What was the "Virginia Cavalcade"? For the most part and to its simplest purpose, it was a 
"vehicle" for communicating to others one person's comments, thoughts, evidence, and 
beliefs on what others did in times past -- please read, "did" in the broadest sense of 
the word, which also speaks to what they "didn't" do.

What made it special: It was regular; it was financed by big government; it was 
beautifully bound; its contributors were accepted and admired because their words and the 
manner in which they strung them together had the "air of authority" from their background 
and cited research: it was carefully edited for spelling, grammar, style, and tone; it 
contained attractive illustrations or photographs of impact or topical interest; it 
featured the happenings of the Commonwealth, and in doing so it helped to build a 
continuing catalog, reference, guide, and inspiration to many as to the development of the 
land and the people of Virginia from its beginnings to the now. In short it was a great 
package! But in the short of it: it was still nothing but a vehicle for the expression of 
words and images designed to "story tell" and sway to a "point of view" about the past.

In September of this year, a person of ignorance in many things but particularly for this 
exercise -- the publishing world -- wrote an article of Commonwealth history. It met none 
of the "short list" of qualifications cited above. In fact of matter, it would fail most 
miserably in every aspect -- save one: with the passage of just one nanosecond from its 
release into the digital world, it conveyed what one Virginia resident did! He publicly 
asked a question: "what if?"

Could it be? The very first, "new", "Virginia Cavalcade" article. Certainly not! It didn't 
cite the date of death or to whom its death can be attributed or who was its editor at the 
time or what its budget was or where its printing presses were located or who made them, 
what model, or what the temperature was for that day, and all the other nuances of 
citations, quotations, and references that make an "article" "authentic" -- credible, 
worthy. And I'm sure someone elsewhere will show "in history" that another proposed a 
similar notion and expressed it publicly and "by gad!" -- "did!" -- isn't history nothing 
but a "bunch" of publicly expressed "dids" -- albeit judged and cataloged by popularly and 
consensus approved perceived importance and impact? If you keep your "dids" in your head, 
they never become history will they now? -- or is it "do they now"?

So we don't start off from the "git go" with that "beautiful" magazine that so captured 
our imaginations and devotion. Maybe we have to crawl on all "fours" for some time and put 
up with ignorant historians and publishers like this one. Or don't: you don't read or 
listen to what they have to say -- your choice -- exercise it while our crumbling Republic 
still allows choice (Editorial opinion - not "proved" by fact at this writing - maybe 
later).

So, I'm announcing that I've just written the very first new "Virginia Cavalcade" article 
(of course not in the style or tone befitting what we would hope to be resurrected); and, 
from time to time, as I see fit or not, and in any form or length I so deem, I will write 
various historical articles about "happenings" or "not happenings" in "Virginia History"; 
and, I will send them out to this list -- and I could care less what your opinion is of 
the value of their contents or how they are constructed, or of their point of view -- I 
will care and take action to correct any errors of fact -- not perceptions or beliefs of 
"respected authorities" -- but cold, hard facts -- indisputable facts -- of what 
"Virginians" "did".

I just can't image that there aren't those of you out there that can "do me" so much 
better.

Note: If you are of the opinion that the spelling, grammar, style and tone of this is 
inept and bad; just take note that the richest man in the world, Bill Gates' dictionary, 
lists supersede as correctly spelled with a "c" -- the times do change, do they not -- go 
fall on your sword!

Now for second thoughts: Fact! It's not going to happen. Fact! The General Assembly 
"crippled" the life of the Virginia Cavalcade. Perception! The General Assembly killed the 
life of the Virginia Cavalcade. Perception! The General Assembly was correct in doing so 
for our history is replete with many examples and "do's" that our Republic was founded on 
the idea of the supremacy of the individual to act in his own best self interest in the 
pursuit of his own individual happiness; and, government should be involved in providing 
only essential services: that which the ordinary citizen CAN'T do for himself as defined 
to wit: public order (collective order), health (not individual health), and safety 
(individual and collective). Fact! Publishing the Virginia Cavalcade is not an essential 
public service. Perception! Virginians believe they can no longer do for themselves and 
believe government must do for them in all things.

Note: Admonish yourself. Why is there no interest in resurrection? Because it's just like 
communism and socialism won't work: there's no money in them!

And thirdly: Ah, just give up and file it for history -- they're going to have to find 
your record and burn it. That or resurrect the Virginia Cavalcade -- no other reply, 
retort, opinion, or "flame", will transform this "did".

Don't tell me I can't do it! Tell me how I can do it!