Duty, Honor, Country

By William L. Garvin

“Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends.”

John 15:13

On February 24, 1967, the United States Congress declared me to be “an officer and a gentleman” and commissioned me as a second lieutenant in the Armor Branch of the United States Army.  During the previous year in Basic Training, Advanced Armor Training, and Officer Candidate School, I learned a number of lessons that have remained constant over my life.  I always check my “gig line” when getting dressed, my shoes are always shined, and what hair I have left is closely cropped.  My wife finds it somewhat humorous that I still fold my socks and underwear the way I was taught by Uncle Sam.  When making our bed, the sheets get a precise forty-five degree angle on the military tuck.

More importantly, I learned the moral principles of military leadership were duty, honor, and country.  My tactical officers insured, in their own unique way, that I understood and would never forget that the men I would soon command were a “sacred trust.”  Today I teach command and leadership principles to new lieutenants in the California Police Management program.  I do my best to reinforce in them that same unshakeable belief --the men and women they command are an irrevocable “sacred trust.”  It is with a great deal of sadness that I see those principles being violated at the highest level of our government.

Our President and Commander in Chief is “offended” when people want to know why four Americans were in harm’s way without the security they requested.  The Secretary of Defense complains about “Monday morning quarterbacking” even though this Administration has multiple and contradictory excuses for the Benghazi fiasco.  Why would the President, his Press Secretary, his United Nations Ambassador, and his Secretary of State continue to blame a stupid movie trailer for the murders of Ambassador Chris Stevens, Navy Seals Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty and Sean Smith?  They did this for nearly two weeks even though now the President says it called it a “terrorist attack” the next day.  Frankly, Sir, you did no such thing no matter what Candy Crowley says!  As is your wont, you used vague, non-specific language.  You call the war on terror an “overseas contingency operation.”  Shamelessly, when Major Nidal Hassan, a coward and a traitor, opens fire on unarmed soldiers in Fort Hood, you call it “workplace violence.”  What part of “Allahu akbar” that the treasonous major was shouting during the massacre didn’t you (of all people!) understand?

I believe you sold out the Poles and the Czechs when you reneged on their missile defense system.  I believe that the Russians picked your pocket and ate your lunch with the START treaty.  I believe you failed the doctor who is now in prison in Pakistan for providing you the DNA that allowed the Seals to get Bin Laden.  I believe you failed to provide the Benghazi Consulate the necessary security even though repeatedly requested.  Your statement that you were “not personally aware” of their requests for security sounds like a typical legalistic parsing of words.  I believe your failure to know and prevent is tantamount to negligence and the failure to act is a violation of your sacred trust—you abandoned your men.  You have said that you are “ultimately responsible”; I believe you are directly responsible!

Two of the individuals we know who demonstrated the highest order of courage were Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty.  As soon as Navy Seal Woods heard the gunfire, he requested permission to go to their aid.  Sources on the ground have said the request was refused not once but twice.  General Petraeus has stated that no one in the CIA gave the order to stand down.  Who does that leave, Mr. President?

The only reasons for disobeying an order are if it is illegal, immoral, or unsafe.  Forget unsafe—that goes with Seal territory.  Woods, two others, and later Glen Doherty, disobeyed the immoral order to stand down.  They took an oath to protect their fellow Americans and they were not willing to stand by and watch them murdered by a theo-political mob of radical terrorists.  They understood “Duty”!  They understood “Honor”!  They understood “Country”!  They laid down their lives to save others.

Why were their requests for assistance ignored?  The battle went on for hours and military assistance could have been onsite and engaged within two hours.  They even “laser-pointed” the mortar position that ultimately took their lives!  I do not believe any military professional would EVER refuse to go to the aid of their men and women in distress.  That leaves only one person, Mr. President.   I believe you have failed to lead.  I believe you failed to show character, integrity, or courage.  I do not believe you are fit to command men like Woods or Doherty.  You have violated your sacred trust and should be removed from office.  

Letter to the editor, Oct 26, 2012

Dear Editor,
As you know, I have always complimented you on your willingness to present all points of view,no matter how inarticulate or unfounded. I also understand the difficulty of putting together a weekly newspaper with very limited resources. Therefore, I "Sincerely" appreciate the service you provide to our community. As you also know, I prefer to address issues on the basis of fact and logic and seldom engage in personal responses or attacks. Unfortunately, as the saying goes, "a kind deed never goes unpunished" so I will allow myself a slight deviation in this letter. Nonetheless, I must caution you NEVER to cut off the name of a letter contributor or some of your readers will fall into a paroxysm of petulance!

My case in point: I presented a factual rebuttal to a letter by Ms. Delia Stichick who listed a number of "lies" she erroneously attributed to Governor Romney. I chose to address just one and hoped to educate her. She said only three out of three dozen green energy companies had failed. I listed SIX, all of which were Obama campaign contributors (can you say "crony capitalism"?), all of which were bankrupt, and another which was on the verge. A quick internet check lists 36 green energy companies which are bankrupt or faltering. Ms. Stichick still alleges her "three" is factual. Maybe she would like to name even one which has paid back the taxpayer "investment"? Of course she didn't and she can't. Instead, she chose to engage in a typical liberal exercise of sophistry. Undoubtedly, her grades on the SATs for reading comprehension were not very good if she responded the same way then! She is simply and incredibly and factually wrong.

As liberals generally do, she chose not to research the facts but merely reiterated her unfounded "lies" even louder. Still wrong. She also created a straw argument that I said President Obama "crept into the gas stations in the dead of night and changed all the prices at the pump!" Even more wrong. I said no such thing; I implied no such thing. Apparently, she "can't handle the truth!" What I did say was that a rising price of gasoline is consistent with his actual words to ""bankrupt coal plants" and "electricity prices will skyrocket." Maybe she should check that transcript! I also remember that every time gas prices went up during the Bush administration the hills were alive with the "Bush-Cheney connections to Big Oil" and "Halliburton." I understand the basics of supply and demand very well; apparently, President Obama, who has problems with seventh-grade math (by his own admission), does not.

Too many liberals love to preach "civility" and "tolerance" but act in the most uncivil and intolerant manner. They feel free to call Governor Romney a liar, murderer, tax felon, and numerous pejoratives with impunity. But if anyone questions the President's awful economic policies, record of stimulus failure, totally undistinguished career prior-presidency, $5 trillion in deficits, lack of vision, lack of specifics, "Fast and Furious" fiasco, his imaginary "war on women" bovine scatology, massive unemployment, food stamp records, or Benghazi incompetence, they are "racist"! Frankly, I'm bored by those types of trite tactics. If you approve of petty, petulant, and pompous presidents; if you approve of buffoonish, banal, and intellectually bankrupt vice-presidents, vote for the incumbents. But as Clint Eastwood so accurately pointed out, "if they can't do the job, you've got to let them go."

"SINCERELY",
Bill Garvin

Split Decision; Mirth or Madness?

By William L. Garvin

“If a wise man has an argument with a fool, the fool only rages and laughs and there is no quiet.”  Proverbs 29:9

By the time you read this, the second presidential debate will have already occurred.  As of this writing, political pundits are referring to it as “Round Two.”  That brings to mind the incredible boxing career of Muhammad Ali.  In 1974, Ali was to fight George Foreman in Zaire in what was marketed as the “Rumble in the Jungle.”  Because of Foreman’s incredible punching power, Ali was not favored to win.  When he “floated like a butterfly,” he was a little slower.  Even in his prime, his “stings like a bee” could not come close to matching the incredible power in Foreman’s sledgehammer fists.

However, in an inspired moment of ring strategy, Ali beat the odds.  He leaned back on the ropes, covered himself up while taunting his powerful foe.  Foreman began to furiously pound away at Ali.  Rather than weakening Ali, most of the power was absorbed by the ropes.  Foreman expended an incredible amount of energy and began to tire.  Ali came back to win the fight and the “rope-a-dope” strategy became part of boxing’s lexicon.

Maybe that was President Obama’s intended “strategerie” in the first debate.  He was certainly passive on the ropes and appeared to be defenseless.  Unfortunately for him, Governor Romney failed to tire.  He continually rained left hooks of Obama’s failed liberal policies to the body.  Joe Frazier would have been impressed!  He followed those up with right crosses to the jaw of conservative, free market economic policy.  The President was helpless, listless and pretty much gave up in a Roberto Duran “no mas” picture of defeat.  There is no escape from a record of failure when your plan for the future is merely “more of the same.”  The fight should have been stopped by TKO.

In the Vice-Presidential debate, the Administration could not afford a similar shellacking.  While the President had come out somnambulant, Joe Biden came out “juiced.”  Some say in more ways than one!  In any event, there has never been a more disconcerting performance in the history of modern presidential debates.  With very rare exception, Biden was described as rude, condescending, maniacal, unhinged, disturbing, self-indulgent, undisciplined, overbearing, boorish, un-presidential and mean spirited by his foes.  His allies could only come up with aggressive, spirited, and “it’s just Joe being Joe.”  The latter is probably true.  His arrogance (without basis) and pomposity is legendary.  He tries to disguise himself as an everyday blue collar kind of guy but he has never been one of “the common folk.”  He’s a lifelong politician with only a passing commitment to the truth.  It’s his failing throughout life.  He received an F in law school because of plagiarism and dropped out of the 1988 presidential race for multiple violations of the same nature.  Many of his statements can only be characterized as outright lies.

In the debate, those who count such things said good old Joe, the barroom bully, interrupted Paul Ryan 82 times in only ninety minutes.  His pugilistic style could only be described as “laugh-a-gaffe” or “smirk-a-jerk.”  Macho Camacho, the clown prince of boxing, would have been embarrassed.  Plus, Biden’s corner man was the referee/moderator.  The analytical aftermath was preoccupied with his outlandish behavior and very little attention was paid to his lack of substance.

Joe, who must be BFFs with “Bibi”, has said “he and Barack” are proud of raising a trillion dollars in new taxes.  He said their tax plan would only affect “millionaires and billionaires.”  Unfortunately, the President’s actual plan would affect individuals making $200,000 and up and couples making $250,000 and up.  But that was just Joe clowning around before the real bozo act began.

VP “no one messes with Joe” Biden asserted that neither he nor the President knew of requests for increased security in Benghazi.  Apparently they also didn’t know of the thirteen previous incidents or that it was 9/11.  He claimed the intelligence community attributed the death of the Ambassador and three other Americans on a movie trailer.  Maybe if the President hadn’t missed sixty percent of the intelligence briefings, these things would have been known.  Maybe if they had viewed the real time feed from the Benghazi consulate during the five-hour attack, they would have known.  Now their campaign says the only reason the four deaths are being discussed is because Romney and Ryan have politicized the issue.  Enough already!  When you have a clown in the ring, don’t be surprised when a circus breaks out!   

Let’s hope both presidential candidates addressed the important issues yesterday with appropriate seriousness.  We’ve had enough Jerry Springer performances. 

Figures Don’t Lie?

By William L. Garvin

Mark Twain is oft cited as having coined the phrase that “figures don’t lie but liars figure.”  He once quoted Benjamin Disraeli as saying “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."  Regardless of the source, improbable numbers should always be viewed with skepticism.  In today’s polarized world, however, such healthy adult skepticism will more than likely be pilloried!

Most economists are in agreement that the Gross National Product of the United States is weaker this year than last year.  In fact, last quarter’s GDP was revised downward to an anemic 1.3%.  As a result, the average job gain for each month of this year (through August) was only 164,000.  These same economists expected about 114,000 new jobs to be added in September and an unemployment rate of 8.1 to 8.2%.  Then like an economic rabbit out of a statistical hat, 873,000 people suddenly found employment and the unemployment rate dropped to 7.8%!  It’s an economic miracle of biblical proportions!  Keep in mind that employers actually created only the predicted 114,000 jobs.  That is not even enough to keep up with population growth.  Also keep in mind that the U-6 number (unemployed, underemployed, and dropouts) remained unmoved at 14.7%.  The BLS Household Survey of 60,000 households that is adjusted “to correct for seasonal patterns” that shows nearly 300,000 people finding full-time employment and nearly 600,000 finding part-time employment in September, (a month that typically shows increases in UNemployment in the 20-24 age group) defies logical and statistical probability.   Nonetheless, Labor Secretary Hilary Solis is “offended” that anyone should ask for an explanation.  Heaven forbid that government should be transparent!

Remember when President Obama promised that the passage of the Stimulus Bill would result in an unemployment rate of 5.4%?  Well, the “Recovery Summer” of 2010 is long gone and this Administration is nowhere near fulfilling his campaign promises.  It continues to blame the Bush administration for the collapse of the financial and housing markets.  It conveniently forgets Democrats were in charge of the House and the Senate for nearly two years at the time of the financial collapse. Remember Barney Frank chairing the House Finance Committee and Chris Dodd chairing the Senate Banking Committee?  Both scandal plagued Democrats actively rebuffed attempts to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  As you assess the President’s record, keep these additional facts in mind:

Fact:  43 consecutive months of unemployment over 8%. Even if accurate, one month under 8% doesn’t come close to balancing the scale!

Fact:  23 million Americans are unemployed, underemployed or have just plain given up.

Fact:  There are no more people working now than when President Obama took office despite his having "created 5 million jobs."

Fact:  The labor participation rate (63.5%) is at its lowest in 31 years.

Fact:  Fifty percent increase in the national debt in less than 4 years: the debt was $10.6 trillion when this administration began and is over $16.1 trillion now.

Fact:  Four straight years of trillion dollar budget deficits.

Fact:  Gasoline prices have doubled across the country and tripled in some areas of California!

Fact:  There are a record number of people (47 million) on food stamps.

Fact:  College tuition is up 25% since the President took office.

Fact:  Health insurance premiums did not decrease $2,500, they went UP $2,500!

Fact:  Anti-America demonstrations are ongoing in 23 countries.

Fact:  The FBI took three weeks to get onsite to investigate the murder of Ambassador Stevens: CNN only took three days!

Fact:  The president of Libya says the terrorist attack had nothing to do with a stupid video!

Fact:  2,000 of our service personnel have died in Afghanistan and we just suffered the largest loss of aircraft since Viet Nam at Camp Leatherneck in an al Qaeda attack.

Fact:  Absentee ballot requests from our military personnel are down as much as 92% in swing states.  Maybe DOJ should investigate real as opposed to imaginary voter suppression!

Fact:  The White House and DOJ claim "executive privilege" and refuse to release information to Congress on "Fast and Furious."

Senator Obama had no record of significant experience or accomplishment when he was elected.  It shows in his administration’s record--that is why he fared so poorly in the debate.  It wasn’t the altitude; it wasn’t the moderator; it wasn’t because Governor Romney “cheated”; it wasn’t because he over-prepped.  It was because he has no fundamental understanding of economic principles, the private sector, or how to solve the great difficulties facing this nation.  When you vote in November, follow Clint Eastwood’s advice: "When they can't do the job, you have to let them go!"

Facts versus Feelings

By William L. Garvin

Political campaigns are conducted on two levels; one is logical and the other is emotional.  As a society, we should be concerned about the shrinking role of the logical and the increasing emphasis on the emotional when it comes to critical decisions facing the nation.  Remember that this constitutional republic we practice as a democracy was predicated on the premise that votes would be cast by an informed citizenry.  With increasing frequency, this is not the case.

It doesn’t matter whether you are watching Jay Leno’s “Jaywalking” segments or “Watters World” on Fox or listening to Howard Stern’s interviews on Sirius.  The inescapable conclusion is that far too many eligible voters know next to nothing about their responsibilities or the issues on which they will be voting.  In Mark Bauerlein’s book THE DUMBEST GENERATION, he recounts a Leno segment:  “Where does the Pope live?”  The answer: “England.”  Leno’s follow-up question:  “Where in England?”  The answer:  “Ummm, Paris.”  Hopefully, that person confines his or her voting participation to “American Idol” and “Dancing with the Stars.”

While the entertainment shows may be exhibiting isolated examples, Bauerlein notes that in a national history exam, 57 percent of high school seniors scored “below basic,” i.e., not even “possessing a partial mastery of prerequisite knowledge and skills that allow for proficient work.”  He also cites a report titled “The Coming Crisis in Citizenship” which tested 14,000 college freshmen and seniors in areas such as history, government, foreign relations, separation of church and state, federalism, women’s suffrage, the Bill of Rights and Martin Luther King.  The average score of the freshmen was 51.7—an F!    By the time they were seniors, their score had increased by only 1.5…still an F!

Given the general dumbing down of America, it is not surprising that politicians would adjust their campaign tactics accordingly.  If the voting population is unlikely to do any substantive research on candidate claims, why not run ads based on emotions?  Why not resort to blatant falsehoods such as “they want dirty air and dirty water!”  “They gonna put y’all back in chains!”  “They’ll throw Granny over the cliff.”  “They’ll take away your birth control and a woman’s right to choose.”  Even if it gets “Four Pinocchio’s,” most people will never read the fact check or think through the obvious sophistry.  This is especially true if the mainstream media has a dog in the fight.  Chances are, if they do any investigating or fact checking at all, it will be one sided on “their” opponent.

Compounding the problem is the cultural shift from a character ethic to a personality ethic.  If a candidate is “cool” and has a pleasant smile, it doesn’t matter what he actually does.  What he says is not as important as how he says it.  What he did is less important than what he says he did.  It doesn’t matter if you claim to be a victim of circumstances if you’re trying to enlist the votes of victims.  Why not talk about raising taxes if you’re trying to get the votes of people who pay no taxes?  Why not promise “free stuff” to lots of people if you’re going to pay for it with other people’s money?  Image is everything; honesty and integrity is an impediment.

Gasoline prices have doubled and unemployment has exceeded 8% for 43 straight months.  Fewer people are working now than when he took office and he can still claim to have “created” 4.3 million jobs.  He has increased the debt from $10.6 to over $16 trillion in less than four years and still claims to be fiscally conservative!

Surrogates like Stephanie Cutter can insinuate that Romney is a tax felon and Harry Reid can falsely charge on the Senate floor that Romney paid no taxes.  Cutter can coordinate a campaign ad that says Romney is responsible for a steel worker’s wife’s death and Susan Rice can say the death of our Libyan ambassador is all because of a movie trailer.

The Middle East goes up in flames and Obama’s foreign policy poll numbers go up.  GDP numbers for last quarter go down to a pathetic 1.25, food stamp recipients reach a record number of 47 million and Obama’s economic policy numbers go up.  So we see form without function.  We see style without substance.  We see movement without progress and flash without sizzle.   It looks more and more as if H.L. Mencken was right:  “Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.”