Saturday, Dec. 10, 2016    Login | Register        

The little President who never grew up

Terry Garlock's picture

If you ever wondered how Pee Wee Herman would perform as President of the United States, well, now you know.

With the background ooompah music of the circus calliope wearing on nerves, acrobats and clowns would perform their absurd routines to entertain crowds seeking diversion from the real world.

Sounds a lot like the Obama administration’s fumbling national security issues while the mainstream media dutifully diverts the public from our own leadership failures.

Obama began his rookie year persistently sowing weakness, bowing to other heads of state, making subtle apologies worldwide for America, promising new alliances to the Muslim world, insulting American allies like Britain and Israel while coddling our enemies. Never mind his wrecking our economy with anti-business rhetoric and policies, new piles of giveaway programs and bloating the national debt.

I suppose it is understandable that objections to Obama from the right were dismissed as politics, or the lame accusation of racism, but jeepers, couldn’t the rest of you open your eyes to see the danger in electing a man so full of himself he basked in his own glow even though he had never so much as run a hot dog stand?

In an epidemic of willful blindness, the media still refuses to see, maybe because their curiosity and skepticism are reserved for Republicans.

I can understand the appeal to the left from the Democrat promise of more free stuff, the explosive growth of government largess in welfare and neat gadgets like giveaway cell phones, but didn’t you start to wonder about the maturity and inner strength of a man who thumped his chest as if he personally killed bin Laden, continually vilified his political opposition while refusing to work with them, pulled cheap tricks to cram legislation through Congress without building consensus and made endless pathetic excuses?

Didn’t you worry about the character of an ostensible leader who went to bed during the Benghazi crisis, then flew to a fundraiser the next day and brazenly lied about it to get reelected against the backdrop of four American funerals?

Apparently not, you voted for him, maybe because Romney made an unpolitic remark. We have sunk pretty low when appearances matter but substance does not.

Elections have consequences. By the time Obama dithered over a troop surge in Afghanistan as the world watched and waited ... and waited ... our enemies already knew America was led by a girly-man who had never earned his big-boy pants.

Frankly, I never thought the 14th century stink-hole called Afghanistan was worth the sacrifice of American lives in the first place, but the President of the United States is supposed to be demonstrating the kind of strength that makes our enemies’ knees knock.

Instead, when he finally announced the surge, at the same time he tried to please critics in his own party by publicly promising to pull all troops out a few years hence, thereby proving positive to our enemies he had neither a spine nor a brain.

Any fifth-grader can tell you not to advertise to your opponent when you will quit the fight, especially when the lives of your countrymen are at risk. That duty is multiplied when you are the one sending our troops to fight.

Weakness has consequences, too. Will liberals never learn that peace comes from strength? While it is nice to believe, even if breathtakingly naive, that we spread peace by kindness and sensitivity, the reality is peace comes from the evil dirtbags of the world staying under their rock due to a very healthy fear of America’s power and influence.

This president has turned that considerable American power into a worldwide laughingstock.

We reaped in Syria the weakness he sowed. When Obama publicly drew a red line on Syria’s use of chemical weapons, then did nothing when that red line was crossed, the world watched ... and waited.

A president should never make empty threats that destroy his credibility, or worse, later deny he drew a red line at all. Pee Wee would have been ashamed of that one.

While Russian President Vladimir Putin set in motion the events that recently stole Crimea from Ukraine, our President countered with words. In the symbolism of liberals, Obama publicly warned Putin was conducting himself like the 20th century, not the 21st century, as if when the calendar turned to 2001, human nature transformed in a way that eliminated evil and promised peaceful negotiation of all conflict. Those big-boy pants would have come in handy.

All this talk of the 21st century reminds me of President Bill Clinton’s “bridge to the 21st century,” a symbolic phrase that means absolutely nothing but was often repeated in 1999 by a fawning media, as if we couldn’t arrive without his metaphysical bridge when the calendar flipped.

Obama had more in his arsenal of words as Putin made overtures on Crimea. He warned that the world would not think well of Russia’s aggression and threatened to dis-invite him to a meeting of the G8, now G7 without Russia. I can almost see Putin roll his eyes.

But then Obama unleashed the big guns of Secretary of State John Kerry, who gave Putin another blast of symbolism with, “You just don’t in the 21st century behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped up pretext.”

Of course the Russians understand power as well as anyone, and they did just exactly that. Perhaps they slept through the international sensitivity training that seems to drive our own government these days with dedication to a fantasy that evil and conquest no longer exist.

Before the Russians took Crimea, Kerry gave them a public warning of sanctions, garnished with this sweetener: “We hope President Putin will recognize that none of what we’re saying is meant as a threat. It’s not meant as a – in a personal way.”

Well, so long as no feelings were hurt, all right, then. I could suggest a pleated dress, low heels and lipstick for Kerry but that would be an insult to strong women.

Of course the Russians had great fun with our threat of visa travel restrictions, rescinded membership in the G8, frozen assets of a few selected officials and other lightweight patty-cake punishments while serious countermeasures – bolstering the NATO budget, bringing more eastern European countries into NATO and re-starting missile shield technology in eastern Europe – were not even under consideration.

In fact, Ukraine’s request for arms was denied as too provocative to Russia, a decision bordering on high comedy, but quiet yourself, Obama’s crew has arranged to send them rations even though they have plenty of food.

Somewhere along the way our White House warriors amused the world by issuing this statement: “In this century, we are long past the days when the international community will stand quietly by while one country forcibly seizes the territory of another.” And of course that is just what happened.

So while Obama and the West fondled their own symbolism and played word games, Putin took a country. When will liberals wake up to what is and is not real?

I am no strategist on international politics, but I do have sense enough to recognize a major league weenie when I see one, and we’re stuck with him for another three years. God help us.

I also have sense enough to know Putin has two or more immediate options agreeable to his nationalistic Russian public with the 100,000 light and heavy infantry and armor troops he has massed on Ukraine’s eastern border.

If he takes Ukraine the West will talk each other to death and impose whatever few sanctions they can agree on, but Putin knows the West will do nothing militarily because we prize above all else not getting involved in a war with Russia. And if he doesn’t take Ukraine, the West will be immensely relieved while Crimea remains firmly in his pocket. Nice fallback plan if that is in his head.

If that isn’t enough to worry about, give a moment’s thought to Iran, the uranium enrichment program they promise is for peaceful means, and the dimwits now in charge of U.S. negotiations who are determined to have us believe the Iranians can be trusted. When will that keg blow?

Finally, we might fervently wish or pray that China doesn’t really want to take Taiwan to resolve their dispute dating to WWII, because there could be no better time for them to strike than now with distractions and Obama at the helm.

All of that, dear reader, is mere background for drawing your attention to Obama’s next blunder as he squanders even more of your security in a dangerous world.

In his quest to cut defense spending ever deeper to free up more money for social programs, our President is canceling the Tomahawk and Hellfire missile programs.

Beginning in 1991 with the Gulf War, the Tomahawk cruise missile became and remains today central to the U.S. armed forces’ war-fighting capability. Launched from land, air or sea, precision Tomahawk strikes from as much as 1,500 miles away have been a central part of remote combat capability impressive to our allies and fearsome to our enemies.

The Hellfire missile is another precision weapon designed for air-to-ground delivery, well proven in recent conflicts from helicopters as well as jet fighter-bombers against hard targets and enemy armor.

Replacements for these systems are 10 years away. Canceling these programs now will hit our U.S. Navy especially hard, where ship count is already at the lowest level since pre-WWII.

What the hell is Obama doing to us? Is he the Manchurian candidate elected with a covert mission to destroy America from within as some right-wing critics claim? I don’t know, that seems far-fetched to me.

But I do know he couldn’t do much more harm if he tried. How could Pee Wee Herman do worse?

[Terry Garlock of Peachtree City occasionally contributes a column to The Citizen. His email is]


PTC Observer's picture

"His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it."

1944 OSS, report on Hitler's psychological profile

The Big Lie works.

It's a socialist tradition.

Gort's picture

Garlock, our local military pundit, once again telling it like its not.

Any school boy can Google the internet and see how false and misleading your allegations are. The whole point of your post is, Obama is a Democrat, and you are going to go out of your way to slam him, even if you have to make the crap up or regurgitate conservative gibberish.

You may want to read Father Epps column.

Remember: If you think Social Security and Medicare are worth saving, vote for the Democrat.

rolling stone's picture

so I used the google. The only hits that came up blaming Obama were from the right wing echo chamber. Digging a bit deeper, it seems that we use about 200 of them a year and only have somewhere around 3500 in stock, then I played "Gimme Shelter" on youtube.

PTC Observer's picture

Your insight is as shallow as your search,

DEFENSE NEWS - November 16, 2013

"WASHINGTON — In multiple trips to Capitol Hill this fall, Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno has painted a stark picture of the future of the nation’s ground force.

Under the $500 billion in cuts being forced by sequestration, he has warned time and again, there is no money to train soldiers for combat, no money for new programs, and not even enough room in the budget to keep the Army anywhere near as large as it was before Iraq and Afghanistan.

If sequestration remains the law of the land — which it appears it will — the chief said the Army “will continue to have degraded readiness and extensive modernization program shortfalls.”

Things are so bad, he added on Nov. 7 when testifying before a Senate committee, “I believe our challenge is much greater today than it has been since I’ve been in the Army in terms of readiness. This is the lowest readiness levels I’ve seen within our Army since I’ve been serving for the last 37 years.”"

What brought on sequestration? You just gotta love it stoned.

rolling stone's picture

[quote]Your insight is as shallow as your search[/quote]

You and I both demonstrate that the easiest thing to find is what you are looking for.

PTC Observer's picture

Indeed. The only question is how curious are people in finding the truth. Even in the internet age, the truth can be elusive.

However, a natural curiosity about how the world actually works helps in finding it. For example, a thug will always think hard before robbing an armed man. One can extrapolate this to nations as well. Military power and the wealth of a nation are inextricably tied. We're broke fiscally, politically and morally. National honor is dead Rolling, and we face foes with spines, if not their own version of "honor".

In the end it is all about confidence in ourselves and by extension our government. How confident are you that our government will do the right thing, at the right time, with the appropriate use of power? How will it execute this without purchasing the power it needs? Look at history for the answers, and remember this lesson, when free men are weak, they will quickly become enslaved by the strong.

Where did President Obama go almost immediately following his election as Senator in 2005 and what did he promise the people of the Ukraine if they destroyed their stockpiles of conventional munitions? Where would they be today if they had the power to resist? Would Putin have thought long and hard about invading another nation, weighed the costs and against the potential "gain"?

The Apolitical President's picture

Dear Terry,

Thank you for your military service during the Vietnam War, and for your continuous efforts to rescue the American ideal from its enemies.

You seek specificity as to what goal our current president could have, if other than to destroy America.

Obama seeks to fundamentally change America from being a country controlled by its constitution, to a country where the constitution is controlled by the president. By presidential action, American government has become an enemy of the American Constitution itself.

Sadly, media-formed public opinion supports socialism and prevents American government from operating within its legal boundaries. As in politics, where the status quo establishes power by numbers, the media tries to convince the public that there is power in numbers when it comes to dominating and controlling government.

The "spirit" of America on December 14, 1791, the day before the Bill of Rights was ratified and became a part of the American Constitution, has suffered its tragic death at the hands of socialists who have rewritten American history and reeducated four score and twenty years of public school children. The children are not to blame for the misrepresentation of the American ideal. The manipulation of our political economy away from liberty-based common law and to political-party based despotism, results from permitting government to control what it doesn't understand as long its actions keep government in control of the Constitution.

Obama studied constitutional law and is well-equipped with an understanding of the means to accomplish the Constitution's demise as the American legal precedent and "spirit" for American governance.

You should not expect a solution or victory for American citizens' war against socialism from either the Republican or Democratic socialist parties. It is they who have first became corrupt resulting from their efforts to control society by first controlling society's government.

The solution American citizens require, other than socialist or Islamist citizens, is educational-based and is promoted in the blog "American Presidency: The Apolitical President" which is found on the Freedom-Connector social network.

With all my encouragement, Terry, please never quit loving America the way that you do. Your fight keeps the battle to restore life to the "Spirit of 1776" on the offensive. A victory here, with Americanism the prize, will give life to government controlled by American citizens, and where socialism and Islamism no longer fight to operate American government for the goal of controlling American society.

Peace and Justice and Truth

William King

The world was a dangerous place before Obama became President and will continue to be dangerous no mater who is the President. We do not rule the world.
When GW looked in Putin's eyes and saw the soul of a good man was that the act of a strong President? When Russia crossed the border into Georgia during the Bush Presidency did the Russians care who was the POTUS? No.
When we attacked Iraq and tortured prisoners was they strong acts? No.
Does Terry Garlock have a selective memory? Yes

Mr. Garlock's invective against the President demonstrates that his disdain for Mr. Obama transcends any ability to evaluate POTUS' behavior rationally and consigns his arguments to the affective realm. Perhaps a review of Dr. Moffatt's op-ed on this page would be instructive.

For instance, what would Mr. Garlock suggest in response to Russian incursion into Crimea? Do we commit troops yet again to a foreign land with little hope of attaining anything other than retaining our claim to "superpower" status? Mr. Garlock served in Viet Nam. Did he learn nothing from that futile sacrifice of 57,000 American lives?

He LEARNED THAT POLITICIANS and the mainstream media made stupid decisions and influenced public opposition against US Forces operations in RVN. I also served there for 2 1/2 yrs---I'm guessing you have never experienced any exposure to such possible danger. Be thankful that others did.

AHG – I thank both you and Mr. Garlock for your service to our country in Viet Nam. I harbor no ill will at all toward the soldiers who fight for our flag.

Because of your service, perhaps you and Mr. Garlock would agree that our nation’s fighting men and women should never be placed in harm’s way except when a compelling defense of our national security exists, and then only for specifically defined goals. Once accomplished (or when it becomes clear that the goals will not be accomplished), all of our military must be brought back to safety immediately and not be pawns in political machinations. I also believe that all wars should be fought on a cash basis with regular taxes collected to fund the conflict so everyone has skin in the game. If a cause is important enough to fight for, it is also important enough to dig into our pockets and pay for.

PTC Observer's picture

I totally agree with this approach, in fact I would carry it one step further. I would say any program passed by the Feds, State or local governments should be paid for on a cash basis. In fact, I would propose that we all be sent bills each month to pay out of our paychecks for all programs passed by our Congress and/or our other elected representatives. Even further, I would outlaw the use of debt to finance any new programs passed by our government, pay as you go I say.

Yes sir, if we did that we'd have fewer wars and a much, much smaller government.

You're full of great idea STF.

tgarlock's picture

AHG, thanks for your comments, and your service.

STF, I find much to agree with in your summary of restraint in deploying our troops. They have been overused and abused in recent wars, drawn out by wrong-headed notions of nation-building, stupid rules of engagement that get them killed while protecting civilians and measuring success by world opinion. In the spirit of Truman's "Walk softly and carry a big stick," we should restrain our military force, be reluctant to get involved in conflicts, but when the world's cretins cross the line we should squash them like a bug without warnings or threats but with regrets for inevitable collateral damage, and then go home. That is how we restore our allies' respect and our enemies' fear. That is how we make Putin reluctant to move on Crimea.

As for Viet Nam, there was a noble cause much worth fighting for, but a lot of good men, and women too, died needlessly because the war was drawn out and screwed up to a fare-thee-well first by the White House, then by the Pentagon, then by the mainstream media giving legs to a radical anti-war movement that over time became mainstream. It's complicated.

I wrote a book about Vietnam vets, with a long chapter titled The Good, The Bad and the Ugly detailing my candid views on the war. I doubt you are this interested, but if you are, email me at and I will send you that chapter so you don't have to buy a book.

Terry Garlock

Terry Garlock, PTC

Gort's picture

Garlock, I bought a copy of your book at a garage sale, well not exactly. I was trying to buy a very high quality, chrome based, crock-pot at a garage sale but I didn’t want to pay the $3 the guy was asking for it. I got him down to $2.50 but he wouldn’t go any lower and I wouldn’t go any higher than $2.25.

It was getting late in the afternoon and the guy must have started worrying about carrying all his wares back in the house. So, just before I left, he offered me the ‘very high quality, chrome based, crock-pot’ and any book of my choice from his book table.

I wasn’t looking for books that day but as I glanced over at his book table I noticed a single ray of light, shinning through the leaves in the afternoon sun, as if pointing to this one particular book. Guess what the name of the book was? That’s right, “Strength & Honor”, by Terry Garlock! Reluctantly I agreed to the sale.

On the way home, we stopped at The Avenues, in PTC, to do some shopping. I locked the car doors but made the mistake of leaving my garage sale finds in the back seat of the car. We were gone for little more then an hour and when we got back, the cars rear door window was broken, someone stole my crock-pot, and left me two more copies of your book!

Remember: If you think Social Security and Medicare are worth saving, vote for the Democrat.

Since 2009, there has been an urban myth that Obama created a program to provide free phones to low-income Americans at taxpayer expense. There is, in fact, a government program that will provide low-income people with a free or low cost cell phone.

It was started in 2008 under George W. Bush. (GASP!)

The idea of providing low-income individuals with subsidized phone service was originated in the Reagan administration (DOUBLE GASP!) following the break-up of AT&T in 1984. It was expanded and formalized by the Telecommunications Act of 1996.

The program is paid for by telecommunications companies through an independent non-profit, not through tax revenue. (TRIPLE GASP)

But hey....why let the facts get in the way of a good story.

Cyclist's picture

It's too bad no one used their free cell phones to take pictures of the vicious mauling and robbery of the driver that stopped to check on the little boy he accidentally hit.

Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

It's time to beat whitey!!

<a href=" Driver Stops After Accidentally Hitting Black Kid, Mob of Black Men Beat Him Nearly To Death, Steal His Wallet</a>

Cyclist's picture

was white I suspect we would see 24 hours of non-stop news coverage of Al and Jesse's rants.

Oh, The Detroit Free Press interviewed a witness who stated that the driver…."He got his",…. “He got beat up real bad.”

Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

see that one of those 'extra' charges listed for land and cell phones cover the cost of providing these 'free' phones. I got tired of not knowing what all these charges were and had an ATT representative go over each and everyone with me and lo and behold--there it was. Call and check for yourself. ATT and no other company gives away things from the goodness of their corporate hearts--if you check it usually goes back to the consumer in one way or the other.

I understand the phones are paid for with user fees from our cell phones. Just like I pay a luggage fee when I fly or a fee when I apply for my fishing license. The point is Mr. Garlock was implying that the phones were paid for out of our taxes....which they are not. Taxes are assessed against us all without choice. Nor was the phone program an Obama initiative. Have to give ol' W credit for that. That was all I was trying to say.

Regardless of whether it is called a tax or a surcharge or whatever--when my money is taken from me-not given or offered freely by me, i consider it a form of taxation. Oh, guess my hormones must be out of whack again and those unwanted chin hairs are coming in cause I ain't a MR. LOL

All due apologies MS. MYTMITE. But there is a difference between a tax and a surcharge. If you object to the surcharge, don't use or buy the product. Tax? Sorry! :-)

Yet another right-wing diatribe again President Obama. How original. Can I get that last 5 minutes of my life back? Your ODS (Obama Derangement Syndrome) is showing. It is no longer quaint, just tiring. Get back to us when you have something substantial to say.

that we live in a country where we have freedom of speech! These comments would never be seen in China or Cuba. I would hope that you all would take the time to read Terry Garlock's book <em> Sisters Redeem Their Grumpy Dad</em>
It is his Truth - and an enjoyable read. There are concepts where our 'Truth' intermingle - there are concepts that are completely separated by experience. It was published in 2003. He is older as are his daughters. The chapter <em>Do You Know Who You Are</em> on page 528 is a must read. He identifies well the dumbasses on the globe. He has beautifully shared his Truth with love.

Today it is 2014. The China of 2003 has changed - and the China that I visited did not manifest the China he describes on p. 547. <strong> In China today, blacks are openly disdained </strong>. The China I visited ( just before the Olympics) had Chinese citizens begging to take a picture with us, explaining that they knew our history as an oppressed people who obtained our freedom, etc., etc., etc. Maybe humans share what they think others want to hear. One of the important sentences in his book is addressed to his daughters: <strong>Consider what I have to say, but think for yourselves.</strong>

Great advice!!

tgarlock's picture

. . . but since you kindly recommended this chapter from an old book of mine, and since readers cannot buy the book as I took it off the market when my oldest daughter reached the age she would be embarrassed by some of the softy stuff, I am inserting that short chapter here. (DM has the book because I gave her one of the copies I had.) Take it easy on me folks, I'm showing you my soft undefended flank here.

Do You Know Who You Are?

When you feel awkward as you morph from a child to an adult, when you are torn by inner turmoil and troubling questions flash through your mind, when the urge to escape to independence from your parents is overwhelming, remember this – it’s a natural part of growing up, we all go through it.

For you girls there is an added dimension to growing up. Both of you joined our family by adoption and you are a different race than your Mom and Dad.

From the time of your first words we have taught you to be proud you were born in China, that adoption is a wonderful thing, that we don’t know your birthmother and birthfather in China but maybe they loved you even though they could not keep you because of hard conditions, that we are your parents and our family is forever. We taught you these things because they are both important and true.

Nevertheless you may sometimes be troubled by certain thoughts or doubts. Kristen, as I write this you have not said your first words and we expect to hear them any day now. Melanie, when you were three you asked why your Mom and Dad are “banilla face” meaning our skin is a different color than yours. Just recently at six years old you told Mom you wanted a big nose like ours instead of your flatter nose, and you told me you wanted blonde hair like Barbie and Darby and Alex. These are natural questions and feelings.

As you get older your angst over racial difference is likely to be intensified as other kids tease you. Since man discovered fire kids have tormented one another about the smallest real or imagined difference, so do you think racial differences will be overlooked? Not a chance.

I remember during our first trip to China to adopt Melanie some Chinese people made fun of me because I was different. That’s what happens all over the world, the local group differentiates themselves against others whether it’s based on race or religion or country or even your grade or class at school. That’s just how people are, and it’s kind of silly when you think about it.

Sooner or later someone will taunt you about your different eyes or skin or hair, and it’s inevitable even people who like you will say things like “Those aren’t your real parents!” How do we protect you from this?

Some parents teach their kids all about racism, and how you need to band together with other kids of the same race to advocate for the rights of your racial group. Discrimination can take many forms and it is wrong, but I won’t teach you to think of yourself as part of one group competing against the others because I think that’s wrong, too. You will be encouraged by others to think of yourself as Chinese-American and advocate for that hyphenated group. I hope instead you will think of yourself as an American who happens to be Chinese, and advocate for everyone.

Race should be irrelevant because how we are physically different simply does not matter. How we behave matters. Segregating ourselves into racial groups perpetuates division and victimology. You are not a victim, you are an individual. If someone insults your heritage and your race and your family it doesn’t make you a victim. But it does make them a dumbass, and I hope you will ignore it or take the dumbass to task, depending on the circumstances. More importantly, I hope you come to know who you are and not let dumbasses determine how you feel about yourself.

Who you are does not depend on your genes, where you were born, what you look like or anything physical at all. Who you are is in your heart, your character and values and beliefs, like pride in your Chinese heritage. Knowing who you are involves accepting yourself, knowing your own strengths and flaws, and not measuring yourself by what others might think.

Your mother and I often forget that you are Chinese. We don’t forget intentionally, it’s just that what’s on the outside is not who you are, even though your Chinese features are beautiful. The person you have become inside is what matters, that’s what we see in our daughters and that’s what we love.

Learn to love yourself. There will always be dumbasses trying to make you feel bad about yourself, that’s life and it happens to everyone.

But the dumbasses will fail if you know who you are.

Terry Garlock

Terry Garlock, PTC

The 'softy side' gives you strength in my opinion. I'm glad you shared this marvelous work - a truism that we all need to remember. Thanks again.

PTC Observer's picture

"Segregating ourselves into racial groups perpetuates division and victimology."

How many of the readers of these posts could learn from this statement?

The NAACP is the only modern segregationist group in Fayette county. Their goal of dividing the county by race has been achieved. Congratulations NAACP!

Robert W. Morgan's picture

I know that sounds nuts, but when you said they were the only "modern segregationist group" that got me thinking that back in the bad old days there was the KKK, very much a segregationist group in the forefront of bad racial relations. The Jim Crow era was created and kept alive by politicians, police and sheriffs enforcing despicable, yet perfectly legal rules and regulations. And since the early 1900's the NAACP was very much on the stage - founded by 3 white guys. And funded to this day by black and white families and individuals with an agenda.

So then, this is how we have progressed. The laws have been rewritten and the politicians are so far from Jim Crow it seems as if it has been written out of history. The law enforcement types only enforce current laws with only occasional charges of DWB and race-based brutality.

The KKK has practically disappeared partially because the laws have been changed and partially because there was no one willing to pony up money to support such an obvious hate-filled agenda. Sure enough there are still hateful individuals around, but no national organization and no fund raising or high profile cross-burnings or even marches.

So who is left except the NAACP. They are well-funded presumably by people that believe in the "cause" - whatever that is and staffed with some activist people who can redistribute wealth from black and white families to sleazy trial lawyers. That is really hard for me to understand. Everybody else has moved on, but it is 2014 and we still have the NAACP? That can only be because whoever is still funding this organization has an agenda and the staff and lawyers are simply doing their bidding as always happens with a privately funded organization. My premise is that there are still haters out there.

Live free or die!

PTC Observer's picture

to do with "hate", it has everything to do with money and power. This is a political agenda, nothing more. A philosophy, the philosophy of wealth redistribution, aka socialism.

Until those that have their property continuously and consistently seized through legal and immoral means, understand this simple truth, the forced redistribution will continue. Law is power and the laws of this country will need to be changed and/or repealed in order to return the government to its intended purpose. That purpose includes the protection of property.

The racial legal tool, is just that, a tool. District voting is appropriate and desirable when based on population and not race, wealth,, religion, or any other politically driven agenda.

[quote]The laws have been rewritten and the politicians are so far from Jim Crow it seems as if it has been written out of history.[/quote]

Interesting statement. <em> Stringent ID requirements;, Red-lining; the use of gerrymandering to insure political power; the not so subtle 'traditions' in some communities; the use of the 'southern strategy', etc., etc., etc.</em>
The Fred Garvin's of our country would love to see Jim Crow back on center stage. As long as citizens see a non- implementation of the Civil Rights laws, the Fred Garvin's and the legal department of the NAACP, will have work to do. Fathers who teach like Mr. Garlock are our hope. His daughters have been given sound advice on how to deal with the da's of our country who use 'race' as a tool to denigrate others or boost their own egos. His daughters are proud of who they are because of the love and sound advice of their parents, and they have the tools to handle the da's.

Robert W. Morgan's picture

Redlining was completely legal (and sensible) until it was not. Redlining allowed the banks to freeze out loans for neighborhoods which had a history of non-payment of loans. Good business plan. So then, the Community Reinvestment Act was born and that became the law of the land and everybody with a pulse was given a loan and they bought a 4,000 square foot house with a spa bath, 5 bedrooms, a home theater and of course the most important thing - granite counter tops and then they couldn't pay the mortgage and the 2007 debacle happened. How many people were hurt by that? How many benefited? Nice job NAACP. Replace redlining with recession. Thanks.

Gerrymandering to ensure political power? Can you say District 5? Thanks again NAACP

And by "stringent" ID requirements, I assume you mean producing a valid ID before you vote for your favorite politician? Ever try to get a drivers license recently?

Did you ever consider that the poor results of your feel good liberal policies might be a huge problem?

Live free or die!

[quote]Redlining was completely legal (and sensible) until it was not. Redlining allowed the banks to freeze out loans for neighborhoods which had a history of non-payment of loans. Good business plan[/quote]

Interesting that Hearst was never 'red-lined' in California. He was financially in the red - and there were 'unpaid' bills. But your quote makes you feel better about ignoring the non-minorities who have suffered in our economy. The original red-lining included insurance policies, etc. Middle class minorities left those areas in order to enjoy living in a non-redline area. What was left was majority and minority racial Americans who were listed as POOR, HENCE MLK'S TURN TOWARDS HELPING THE POOR IN OUR COUNTRY - regardless of race.

[quote]And since the early 1900's the NAACP was very much on the stage - founded by 3 white guys. And funded to this day by black and white families and individuals with an agenda.[/quote]

This constant attempt to denigrate the steps taken to by Americans to insure opportunity for all citizens reminds us that the struggle is still in the minds of those who disagreed with this movement. The 'agenda' is equal opportunity for all Americans regardless of race, gender, religion - etc,

<strong>Founding group </strong>

<cite>The NAACP was formed partly in response to the continuing horrific practice of lynching and the 1908 race riot in Springfield, the capital of Illinois and resting place of President Abraham Lincoln. Appalled at the violence that was committed against blacks, a group of white liberals that included Mary White Ovington and Oswald Garrison Villard, both the descendants of abolitionists, William English Walling and Dr. Henry Moscowitz issued a call for a meeting to discuss racial justice. Some 60 people, seven of whom were African American (including W. E. B. Du Bois, Ida B. Wells-Barnett and Mary Church Terrell), signed the call, which was released on the centennial of Lincoln's birth.</cite>

brewster's picture

Some say agenda is "equal opportunity for all" but it was founded on and has the continued connotation of the "advancement for colored people".
The name itself is racist. This organization needs to retire the name to be posted in the history books along with Jim Crow, race riots and lynching.

National Association for the Advancement of Civil Rights.

Many 'groups' could unite behind that nomenclature. What certain groups are afraid of is the Voting Rights Act that the NAACP keeps using as a 'tool' to change some 'traditions'. Sometime it appears as if some people are still upset with the NAACP for challenging apartheid in the United States. It's sad that there is still a desire in some places in our country for an apartheid system. That's changing, isn't it?

The need for the organization was to stop violence against 'colored people'. Some would argue that still exists. It is a different era- and not only 'colored people' may still be denied civil rights in our country. Hmmmmm, may be a very unifying concept.

brewster's picture

Might be the most profound change of meaning of two letters since B.C. went to A.D.

Hate Groups - (939)

KKK - 163
Neo Nazi - 143
White Nationalist -128
Racist Skinhead-126
Christian Identity - 37
Neo-Confederate - 30
Black Separatist - 115
Other - 191

The number of 'hate groups ' has dropped. That's a good thing! However, the extremist groups on both the left and right are growing and aren't 'hate' groups according to today's definition. (Hate groups have a high potential for violence). The most notable decline is in the Patriot movement composed of armed militias.

[quote]Some say agenda is "equal opportunity for all" but it was founded on and has the continued connotation of the "advancement for colored people".[/quote]

The need was dealt with by Americans who wanted to challenge the Archilles Heel of the United States - race relations.
There are Americans who want the challenge to stop. But - - there are Americans who are still victims of racial profiling, red- lining based on race, institutional racism, etc. Today, civil rights are being denied to Americans often based not only on race, but on gender, religion, etc., etc. Although 'colored people' is in the present name of NAACP , it is considered a civil rights organization that has opened the doors for Americans of different colors. However, no one will deny that there is a strong anti-NAACP attitude in FC and other parts of our country. Will changing two letters do much to change an attitude? Maybe.

NUK_1's picture

Very true and that is a very moving message. You've walked the talk.

G35 Dude's picture

Well said!!!

Gort's picture

Garlock, The way you wave the ‘bloody shirt’ around here I’m surprised your daughters didn’t have GI Jane dolls instead of Barbie dolls to play with!

I wish I could agree with you that racial, (or any other type of,) discrimination is limited to verbal taunts, of the stupid and weak minded, but I don’t.

IMHO, if discrimination isn’t challenged then it becomes the norm of the society that practices it and works its ways into our economy and politics.

Some think it would be ideal if those being discriminated against would just, ‘suck it up,’ and make it easier for everyone else. That is just BS in a nation of immigrants.

Remember: If you think Social Security and Medicare are worth saving, vote for the Democrat.

PTC Observer's picture

Your comments concerning Mr. Garlock are uncalled for and speaks a bit about some "meanness" in your character. You clearly struggle with experiences you have not had and hopefully will never have.

As to your view on discrimination, it is flawed. The nature of mankind is to discriminate and no force of law can eliminate it. The freedom to associate or disassociate is an effective tool to engendered a civil society. It worked in Birmingham, Alabama and it can work today. Free individual action against all forms of unjust laws and groups speaks to the non-violent lessons of Gandhi and Dr. King. Laws forcing people to submit to things they don't actually believe only breeds hate and resentment in their hearts. Government has the obligation through our social contract, the US Constitution, to protect us against the force of another individual or group of individuals, including the government itself. It also has the legal obligation to not infringe our Right to associate and assemble.

. [quote]It worked in Birmingham, Alabama and it can work today. Free individual action against all forms of unjust laws and groups speaks to the non-violent lessons of Gandhi and Dr. King. Laws forcing people to submit to things they don't actually believe only breeds hate and resentment in their hearts. [/quote]

If it truly worked in Alabama, who are you talking about being 'forced ' today? King was keenly aware of the bitterness in the 'black and 'white'' communities. When laws became 'just' for 'blacks', the rhetoric of the Fred Garvin's appeared. Mandela's reconciliation helped to deal with the bitterness and fear in many South Africans after apartheid ended. Free individual action against unjust laws was the cause of many 'individuals' death. Your simplistic, political solutions are non- solutions to an old human weakness.,,,the need to feel better, more powerful than someone else.
Are you aware of Gorts lack of experience with discrimination?

[quote]The nature of mankind is to discriminate and no force of law can eliminate it.[/quote]

Really? Then what 'worked' in Alabama?

PTC Observer's picture

worked because of economics and the freedom to choose between good and evil.

Clever 'non- answer'. How did that 'freedom to choose' after 1964 affect women, people of color, etc., etc., in Alabama? Some see evil in the 'good' of segregation. I know you don't - - but your answers are so empty of the reality of many people in these United States. Your words have a wonderful goal - and I'm sure you do all you can to see that these goals are achieved. We're much closer than we were in 1964, but as you can see from some of the comments here - we're not there yet.


Gort's picture

PTC_0, I’ll agree with you this far, at the brainstem level, man has a natural instinct for a herding mentality but man was given a cerebral cortex also. Shouldn’t men, (the species not gender,) of all races be expected to use it for good causes and not evil?

I’m sure you are not saying, it’s okay if some people single out Terry Garlocks children for ridicule and discrimination because that is just the way it is, are you?

BTW, did you just call me a meanie? That just stings my bleeding heart!

Remember: If you think Social Security and Medicare are worth saving, vote for the Democrat.

PTC Observer's picture

Mean spirited.

Yes, you prove my point that's true.

Men should use their brains to make correct choices, that's true also.

It is not correct nor "good" to open your remarks on Mr. Garlock in this way. I wasn't speaking to his children or how they should be treated, you brought them into the dialog.

Let's just skip it Gort, the lesson is lost on you.

Gort's picture

PTC_0, well okay but before we break off this conversation I’ll say this about that. Garlock set the tone of the discussion with his post at the top of this sting.

Garlock was also the one that brought his children into the discussion. Besides, my lampoon remark about the GI Jane doll, was directed at Garlock and not his children.

Remember: If you think Social Security and Medicare are worth saving, vote for the Democrat.

Ad space area 4 internal