by Gordon Ryan
“I am also pleased to introduce Dr. Roslyn Chambers from the Montclair Advocacy. I have worked with her this past six months on the California constitution development. Dr. Chambers holds a J.D. from Yale Law and a Ph. D. from Stanford, specializing in the economics of constitutional taxation. She comes from a solid background in governmental law, including twelve years as a professor at the Pepperdine University School of Law before accepting appointment at Director of State and Local Government at Montclair. As a graduate of Yale, she somehow escaped the liberal slant that so often accrues to those from the Ivy League legal fraternity, but we should all understand, Dr. Chambers is not a dedicated conservative thinker, ignoring all information contrary to that point of view. To quote her own bio,” Dan said, looking down to read from a prepared script, “she is not ‘… afraid to access, analyze, adapt, or even implement the positive elements of liberal thinking.’
“I stand in awe of her understanding of the meaning of these formative and historically important documents and have been led to appreciate her judgment on more than one occasion. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Dr. Roslyn Chambers.”
Chambers rose from her seat to the left of the podium and came to stand in front of the group. She was dressed in a lightweight, two-piece business suit, burgundy in color, an off-white silk blouse, and a matching forest green and burgundy scarf tied around her neck. She was about fifty, had short dark hair, expressive hazel eyes, and stood about five feet, five inches tall.
“Thank you, Mr. Rawlings. It is a pleasure to be with you this morning. Our opening comments will likely be surprising to this assembly, given the nature of our assignment to help you form a new nation. We ask you to give us today, and perhaps a bit of tomorrow, before you reach any conclusions.
“We understand that you have allocated five days to form the foundational documents for a new nation, or at least the principle philosophical components of those documents. That time frame, in and of itself, speaks volumes about the nature of the task you have asked us to perform. It’s very quick. Almost impetuous. Democracy involves what has been termed a pluralistic, incremental society. Significant movement is slow, painstaking, and often painful for those involved. Along the way, many citizens do not like the direction, the encroaching philosophy which varies from their vision of the future. One single, important issue will turn someone against a philosophy that otherwise is completely in accord with their beliefs. But, if a democratic nation has any future, it will lie within the foundation of its core values. The most significant aspect of American democracy, as it has been practiced for over two hundred years, is that it is changeable, reversible in application, but, and this is my key point this morning, irreversible in principle.
“The Montclair Advocacy’s director, General Robert Del Valle, will address this point after my opening remarks, but from my perspective, please understand that if America is to maintain those core values, I firmly believe we must use the system in order to change the system. I ask you to keep an open mind this first day and allow us to present the issues as we see them. Perhaps, in the process, you may see a different path from the one you have chosen.
“So,” she said, pausing a moment and taking a sip of her orange juice she had brought from her table, “in considering the foundation for a government structure, let’s consider what we already have. The Constitution of the United States of America has served us well for two hundred and twenty-four years, with only twenty-seven amendments. Ten of those were added immediately. Some of them were to rescind earlier amendments, basically social experiments that failed. There are also concepts that the founders knew should have been included initially. ‘ All men are created equal’ springs to mind, but was politically unpalatable and required postponement. That correction did not occur until the thirteenth amendment in 1865.
“Essentially, there have been very few changes in this seminal document that founded the United States of America. It would seem that the ‘old boys’ got it right, didn’t they? And this time, in our modern, collegial atmosphere, we’ve added the ‘old girls,’ so the decisions we reach in this century should be a far better product.”
Again, laughter and a smattering of applause filled the room.
“I have created an agenda, at least for the first four sessions, morning and afternoon, today and tomorrow. We will take it from there as we jointly see fit. After General Del Valle’s remarks, we will discuss the structure of our government, the three branches of government, and the primary functions of the federal system, as originally intended. I’m quite sure the founders didn’t intend for your six-year-old to learn about sex from an action video.
“I’d like to establish one basic premise: if the ‘old guys,” whom we lovingly call the Founding Fathers, got it right, why should we deviate? I propose that we review and analyze what’s in the original documents, at least philosophically, and see how they apply to us today. Two hundred years of judicial interpretation has certainly changed the meaning, or the apparent meaning, the politically acceptable meaning, but perhaps that is the crux of where we stand as regards the need for change.
“And please, throughout the day, this is a seminar, not a single-voiced lecture, so speak up at any time and let’s have an actual discussion. Let’s see how long it takes us to get into an argument. Perhaps the first thing I should do is to introduce our team. We’ll learn more about the rest of the staff-some of whom suggested that they should wait by the pool until their turn on the agenda-over the next several days, but for today, our primary moderators will be myself and Major General Robert Del Valle, who will address us now, and continue his comments after lunch. General Del Valle, as has been stated, is the new Executive Director of The Montclair Advocacy. Formerly, he was the Adjutant General of the State of California. He is a graduate of West Point, holds a Masters degree from the National War College, and took his Ph. D. in public policy from the University of Southern California. His doctoral dissertation was ‘Honor in Public Service: Roosevelt to Roosevelt, The Early Twentieth Century.’”
Del Valle took the floor at 9:25 A.M. “Good morning, ladies and gentleman,” Del Valle said. “I believe it important for me to establish some understanding with each of you from the outset. In the planning stages of any military exercise, we employ what is called the OPFOR. It stands for opposition or opposing force. I stand here with you today to represent the OPFOR. If, in my assumed role as OPFOR commander, you determine that Montclair’s advice and counsel is not what you expected, there will be no consulting fee. I am that determined to represent the opposing force.
“I won’t mince words this morning. Here is the executive summary, the bottom line and the underlying principle of our presentation to this committee: under my direction and with the concurrence of my colleagues here today, The Montclair Advocacy is opposed to the establishment of the Republic of Western America. We are opposed to the singular secession of California and always have been. Secession of several states of our union, a division of the nation of states we have formed, goes against the basic mission statement of The Montclair Advocacy: Strength through Unity of Purpose.
“Look around the room. Of the eight delegates, not one of you is over fifty. Perhaps only two are over forty. And from our former association, I know that Mr. Rawlings is under thirty. Compare that with the Montclair staff. We average fifty-seven. Certainly age is not the criteria by which we should judge people or their accomplishments. Some of my staff, myself included, envy your youth, your vitality. The future is in the palms of your hands. All of the delegates here today are smart. You’re well educated. And you’re well intentioned. But you are not wise. That, ladies and gentlemen, is something that does come with age.
“Over the next two days, as we examine America’s governing documents, her process of change, even her failures over the past century, I hope to be able to convince you of the error of your ways, and at the same time, demonstrate to you how you may bring about the change that you desire. Valid change. Dramatic
change. But honorable change that results in a stronger, more capable and more vibrant United States of America. Do you want a more conservative America? Do you want not only a nation, but a nation under God? We can show you how to achieve that end. And I will make one further statement: beginning next week, The Montclair Advocacy will begin a public campaign against voter approval of the formation of the Republic of Western America. Obviously, if we cannot reach accord this week in our discussions here in Mexico, then Montclair will necessarily withdraw from participation in the process.
“Now, our remarks today are not what you were expecting to hear and you need a few moments to consider your reaction. Therefore, my colleagues and I will remove ourselves from the room and allow you to deliberate on whether or not you prefer to continue this discussion. If you choose to do so, and I sincerely hope that you will give us a chance to fully explain our position, we will return and I shall present the thesis for our argument against secession. Mr. Rawlings, as chair of this committee, is that acceptable to you?”
Dan glanced around the room and received a few affirmative nods from his associates, then turned back to look at General Del Valle.
“General, I think we all could use a twenty-minute break. But I hope I’m speaking for the remainder of my colleagues when I say we will be privileged to hear your opinion and conclusions when we return. Sir, thank you for your candor this morning. As you mentioned last evening, it was not what we were expecting, but, with this twenty minutes to reflect, I think we will probably all agree that your position is not all that unexpected. Let’s meet back here at 10:45.”
During the break, Dan pulled up a chair next to Nicole, who was reclining on a sun lounger besides a sparkling, blue-water pool, a cool drink on her table and several towels, beach bag, and sun tan lotion beneath the table. A copy of Governor Jefferson’s A Colored Cowboy was lying open across her stomach. A signed copy, she would have said, had anyone deemed to ask.
“I’ve only got a few minutes on this break, Nicole, but I think the week is not going to progress as we originally thought. I’m going to text Governor Jefferson, but the general has just dressed us down like school children. Montclair, I mean Del Valle and the whole staff, are opposed to the formation of the Republic and are determined to spend the next couple of days convincing us of that fact. It’s an end run, or a sneak pass, or any other sports analogy that fits. I’m really surprised, and maybe a bit disappointed,” Dan said.
Nicole sat up in her chair and pushed her sunglasses back on top of her dark hair. “Are you surprised?”
“Are you kidding? I’m astonished. The general was opposed to the California issue, but to bring his team down here and try to reverse our purpose? That’s brazen. I respect the man, but good grief, he’s gone off the deep end. He said if we didn’t like what his group said, there would be no consulting fee. Amazing.”
Nicole smiled and lifted her drink, taking a sip and offering one to Dan, who shook his head. She replaced the glass on the small, round table, and took his hand. “How much time do you have?” she asked.
“About five minutes. I have to, uh, ‘?donde esta los banos?’” he said.
“Okay, let’s put this together. General Del Valle knows Pug Connor, right?”
“Yes,” Dan said, a quizzical look appearing on his face.
“And Pug Connor knows President Snow…”
Dan hesitated. “Yes,” he said, a bit softer, the wheels clicking in his head before Nicole continued.
“… and Pug knows that General Del Valle was opposed to secession and he probably knows that Montclair was retained to provide consulting advice to our movement, and… he also probably knows that the general resigned as Adjutant General of California because he did not want to be part of the secession.”
Dan was silent for several seconds. “He’s here on presidential orders,” he concluded.
“That might be a bit strong. I think he’s here on his own business, his own initiative. But his interests and those of the president coincide. Dan,” Nicole said, raising his hand to her lips and kissing him. “Pure and simple, he’s here for America. He’s the same man you’ve always known and admired. What else could you expect from him? I tried to tell you in Las Vegas, but it’s hard to tell your new husband that he’s wrong about such an important issue, especially when you’re still on your honeymoon. I think you’ve gotten carried away with pride. Please don’t take that wrong,” she said, pulling his hand closer to her. “You’re all fired up about this new movement and what part you can play in its formation, but you’ve forgotten why you got here in the first place. You’ve forgotten the voices in your blood,” she said, echoing the title of Dan’s successful novel from the previous year. “And you’ve forgotten Jack’s admonition,” she said, referring to Dan’s recently deceased grandfather, who had told Dan that if he didn’t stand up against the militias and the secession nuts, his ancestors would rise up out of their graves and stomp all over him.
“How did I get such a smart wife?” Dan said, his smile now returned.
“Well, first, you got her shot while she was rescuing you, and second, you got her medically retired from the FBI, and third… you got her to fall in love with you. Go back in there and listen to General Del Valle. If he doesn’t make sense, go ahead and build a new nation. Who needs a unified America, anyway?” she said, lying back down on her sun lounger. “Oh, and don’t forget the banos, or the rest of the meeting will be uncomfortable.”
“I am going to open and close my comments,” Del Valle began, “with quotes from my favorite statesman, Winston Churchill. No other politician had his gift for either content or delivery. In light of my message this morning, one which none of you were prepared to hear, my request to you follows Sir Winston’s thoughts on courage. To me, Churchill was a man who admired, and personified, courage. He said: ‘ Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.’ I ask you to do just that for the next short period of time.
“For forty-two years, ever since my graduation from West Point, I have endeavored to honor my oath to defend and protect the Constitution, from foreign and domestic enemies. What has been proposed makes your group essentially a domestic enemy. I would not go so far as to say it’s treasonous, because you are calling for a public referendum, a national vote. If this were Britain, it would be a vote of confidence in the government that might just result in a change of leadership. We have no such system, so for some of you, and your associates in the states, you have chosen what you perceive to be the only legitimate alternative: form your own nation and leave the USA.
“Over the past sixty years, America has become the strongest nation on earth economically speaking, although that is waning quite early in our history. Our military strength has been amply demonstrated around the world-no standing army can successfully oppose us. Instead, we face a man with a suitcase bomb or a civilian army in residential neighborhoods. No army in history can defeat such enemies, willing to sacrifice their lives in exchange for a few dozen of us. But far more important, America has always been the strongest nation on earth morally. Many would find that hard to believe, given the trash Hollywood and television puts out as everyday life, but it’s true collectively, if not individually. We combine moral behavior with freedom of choice to a far greater extent than any other nation that has ever existed.
“Here is the simple fact: America, as we know her, cannot survive this secession movement. If that’s the basis of our political position, then why, you might ask, has Montclair accepted your commission to moderate the seminar and help develop a governmental structure for the new nation? I can answer that distinctly, ladies and gentlemen: we didn’t accept the commission to form the structure for a new nation. We came to help you examine the structure of our present nation, and see how we can apply it to our advantage. We are decidedly opposed to cradle-to-grave socialism. We are opposed to government in the state to which it has evolved. In that, we can agree. Am
erica is moving much too far in the wrong direction and removing freedom of choice in the process. That road leads to slavery.
“Montclair is conservative in philosophy. We do believe in free enterprise. We are opposed to the growth of government, excessive debt that even our grandchildren won’t be able to repay. But we are also opposed to running away from America’s troubles and finding our own little Utopia. For the sake of our discussion this morning, let’s examine the facts. Two Americas, no matter how closely aligned and coordinated their intent, will quickly become disparate in philosophy. One American is already disparate. The president can barely achieve fifty-two per cent of the vote in a national election. That means almost half of the country did not want him… or her. Within twenty or thirty years, there will be four, if not six Americas, philosophically, if not legislatively.
“But if America were divided and no longer the strongest force for good on earth-and, by heaven, I hope we can all agree that America has consistently been the primary force for good in the world this past century-but if we surrendered that title, that obligation to our role in history, who would replace us. China? Russia? A Pan-Arab confederation with government by Sharia law? Would any of those nations have the best interest of the world as their primary goal? Would they reach out to protect their neighbor if they were in trouble? Or would they join the invaders and take control over yet another country?
“These are all global considerations. Those of you in the room, I dare say, have not given much thought, education, or concern to global issues. Replace America with any of those countries, and within fifty, probably twenty-five years, there wouldn’t even be a history book to laud the twentieth-century efforts of the United States of America. We would have ceased to exist. And the Evil Empire would have won.
“You are all very young. Frankly, you’re ignorant. You see America locally, not internationally. You see America’s drift to the left, a more liberal society, taxation run rampant, a system of takers and givers, and each of you is tired of giving. I understand that. But consider this, ladies and gentlemen: you are all selfish.”