The National  Memo Logo

Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.

Monday, December 09, 2019 {{ new Date().getDay() }}

My mother was a child abuser. I was, too. In fact, growing up, pretty much every parent I knew abused their kids.

Or so many of Adrian Peterson’s critics would have you believe. Peterson, a star of the Minnesota Vikings, was arrested recently for child abuse after hitting his 4-year-old son with a switch. A “switch,” for those who don’t know, is a long twig. I should know, having been on the receiving end of quite a few. When no switch was available, mom was also known to employ a section of the orange plastic track from my Hot Wheels.

Admittedly, a few of the “child abusers” I knew were bad and neglectful parents back in that era before “parent” was a verb, but most were caring and attentive people who scraped and sacrificed so their kids might have better than they themselves ever did. My own mother — you may take my word for this — was the best mother in the history of mothering, fixer of scrapes, keeper of confidences, stretcher of dollars, listener of prayers, critic of a certain budding writer’s earliest work. And, yes, a spanker of behinds when the owners of said behinds got too outrageously out of line.

I don’t write any of this in defense of Peterson, by the way; I have no idea of the severity of the punishment he gave his child. No, I’m just here to express the sense of dislocation, of sheer, unadulterated “Huh?!?” that comes with hearing that the best mother in the history of mothering was a child abuser. But Peterson’s critics have been very clear.

“Spanking isn’t parenting; it’s child abuse,” goes a headline on CNN’s website.

“Violence is violence,” argues a piece on Bleacher Report.

Sorry, but that’s going to be a hard sell for me — and for the three other people my mom raised successfully, and essentially alone, in the gang- and poverty-ridden slums of Los Angeles. But then, the idealized model of modern mothering now resembles less her example than it does that of a woman I once saw pleading with a child to behave. The child in question, a boy of about four, was frolicking barefoot through the ice cream cooler in the supermarket.

Never raising her voice, his mom reasoned with him. He giggled.

She cajoled him. He ignored her.

She threatened him with a “time out.” He didn’t even look her way.

He was still tiptoeing through the Ben & Jerry’s and she was still begging him not to, as I left the store. This was maybe 25 years ago and I find myself wondering: If she couldn’t stop a 4-year-old from strolling through the ice cream cooler, what in the world did she do when that same child was 13 and ditching school, 14 and using drugs, 15 and getting horizontal with some little girl in his class?

I don’t believe in spanking reflexively. Not every offense merits it. Indeed, most don’t.

I don’t believe in spanking to excess. The idea is to sting, not hurt.

I don’t believe in spanking in anger. Anger leads to loss of control.

And no, I don’t believe all spanking is abuse. A 2001 study by Dr. Diana Baumrind — a psychologist who opposes spanking — found that mild to moderate corporal punishment causes no lasting harm.

Here’s what I do believe. A parent must be loving, accessible, involved, but also an authority figure, the one who sets limits, and imposes real and painful consequences for kids who flout them.

Otherwise, you risk sending into the world something we already have in excess — children poisoned by “self-esteem,” walking in serene self-entitlement, convinced the sun shines for them alone. Such children are invariably brought up short. The universe is a rough teacher and its lessons sting worse than any spanking you could get. The worst thing you can do is send your offspring into that classroom unprepared.

Speaking of child abuse.

Leonard Pitts is a columnist for The Miami Herald, 1 Herald Plaza, Miami, Fla., 33132. Readers may contact him via email at lpitts@miamiherald.com.

AFP Photo/Dilip Vishwanat

Want more news and analysis? Sign up for our daily email newsletter!

Advertising

Start your day with National Memo Newsletter

Know first.

The opinions that matter. Delivered to your inbox every morning

  • 1.Why did Trump choose to hide certain specific files and not others at Mar-a-Lago? What were the criteria that Trump used to keep some files concealed and not others? Who selected those files? Did Trump consult or direct anyone in his selection of secret files? Trump was notorious for being too impatient to read his briefing papers, even after they had been drastically shortened and simplified. Is there the slightest evidence that he spirited these papers away so that he could consult or study them? Who besides Trump knew of the presence of the files he had concealed at Mar-a-Lago?
  • 2. Mar-a-Lago has an infamous reputation for being open to penetration even by foreign spies. In 2019, the FBI arrested a Chinese woman who had entered the property with electronic devices. She was convicted of trespassing, lying to the Secret Service, and sentenced and served eight-months in a federal prison, before being deported to China. Have other individuals with possible links to foreign intelligence operations been present at Mar-a-Lago?
  • 3. Did members of Trump's Secret Service detail have knowledge of his secret storage of the files at Mar-a-Lago? What was the relationship of the Secret Service detail to the FBI? Did the Secret Service, or any agent, disclose information about the files to the FBI?
  • 4. Trump's designated representatives to the National Archives are Kash Patel and John Solomon, co-conspirators in the investigations into Russian interference in the presidential election of 2016, the Ukraine missiles-for-political dirt scandal that led to the first impeachment in 2019, and the coup of 2020. Neither has any professional background in handling archival materials. Patel, a die-hard Trump loyalist whose last job in the administration was as chief of staff to the Acting Secretary of Defense, was supposedly involved in Trump’s “declassification” of some files. Patel has stated, “Trump declassified whole sets of materials in anticipation of leaving government that he thought the American public should have the right to read themselves."
  • The White House counsel failed to generate the paperwork to change the classification markings, but that doesn’t mean the information wasn’t declassified.” If Pat Cipollone, the White House legal counsel, did not “generate the paperwork,” was he or anyone on his staff aware at all of the declassifications? The White House Staff Secretary Derek Lyons resigned his post in December 2020. Did his successor, who held the position for a month, while Trump was consumed with plotting his coup, ever review the material found in Trump’s concealed files for declassification? Or did Patel review the material? Can Patel name any individual who properly reviewed the supposed declassification?
  • 5. Why did Trump keep his pardon of Roger Stone among his secret files? Was it somehow to maintain leverage over Stone? What would that leverage be? Would it involve Stone's role as a conduit with the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers during the coup? Or is there another pardon in Trump’s files for Stone, a secret pardon for his activities in the January 6th insurrection? Because of the sweeping nature of the pardon clause, pardons can remain undisclosed (until needed). Pardons are self-executing, require no justification and are not subject to court review beyond the fact of their timely execution. In other words, a court may verify the pardon was valid in time but has no power to review appropriateness. A pardon could even be oral but would need to be verifiable by a witness. Do the files contain secret pardons for Trump himself, members of his family, members of the Congress, and other co-conspirators?
  • 6.Was the FBI warrant obtained to block the imminent circulation or sale of information in the files to foreign powers? Does the affidavit of the informant at Mar-a-Lago, which has not been released, provide information about Trump’s monetization that required urgency in executing the warrant? Did Trump monetize information in any of the files? How? With whom? Any foreign power or entity? Was the Saudi payment from its sovereign wealth fund for the LIV Golf Tournament at Trump’s Bedminster Golf Club for a service that Trump rendered, an exchange of anything of value or information that was in the files? If it involved information in the files was it about nuclear programs? Was it about the nuclear program of Israel? How much exactly was the Saudi payment for the golf tournament? The Saudi sovereign wealth fund gave Jared Kushner and former Trump Secretary of the Treasury Steven Mnuchin $2 billion for their startup hedge fund, Affinity Partners. Do the Saudis regard that investment as partial payment for Trump’s transfer of nuclear information? Were Kushner or Mnuchin aware of the secret files at Mar-a-Lago?
  • 7.Did Trump destroy any of the files? If so, when? Did those files contain incriminating information? Did he destroy any files after he received the June subpoena?
  • 8.Were any of the secrets of our allies compromised? Has the U.S. government provided an inventory of breaches or potential breaches to our allies?
  • 9.Does the resort maintain a copying machine near the classified documents that Trump hid? Were any of the documents copied or scanned? Are Trump’s documents at Mar-a-Lago originals or copies? Were any copies shown or given to anyone?
  • 10.Trump’s lawyer Christina Bobb has revealed that a video surveillance system covers the places where Trump hid the files at Mar-a-Lago, and that the system is connected to a system at his other residences at the Bedminster Golf Club in New Jersey and Trump Tower in New York City. According to Bobb, Trump and members of his family observed the FBI search and seizure of his files at Mar-a-Lago, “actually able to see the whole thing” through their surveillance system. Who has that surveillance system recorded entering the rooms where the files were kept?

Kevin Bacon, right, in "The Following"

The aftermath of the August 8, 2022 search of the Mar-a-Lago club, former President Donald Trump’s Florida home, isn’t the first showdown between the FBI and a cult leader.

The Following, a 2013 Fox Pictures series, played out in similar fashion. Three seasons was enough for the producers and it’s been nine years since our introduction to Joe Carroll, English professor-novelist-serial killer, so there’s a spoiler risk -- but not enough to prevent the comparison.

Keep reading... Show less
{{ post.roar_specific_data.api_data.analytics }}