By theent, hosted historical office, is about an hour. Good afternoon. It is 12 00. We begin with two very distinguished guests, veteran reporters who covered the Civil Rights Act of 1964. I way of introduction, we are in one of the most historic rooms at the capitol complex. Now known as the kennedy caucus room, it was the room where the hearings were held, the watergate hearings were held. This is the room where john f. Kennedy announced his candidacy for president. The room where a lot of nominees have been grilled by committees. There have been a lot of inquisitions here. Today, we are not doing an inquisition. We are doing a conversation. We are very pleased to have andy glass and roger mudd as our guests today. Andy glass was born in warsaw, poland, and arrived in the United States during world war ii. He became a citizen in 1948. He is a graduate of the Bronx High School of science and yale university. In 1960, after he completed his military service, he became a reporter for the New York Herald tribune. In 1962, he was assigned to the washington bureau. In 1963, he became the chief Congressional Correspondent. Having grown up in new york city and read the New York Herald tribune, i always lamented when the Herald Tribune bolted as a newspaper, went out of business in 1966. But his career continued. He worked for newsweek and reported for the Washington Post. He then came to capitol hill, where he worked for senator hugh scott. He was the press secretary for senator jacob gavins. And then he went back to journalism. He went to the national journal. More recently, we are familiar with him because he was the managing editor of the hill newspaper and in 2006, he joined politico. That is quite a resume. Our other guest today is roger mudd who was born right here in washington d. C. He took a masters degree at the university of carolina in history. He was studying the relationship of the press with fdrs new deal. At that point, he thought he should get a little experience and see what the press was like. He took a summer job with Richmond News leader. It happened that they owned a Radio Station called wrnj, across the street. That station needed a news director. Instead of going on for a phd in history, he went on to become a broadcast news journalist. He came to washington dc in the 1960s for wtop. Wtop was both radio and television. He was in the same building as the cvs the cbs evening news. He moved to the National News in 1961. In 1961, the National News was only 15 minutes. It was not until 1963 that it went to the standard half hour of programming. In the subsequent years, he became a regular. He was the cbs senate reporter. He was covering political campaigns. He was anchoring whenever Walter Cronkite was away. He was a regular feature on the cbs evening news. In 1980, cbs had the equivalent of the war of the roses and he went to nbc and then to pbs. Any of you are more familiar with him in recent years as the host of the history channel, on many of their programs. He is also the author of a wonderful memoir that i recommend. It is about washington, cbs, and the glory days of television news. Andy and roger, i want to welcome you both and thank you for being here today. You were both members of something called the culture club. Could you tell me about what the culture club was and how you found yourselves members of it back in 1964 . Thank you for that kind introduction. We invented the culture club. It rose, phoenixlike, from the ashes. The problem was that there was a filibuster. And nothing was happening except a lot of speeches. That did not mean we created news or made it up, but we were like bees going to flowers. Flowers were russell, senator russell, senator dirks, senator humphrey, mansfield, and others. We went around and ask questions or make comments and said, hey, the majority leader said x. What do you think . At the end of the day, roger had a good story for the news and i had nothing to write for the tribune. That was the nature of the culture club. There were five of us. Roger and myself, peter, unfortunately, and Ned Kenworthy of the New York Times. Peter was a correspondent for the baltimore sun. Ned kenworthy of the New York Times. And john hayward, he created and ran, as it were, the culture club. Everybody is dead now except andy and me. And we are headed there. We traveled in a pack. Journalism does not prohibit you, to a certain extent, sharing stuff. So we tried to keep independent of each other, but at a press conference, the sender would say, oh god, here they come, the culture club. It is interesting that not every news outlet, not every newspaper, had a fulltime reporter assigned to cover the filibuster in the civil rights bill. We did not have anybody from the Washington Post with us regularly. Robert albright was assigned to the story, but we never saw him. The big newspapers, the chicago tribune, the st. Louis postdispatch, it was not that there were noshows, it was that they did not think the story deserved its own coverage, which the culture club was doing. But it was my first introduction to covering something that important day in and day out. And i learned as much about the senate and the vanity of the senate and the dependence on the staff members. Some senators were stupid and some were bright. In between, there were a lot of senators. [laughter] but it was an education for me. You are looking for conspiracy theories, which i love. A 28yearold reporter who was getting won by line every day in the New York Herald tribune. Think about what the Herald Tribune was. It was competing with the times, but it was basically a liberal republican newspaper. The owner was this guy named john hays whitney, a friend of resident eisenhower and former ambassador to king james in london. Very much interest in seeing this legislation succeed. He was married to i think her name was paley. Her sister was married to the head of cbs bill paley. So that he would get a lot of airtime. I wonder now, 50 years later, whether paleys sister had something to do with having all of this happen. [laughter] what was i going to add . The problem is you have a thought and when your time comes, you have forgotten what you are going to say. It will come. I stood out not because of anything i had done especially, because i was the only one. I had no competition. Of the three networks, abc was kind of the week sister. Weak sister. And nbc over cbs, we always called nbc the National Biscuit company. [laughter] they sat on their elbows and smote their pipes and did wonderful, stylish stories the second day. They were bad losers on the first day. Anyway, i had been up a week or two, row down on the elevator with bob mccormick, the nbc correspondent on the hill. I overheard him sniffing about cbs coverage, saying, our people are not interested in that. So i had no competition. What were the challenges for Tv Correspondents to cover the senate . Just in general . How easy or how hard was it for eight Tv Correspondent . The main stuff was behind closed doors, as you could imagine. The cameras were not welcome, except in certain places. The cameras did not get into the house until 1979. And not into the senate until 1986, i think it was. I thought when cameras finally got into the chambers, the world of reporting would really change. For the first time, the public would be able to sit in and watch what happens on the floor. As you know, not a lot happens in the senate. [laughter] so, it was difficult just to know where to go. You could not go a lot of places. You could not go into the chamber. You had to wait before the sergeant of arms would sneak out of the outside Committee Room and then you would have to grant them as they came out. So it was hard work. A lot of times, most times, they did not want us to give away what was going on behind home behind closed doors until they nailed down the changes, title9 to title 6 to title 2. If i could add to that, my clear regulation recollection was that roger was an expert at an establishment spot. He would stand in a place where the viewer would know exactly where he was in front of the senate or on those capitol steps. The day the crunch came, which was in late june of 1964, senator russell made a point that, when roger was going to cover the vote, which was the crucial vote that ended the 84day filibuster, he could not do it on the capitol grounds. My recollection was that they kicked you off and you had to go across the street. Am i right . You were kind of right. The first week, i broadcast from the steps. The southern senators got to build small, my boss, my bureau chief, and said, we cannot have that. So i moved across the street from where the park is, where the little retaining wall is. That is where i set up. I remember, about the second week, i came down the steps to do the 9 00 feed for the Morning Television show and there was a crowd of tourists waiting for me. And i never i never i never been in a crowd like that. I did not know what they were going to do. They just stood there and did not make a sound, did not disturb anybody. After i had finished, they came up, can you sign my guidebook . So andy, it was before the vote that i was moved across the street. The day of the vote, we had a big the Art Department on of cbs had set up an easel, a chart of all the senators and their names. That is how we did the last outing. This was one of the longest debates that took place in the history of the senate. I went back and was reading some of your stories about it. In march of 1964, you started one of your stories, the talk begins. All it took to get a civil rights debate going was a twoweek discussion about whether or not to debate. That was just to get it to the floor. What were the complications of keeping that story on the front page . Good question. Actually, there were two filibusters. It was a mini filibuster that would decide whether or not to send the bill to the Judiciary Committee, which was then hidden by james 0. Eastland of mississippi. And it would have died there. Or to use some competition some complicated formula to get it to the floor, which would be the strategy that senator mansfield and senator humphrey decided on. So that was a debatable manner matter and they debated that for a couple of weeks and they finally brought it to the floor. And then they have, i believe, for the historians in the room, it is still the longest single filibuster in senate history. 84 days. As we said earlier, it was a stretch to try to write about it. One day, i wrote, senator long always came back and talked about part of the bill where i think it was title 7 about employment. They had to have female priests or something. And so i wrote for the tribune the next day, you could just about get away with this, senator long, who had dined well, but not necessarily wisely went off on that and then i wrote about it. I also had a great advantage over the New York Times. It was still arcane, the motion on the floor, the previous motion. The Herald Tribune was very good about that kind of stuff. I would just write, a parliamentary hassle ensued. And that was the end of it. The times would really explain how it all happened. Reporters loved congress and their editors hate congress because so much of the story is time tables, moving from the subcommittee to the full committee. You had your report not only once a day, but many times a day. How did that come about that you were on the steps every day and how did you ever find enough to say . I was assigned by the newlyarrived president of cbs news, a volcanic man named fred friendly. He thought that the whole issue of civil rights deserved total dawntomidnight coverage. So he said, here is the plan. You going to do a report on the morning news, noon news, midafternoon news, cronkite news, good night news, and you are going to do a report on every other hourly Radio Broadcasting every day until we finish. I said, you are kidding. Sounds like a flagpole sitting stunt. He said, no, we are serious. So i say, ok. He came up to me to make it sound interesting when knighted 5 of the story was not interesting. When 95 of the story was not interesting. Like he said, a parliamentary hassle. So i wandered around, getting to know people. Adding to know staff, senators. Some of the senators did not trust me because they thought i was working for a big, liberal network where they wanted to cut the south back to stature. It was not until they realized after a week that i was not pulling my punches, i was doing both sides. The first date we broadcast, i had humphrey out. I made sure, before i ended, tomorrow night, were going to have richard russell. So it was very balanced. Finally, the southerners began to trust me and i began to get calls from their press secretary, do you want to come over and meet . I think we could keep the story going and doing profiles of the key actors, senator dirks and senator cagle. You mentioned majority leader mansfield. Of course, we would always go up to the white house and tried to get a feel for larry obrien. Even the president , who was accessible on the story. One day, i went to see james. It required some coverage. By the way, over 84 days, it was always with senator russell and mr. Glass. So i went to see the chairman of the Judiciary Committee to convince myself i was the Congressional Correspondent of the New York Herald tribune. I am sure you know, a big flag of mississippi, american flag. After about five minutes of a monologue, he had a cigar in his mouth and said, sonny, you stick around here for 20 years and maybe you will understand how this place works. That was the interview. Later, we became more friendly and he invited me for a weekend to his plantation in sunflower county. Had a great time into below. In tupelo. So things change. I do not think i have ever covered a senator as interesting as richard russell. Publicly, he was a very remote, dignified man. Privately, he was as generous a friend as you could have. It took him a year before he called the roger. And he never called me roger in public. It was always private. I would go down to georgia on occasion on political trips. I would go see him before i went to tell him he was going. He would give me names and phone numbers of people. When i got back, i would get a call, come see me. He was always generous in that way. I never thought he told me before the filibuster began, in so many words, that there was not anything else he could do. He knew he was beaten, i think, before it started. And i asked him, is there nothing you can offer americas black population. He said, all i can offer is hope that we can get through this difficult period. That told me that he knew he was going to get defeated. I thought the main conflict was not between dirks and humphrey versus russell, but between humphrey and dirks and whether those two leaders could craft a bill that would pull along enough republicans to break the filibuster. My take on it was a little different. I always thought the big 17, whose picture is over there, including john tower and robert byrd of west virginia, honorary southerners not always honorary. [laughter] and then there were also spies. Fulbright and matters mathers, who were going to these southern meetings, southern caucus, whatever they call it, and leaking the stuff to humphrey. But my feeling, and i wrote at the time, was that it was a rope dope ropeadope strategy. To hope that the country, very much united that this ideas time has come, would turn because there would be a summer of violence by what were then called negroes, and the country would lose interest in the bill. That is why it was being stretched out, hoping that something would happen to change the chemistry. I thought that finally, the real in idea whose time has come would turn into a summer of thentermed negroes. Hoping that something would happen to change this. I think my real problem was to stay sober when Erica Dirksen said come to the back room. They were very jealous of make ego. O had a very getting those people to come along was a great feat. Hubert would go on meet the press and say this is dirksens bill. That is what dirksen wanted to say. Was the chairman of the republican policy committee. She was not a very good spokesman on television. He resented dirksen about becoming the spokesperson about everything. I number the first time i met mud,e said mud, mud, hickenlooper, i dont know w hats worse. Mud or hickenlooper. He was trying to be funny. He asked about the difficulty of covering for television. Becauseoubly difficult cameras were not allowed in the chambers. The rules in the press gallery allowed you to bring a reporters notebook, but you cannot bring in an artists sketch pad. To get illustrations from the floor we hired a world war ii combat artist named howard brody. We would meet every morning in the tv gallery and i would give him a rundown of what i thought i would need to illustrate the report i would be preparing later for the cronkite show. Inneed an overall scene whatever. Howard will come out in the chamber in the gallery overlooking the floor. Here withnt t hands up to the temple. He was laser in and memorize everything about javits and then go to the gallery and sketch it. 15 minutes later he would come again tolaser javits begin details about his hair and chin. That is the way he operated. Every night yet eternal five or six catches to illustrate what i was going to write that night for the cronkite show. He was a marvelous artist. Yet one problem. He was a california liberal and could not get down on paper [indiscernible] there are great advantages to print. You could go in the back room. After we developed a relationship he said to me one day, and this is a story i have not seen printed anywhere that t was playing with the house money. That was important to him. What do you mean . He said in world war i when i theyd in the artillery assigned to me to the balloon corps. The balloon corps went over the trenches at about 1000 feet and davebinoculars and a wire away the german position and more accurate. The problem with these pollutants is that they were with hydrogen. It german airplanes it would shoot these balloons down in flames. Rate wasalty approximately 80 . He came down the balloon and that was it. Ier since their i feel like am living out of time. That is something ive always remembered about him. I think you really meant that. Who were your best sources in those days . Were the promoters of the bill . Humphrey was instantly accessible. So was dirksen. Mike mansfield not so much. Would, to the press gallery behind the chamber fairly regularly. He would bum cigarettes from everybody. He would start spinning these stories. Dumond said dirksen before the press is like throwing imitation pearls to the real swine. [laughter] was jon stewart who worked for hubert humphrey. Kennedy, one of dirksens bombers. Cornelius unity was the one i used a lot. Was theferriss democratic policy committee. He was the director of the Senate Policy committee. He was mansfields man. I do nothing in our or to win by that i did not check with charlie. He trusted us. He told us what he thought would be helpful. Senatorscombination of and staff people. Every session would begin with what we called dugout chatter when the leadership would come out. It was then the press was allowed on the senate floor with notes. We get to it three minutes before the bell rang it with you get the senators down close enough. That always gave me enough to write a new lead to my 10 00 radio piece. It was a lot of scraps coming out. Dugout chatter was very helpful for us to tell which way to go and which senators to follow and whether there was something or amendment that would be proposed. Is important to emphasize these were people who were getting their hands dirty with the bill. The were sitting in meetings that we were getting a good feel on. One was pat who worked with senator javits. What was absent at that time were press secretaries. I do not recall ever talking to a press secretary during that whole time. Not that i have anything against them. , roger and i delaalt with people who were either senate are the working very closely. One source i had was a good, young legislative assistant for of republican whip, tom pico california whose name was leon panetta. Things changed that way. I just want to tell one story if i may. You got 30 minutes. [laughter] came up to the gallery. He said i am like little johnny. When the teacher says johnny, can you spell straight. Traight. The teacher says, what does it mean . Little johnny says hold the ginger ale. One day i walked in and says do you know about delaware . I thought was going to talk about williamson. Gun control, either way. I so what about it . District whennal it times out. No congressional districts when the time is out. I was his idea of humor. Toms name comes up. A lot of people do not know he was the republican whip in the 1960s. Very influential. I understand he gave you particular insight into how it worked. Had down the hall a little hideaway office. The chamber for the elevator that went down into caucus room. Elevator was removed. The door was not. I made friends with the secretary. The Old Supreme Court chamber. She let me come in. From my ear to the door. She will not let me do it on the republicans were there. Break a five or six hour on stuff that would come out. They will come through this door. These were the little privileges that you accumulated. One thing before we end is very important. Looking here, the most controversial title of the bill is titled two. It he was against the idea that areate individuals obligated to serve people regardless of race or any other criteria. He voted against the bill. Another is the reconstruction era bill that created public accommodation. Clearly that do not hang on the 14th amendment. They said it was this clause. The irony is if you look at the bill today in education, we have to do that over. We look at voting rights. Section controversial was the one that was most clearly accepted. The idea that restaurants and other places of public accommodation were open to blacks and that was it. Senators the critical was george aiken of vermont. I was not caught up so much personally in the civil rights movement. Hill. Isolated on the you dont know what is going on in the rest of the country. Worrying ite kept wasnt if the bill was going to pass. It was was his amendment going to get out of subcommittee . His amendment was that it was amended from the public accommodation. I cannot remember if that got through or not. 150. One other thing. One other thing about covering it, i know and he is going to bring it up. Back then they pay their reporters. To the base salary. 25 every time they were on the radio. 50 dollars or time they were on television. Here i am five times before television. With up fromary about 400 a week to a little more than 2000. When i realized it my wife and i started a little remodeling will be for this filibuster started. In the middle of this i call my contractor. We had this in the senate press gallery. Wehad it with the union and had typewriters. If i did not have too much to drink and i was still sober warning came to read a story, which was in my interest, i would go back after doing all this stuff and figure out what the story was the day. Up. Would always type it there are only six of us that were covering it. Three on eachks, side. On the top of your story you would write in pr. Npr. Id ors night press rapo Something Like that. The next morning i would go to pick up the tribune. Way to earn a living. I was not making as much money as roger but i was doing ok. This is the most critical vote. Can you describe some of the atmosphere . I had a dinner to monaco that was just open. He knew hel worried had 65 or something but he needed 67. Haydent a deal with carl i think he was in his 90s that he would vote if it was the 67 votes. That the end, he didnt appear talked about this just before this decision. Claire ingle who died in july of was year of brain cancer actually wheeled into the chamber when his name was called. It was so dramatic. Wheelchair. Ng the we were watching this. He couldnt talk. He very slowly raised his hand and moved it to his right eye. I think it was senator mansfield at sign the senator has indicated his the poor and if he ,an do it again to confirm that senator ingle voted aye. It was very germanic area right there that key vote was great speech of Everett Mckinley dirksen. Nly, nostanding room openi staff allowed. Just the 100 senators. A tomb. Ilent like when don williams of delaware , everyoneeciding vote sighed. There was a corporate exiling of breath. Literallytense everybody hold their breath until the last vote was counted. They were demanding to know what the hell we do next. It, youto think about know how hard it is to get 60 for anything in todays senate. This was 67 which was a much higher bar. Was clearly a block of people that were against it. It was one by one, president johnson had a few. One of them i recall writing about was the other senator from iowa. I think he was from dubuque. There was an archbishop who called him and said if you do not vote for cloture will excommunicate you. Today Martin Luther king, a great american, Lyndon Johnson get a lot of credit for passing that bill. It is true johnson almost screwed it up by pressuring the out theip to bring cots. It is taking too long. Huber refused to do it. He said we are going to let it play out. This is the 12th time. 11 times the filibuster had succeeded. The filibuster was never the same after that vote in gene. Forsenate began to use it anything and everything. It is really a term care there is a diminutive texan. He was holding before. Of vermonte miniature was presiding. No one was in the gallery. Presiding in tower had the floor. Towers said in we have orders . It was a very funny line. The other memory i have was in new jersey. It is if he got too close to the issue and got hung up. He was called to the floor by a group of his constituents. Butwilliams constituents they wanted to parade him. He came out and went back to the floor. They asked him to come again this time. He slipped out of one of the doors of the chamber in literally ran down the hall and saw a asylum and Mike Mansfields office. Secretarya wonderful who was also named sophie englehart. Day keep showed up one puckishly went into the office were retracted and said there are four reporters here to see you. A gentleman from the New York Times. I wanted to give the audience to asked him questions. We have a few more questions. There is a question i hear. I wanted to get your thoughts more on the role that the filibuster played weird i believe it was senator thurmond still holds the record for the longest single filibuster. It was a huge part in legislation sister. He often makes a comparison between now versus then. Evolution. An given the context of this special technique or the special process, did you see from especially southern reporters or other communities once they read what you were writing was there backlash to this technique that was used . I guess it was for more commonly used relationships. Was there some accountability that was news . On howre your generally people reacted to the reporting of that technique . Did you get feedback from that . This thing was on two tracks. What was going on in the senate, which was warning button portends. Important. If you do not have a quorum, you could lose. Always could have this. The other track was going on behind the scenes with the Leadership Council on civil rights. , all threeus people major religions were involved. Of course bobby kennedy. Meetings occurred in dirksens office. This is one of the ego trips. To cover what was going on in the floor. That was a public event. We had to do what was going on behind those doors. I lost the gist of your question. Was it on use of the filibuster . I think what i was trying to ask is that sometimes people see it to hold members of congress accountable. They are supposed to ask tough questions and allow the public debate to occur and allow controversial issues. One is the filibuster. It is such a unique process that we have in our government. Did you see any of that kind of ofber station that kind presentation . The idea of a filibuster. Powerfulwas a big company that they would decide a not in theue those best interest of the company. Its instruments to convince the country to do something it was reluctant to do or never thought to do. That was an interesting case of journalistic ethics. The company be in the business through its reportorial coverage of an issue in the business is trying to change peoples minds or just laying out and let them decide for themselves. It is a narrow question. Is an very calendar behind jay to indicate how long this look esther has been going on . Calendarthere this behind it to indicate how long this has been going on . The country was sitting on top of a racial volcano. There was really a fear, legitimate fear, that things are getting out of hand and that something has to be done. Think it shared that view. Whohere is an irate viewers accused me of being unpatriotic american economists, a andmaiden for the leftwing this made out of hand. Every night. W i enjoy it a lot. Most proudwere you of . What might you have done differently looking back . I was probably getting a page one story at 27 years old. I thought that was terrific. That proud of the fact they trusted my coverage. That ifally very but he youre 27 years old you are an internet politico. This was the Congressional Correspondent of the tribune. There was an open spot. They said how about covering the hell . Thwe e hill . I said fine. The next thing was the civil rights bill. That was a great time in my life. I was most proud and nobody knowing what i thought. Not the senators, not the audience. It is hard to do. It is the best way to do it. From any ofe sense the opponents of the bill that they actually believe that it was the right thing to do to pass the bill but because of their concern about the that they hadre to oppose it and participate in a filibuster . Did you get any sense of that from any of the opponents . These people had a tremendous investment in what they believe were our way of life. The last thing they wanted to do was to have that up. Public accommodation was key to that. They were not interested in compromising. Believed that this bill was directed to the old confederacy. To the rest of the country was not important. The feelings on the part of the opponent were beleaguered. That. E writing it was very evident. A view bills. William fulbright comes to mind. It was the southern manifesto. He was a fainthearted participant in the filibustering. I think he had serious, grave maintainingbout this. How did for leaders respond to the whole process . Did they respond publicly . I do not know. Maybe you could answer the question. [laughter] i suspect it is impossible to explain to anybody in any other country. If you have a bill as momentous as that, the ability for members of congress to origate then versus today this is disappearing, comedy century were more people get. Heir news, the way people vote the people in congress. Can you compare and contrast them versus now . How differently it would be reported today than you were able to report it in 1960s. Wouldve still happened behind closed doors . Would there still have been that difficult it . It would be the vantage for television. This on the floor. What went on in the floor then. Nd now fear which are mainly or almost al visceral sense of what you can walk out the door in right. This does not exist today. Is second great advantage that we had some leisure. I could take the whole day and think about what happens and write it. People would be quite content taking up the New York Times the next day and finding out what happened. The something important happening, i could have another day and say this important thing happens. Have five violin to look at we have a violent to look at the big extra. We work very hard. We had a better sense of time. The public was better served by that kind of pace than it is today. I wanted to point out that not only does the public depends on the reporting but historians are dependent on it. S is the first restaurant a rough draft of history. He wrote this as it was happening. Youg back and reading this called the story correctly. Im very relieved to know that i could use this to try to recreate this for a time i was not here. I want to thank you. Staff. To thank the send pictures that are up here. Comee we have a chance to up and take a look at the illustrations here. Thank you all for coming. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2014] [applause] you are watching American History television. 48 hours of programming on American History every weekend on cspan three. Theres information on our upcoming programs and to keep up with the latest history news. It is pretty held the. It is shy of 600 million. Itput that in perspective, was 6 billion. It was the pinnacle of endowments. Campaign a 6 billion going on right now, just to put it in there. We were going to aspire to have that kind of facilities to pursue that, we have to have that kind of investment. Responsibility to me or she is there to go out and make sure we expanded. Dr. Wayne fredericks on the thelenges facing university. All weekend long, American History television is showcasing the history of mississippis capital city. To learn more about this on our tour, visit cspan. Org localcontent. We continue now with the history of jackson. For many of us who have gone overseas and fought for this fought for mississippi, fought for alabama, fought for north carolina, fought for illinois and for every state in this union