Althouse: "Surprise! Cruz supports Gillibrand in prosecution of military sexual assaults."

June 13, 2013

"Surprise! Cruz supports Gillibrand in prosecution of military sexual assaults."

"I am going to be voting against the chairman's amendment. And I am going to vote against it because I was persuaded by the argument that Sen. Gillibrand presented in this committee a few moments ago," Cruz said. "I think she made a powerful and effective argument that the lack of reporting [of incidents] is driven by a fear of not having an impartial third party outside the chain of command in which to report a sexual assault."

(The Chairman is Carl Levin, a Democrat.)

158 comments:

edutcher said...: Bad idea, Ted. This is what happened to Rubio and Toomey.

Gillibrand's plan would put a political commissar in every unit; they had these in the Red Army in WWII.

They were part of the NKVD.

Need I say more?

PS Will they handle the homosexual rapes, or just the heterosexual ones.; 6/13/13, 5:17 PM
traditionalguy said...: Cruz is an honest man. That alone separates him from the DC crowd.

Justice requires honest Judges. Cruz is not afraid of the dishonest military judges, a/k/a careerist Majors and Colonels. Good for him.; 6/13/13, 5:33 PM
Jason said...: I've held four separate commands over 21 years in the military. I just retired officially on June 1. Not fucking soon enough.

If these little tin-pot libtards don't trust me in command of my own unit, they can find another fucking officer. But when they go to war again, they'll be begging for another commander like me.

Fuck these shitheads.

The people these libtards are looking to promote are the very people that get fragged by their own troops when things get hot.; 6/13/13, 6:19 PM
Jason said...: It's gotten so bad that people accused of sexual misconduct of any kind can have no expectation of fairness or evenhandedness in the handling of their case. The undue command influence is so thick you can cut it with a knife and is coming from the very top. Any reasonably competent defense counsel should be hammering and hammering on this.; 6/13/13, 6:22 PM
Chef Mojo said...: Good on Cruz.

Edbutcher, you are simply an asshole sometimes. Make that most of the time.

Regardless of what you think of military law, it is the law, and sexual assault is against the law. Are you saying the military should look the other way? Ignore the problem?

You may not like women in the military, but tough titty, dicksmack. They're there, and they're not going anywhere. They deserve full protection under the law. Which you really don't seem to care about. Sure, let the sexual assault commence! After all, they had it coming, right? Getting all up in that MAN thing?

What does it say about a person that they're willing to assault a comrade-in-arms, Edbutcher? Are those the ones you want serving in our armed forces? Are those the leaders? Yeah, they're just building up the unit cohesion by hitting on or raping their comrades-in-arms, right, Ed? But you just think that's peachy, right?

And yes, it does cover all aspects of sexual assault, you ignorant asshat.

Political commissars? Quit being such a fucking drama queen. This is about the UCMJ, plain and simple. Whether you like or not, Congress gets oversight.; 6/13/13, 6:22 PM
Jason said...: I've held four separate commands over 21 years in the military. I just retired officially on June 1. Not fucking soon enough.

If these little tin-pot libtards don't trust me in command of my own unit, they can find another fucking officer. But when they go to war again, they'll be begging for another commander like me.

Fuck these shitheads.

The people these libtards are looking to promote are the very people that get fragged by their own troops when things get hot.; 6/13/13, 6:30 PM
exhelodrvr1 said...: Why should this be just for sexual assaults? Make it for every offense!!; 6/13/13, 6:39 PM
exhelodrvr1 said...: Chef Mojo,
Overall, the current structure does a very good job of being fair to both the accused and the accuser. The people who are accused also deserve equal protection.

This process will pretty clearly provide too much leeway for the accusers to use it for purposes other than justice.

traditionalguy,
"Dishonest" military judges is less of an issue than "dishonest" civilian judges.; 6/13/13, 6:45 PM
Anonymous said...: Bad call. It's not political commissars next but it opens the door.
The military in general does not ignore these problems. Some commanders do. There are other avenues. Troops can go to the IG or write their congressman. They can even go to the local media. The military is already chopping starred heads and will continue to do so.; 6/13/13, 6:45 PM
Revenant said...: I'm pretty damned impressed with Ted Cruz so far. Good for him on this one.; 6/13/13, 6:48 PM
RiverRat said...: Why would this be a surprise. Cruz trusts "government" even less that I do. A truly "independent" 3rd party always makes the most sense...if we could just find some.; 6/13/13, 6:58 PM
Henry said...: Good for him.; 6/13/13, 6:58 PM
Anonymous said...: So it's a bad idea? This from a career military officer? Good lord, I'm glad you've retired.; 6/13/13, 7:04 PM
edutcher said...: Chef Mojo said...

Good on Cruz.

Edbutcher, you are simply an asshole sometimes. Make that most of the time.

Regardless of what you think of military law, it is the law, and sexual assault is against the law. Are you saying the military should look the other way? Ignore the problem?

You may not like women in the military, but tough titty, dicksmack. They're there, and they're not going anywhere. They deserve full protection under the law. Which you really don't seem to care about. Sure, let the sexual assault commence! After all, they had it coming, right? Getting all up in that MAN thing?

What does it say about a person that they're willing to assault a comrade-in-arms, Edbutcher? Are those the ones you want serving in our armed forces? Are those the leaders? Yeah, they're just building up the unit cohesion by hitting on or raping their comrades-in-arms, right, Ed? But you just think that's peachy, right?

Oooohhhh, aren't we the tough guy.

Or is it the She Wolf of the SS?

Same drivel.

Spare me your nonsense. If you can't make a point without making an ass of yourself, maybe you ought to go back over to Kos.

And yes, it does cover all aspects of sexual assault, you ignorant asshat.

Political commissars? Quit being such a fucking drama queen. This is about the UCMJ, plain and simple. Whether you like or not, Congress gets oversight.

That's EXACTLY what we're talking about, moron.

And what it would amount to is a politically appointed second commander looking over the commander's shoulder.

From the NY Daily News story:

Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) has proposed a dramatic change in the virtually God-like power a unit commander has over subordinates, including the process by which allegations of sexual assault are handled.

She wants to alter the chain to create a separate military convening authority to assess such allegations and decide if they will go to trial. Critics argue the current system creates a big disincentive for victims to even come forth.

And, yes, you twit, that would put homosexual assaults, which have skyrocketed in the military in the lap of a politician who might have every incentive in the world to treat them differently.

Mojo, you're a fool, just like the last time I had to answer your stupid mouth.

The fact this is being proposed by Chuckie Schumer's little handmaiden and protegee would make any intelligent person suspicious. You're not, because intelligence has never been your long suit, has it?

And, yes, genius, they DO want to go outside the UCMJ.

Go sleep it off, somebody's going to think you're machine or Diamond.; 6/13/13, 7:11 PM
Anonymous said...: Why does edbutcher think everyone who disagrees with him is me ? Chef Mojo is me? What an idiot you are eddy., LMAO,; 6/13/13, 7:27 PM
Browndog said...: Inga has a daughter.

Everyone else, STFU.; 6/13/13, 7:42 PM
edutcher said...: Because mojo sounds just like the She Devil of the SS.

Amazing how these people all have the same verbal tics, savers, and boilerplate.; 6/13/13, 7:46 PM
Swifty Quick said...: The military isn't the military anymore. It's now just a big laboratory turned over to social scientists, conflict theory sociologists chief among them, very similar to how the public school system morphed out of its mission into something else a generation or two ago. And we can see how that worked out.; 6/13/13, 7:46 PM
Anonymous said...: Chef Mojo is a conservative, you dope.; 6/13/13, 7:48 PM
edutcher said...: That's "rightist", and, no, he's not.

PS and OT:

We've had a lot of these Surprise! turnarounds lately among Republicans.

The word "metadata" occur to anyone else?

And, before anybody says, "No", remember what Willie and Hillary! did with just half the FBI files on Republican members of the House?; 6/13/13, 7:52 PM
David said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 6/13/13, 7:55 PM
Methadras said...: This is what happens when we allowed women in the military. Sorry ladies, you didn't need to be there. However, that being said, this isn't a pressing issue for me. Sexual assault is a crime regardless of where it's committed and in that vein if this what is going to require to get this house in order then do so and move on. I just can't wait to see what the unintended consequences are going to be though. There will be.; 6/13/13, 7:56 PM
David said...: "Inga said...
So it's a bad idea? This from a career military officer? Good lord, I'm glad you've retired."

It can't possibly be a good idea, Inga? Your are really sure of that, aren't you? Wow, where did your vast knowledge of military command come from all of a sudden? Because your daughter served? What bullshit.

If the commanders aren't doing a good job, relieve them and get new commanders. But having someone in each unit with command override authority presents all sorts of problems, no matter on what issue the commander can be overridden.

The officers of our military are men and women of high honor and sense of duty. They are not perfect, nor are all of them up to the highest standards. But command authority is crucial. This proposal is an insult to the officer corps. They will fix the problem, if given a chance.; 6/13/13, 7:58 PM
Revenant said...: We've had a lot of these Surprise! turnarounds lately among Republicans.

The big surprise turnaround being that a guy elected on a Tea Party "the government is the problem" platform isn't showing sufficient deference to government traditions.

Damn that flip-flopper! The NSA musta gotten to him!; 6/13/13, 7:58 PM
edutcher said...: Agree with David, but I can see any Martin Dempsey wannabes jumping for a post like that so they can make a name for themselves in the eyes of the media and all the "right" (Left) Congresscreeps.; 6/13/13, 8:04 PM
SGT Ted said...: The idea that sexual assault is a hugely ignored crime in the Military is a big fat lie. This is feminist supremacist politics at its worst.

I served in units with females for my entire career. Jason is right, Inga is all wet. One can be for hammering rapists and still not support this idea.

If you have ever been in the crosshairs of an AR 15-6 based on sexual misconduct, you would not support this either. While I haven't been a target, I know innocent men that were. You are presumed guilty and you go from there.

My 1SG in Iraq had to go to court martial to clear his name a year prior to our deployment and was found innocent, with the accuser caught lying in open court. Not to mention other exculpatory evidence that was ignored by the JAG prior to trial.

Plenty of women abuse the chivalric attitude of warrior types to get out of shit details and bad or hard duty. Or, an NCO just knows that the women can't handle certain jobs, based on experience and past performance, so he doesn't even assign them to it.

They will also tells lies to get people in trouble, just because.

The process will be abused by those motivated by revenge or by women trying to hide an adulterous relationship or to avoid fraternization charges.

There better be a giant hammer for false accusers or it will be a farce.; 6/13/13, 8:25 PM
Nomennovum said...: Cruz is playing a sucker's game. He's going to get caught up in a witch hunt, and I can hardly wait to see where this all ends up.

I am, however, reminded of the maxim "bad cases make bad law."

I am also reminded of the Law of Unintended Consequences, but I'm not sure how unintended all this is when feminists fought and won their battle to get women in the military along side men. At the very least, this certainly shouldn't have been unexpected.

You all expected this, right?; 6/13/13, 8:25 PM
Nomennovum said...: I predict that the Dems will double cross Cruz, crucifying him at the crossroads of feminist politics and military policy; 6/13/13, 8:51 PM
Jason said...: Inga: how many company commands have you held, dingbat? I keep people like your daughter alive. You're a muddle-headed ignoramus.; 6/13/13, 8:52 PM
Anonymous said...: Jason, as I said, good riddance.; 6/13/13, 9:00 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Jason's comment wins the thread!; 6/13/13, 9:01 PM
Anonymous said...: Any of you warrior types want to explain why the first thing the females were told by the male Marines when they got to Camp Leatherneck was to never walk to the latrines or anywhere alone after dark? It wasn't Taliban that they were warning the female Marines and Navy Corpsmen about.; 6/13/13, 9:05 PM
edutcher said...: Nomennovum said...

I predict that the Dems will double cross Cruz, crucifying him at the crossroads of feminist politics and military policy

History tends to back you up.

Jason said...

how many company commands have you held, dingbat? I keep people like your daughter alive. You're a muddle-headed ignoramus.

The She Wolf of the SS thinks her fictitious "daughter" gives her the "absolute moral authority" (as MoDo put it) to shout down anybody who dares disagree with her on military issues.

Nice to see the real soldiers telling it like it is.; 6/13/13, 9:06 PM
Roux said...: How do you define "sexual assault"?; 6/13/13, 9:07 PM
Nomennovum said...: Inga votes.; 6/13/13, 9:08 PM
Anonymous said...: Edbutcher, unlike you the armchair warrior.; 6/13/13, 9:08 PM
Henry said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 6/13/13, 9:11 PM
Nomennovum said...: Any of you warrior types want to explain why the first thing the females were told by the male Marines when they got to Camp Leatherneck was to never walk to the latrines or anywhere alone after dark? It wasn't Taliban that they were warning the female Marines and Navy Corpsmen about.

Because they are women in the military, a man's domain? Where they shouldn't fucking be??; 6/13/13, 9:11 PM
Henry said...: I'm not military and I sincerely appreciate the knowledge and experience of commentators like SGT TED. However, I do read a lot of military history and some of the veterans I listen to (like my cousin) have extremely divergent viewpoints to those expressed here.

I can understand how a commanding officer, with the weight of responsibility for the welfare of his troops, might object to being subverted. But I would ask Jason and SGT TED: do you have the same faith that every commanding officer you've served, or served with is equally attentive and fair?

Even from a military point of view, the history of rigid, top-down commanders is not awesome.; 6/13/13, 9:12 PM
Revenant said...: I'm seeing a number of supposed ex-officers here leap to their feet to denounce the proposed change.

I'm curious what the enlisted folk think. My conversations with enlisted men and veterans has been less "our officers are great men who make great decisions" and more "our officers are brown-nosing careerists who couldn't find their own cocks with a map".; 6/13/13, 9:12 PM
Henry said...: Nomennovum wrote: ...they are women in the military, a man's domain? Where they shouldn't fucking be??

You should have testified, man. The vote would have been even closer.; 6/13/13, 9:14 PM
Anonymous said...: "Because they are women in the military, a man's domain? Where they shouldn't fucking be??"

6/13/13, 9:11 PM

Troglodyte.; 6/13/13, 9:15 PM
Revenant said...: Is Nomenovum "whores of the internet" renamed, or someone new? Just curious, if anyone knows.; 6/13/13, 9:22 PM
Nomennovum said...: Oh, boy. I guess I gave the wrong answer.

But will someone show me the evidence that the US is stronger and better militarily, then, with women in it? No one will, because there is no such evidence. Why? Women are weaker and more emotional than men. Weak and emotional soldiers are worth shit. I doubt they are even as good as the guys at guiding drones from a cushy seat in an air-conditioned room in Tampa, Florida.

But, everyone, please do carry on with your PC nonsense and name-calling.; 6/13/13, 9:31 PM
Nomennovum said...: Sorry I hurt your feelings, Rev.; 6/13/13, 9:32 PM
Jason said...: It's the brown nosing careerists who couldn't find their own cocks with a map who will take the commissar gigs.; 6/13/13, 9:33 PM
Nomennovum said...: I note with interest how certain types are so willing to dismiss the opinions of men who actually have extensive relevant military experience, but will entertain the opinions of dopey ex-nurses and irrelevant hearsay of griping boss-hating vets.; 6/13/13, 9:41 PM
edutcher said...: Inga said...

Any of you warrior types want to explain why the first thing the females were told by the male Marines when they got to Camp Leatherneck was to never walk to the latrines or anywhere alone after dark? It wasn't Taliban that they were warning the female Marines and Navy Corpsmen about.

They were warning the Navy corpsmen about rape?

The men, not your fictitious "daughter"?

Where's Skyler, Fen, any of our other Marines to verify this?

I want to hear that the Navy corpsMEN, even before Choom let in the homosexuals, had to walk in groups to the HEAD

Edbutcher, unlike you the armchair warrior.

I don't see any jump wings or CIB on you, either.

Because they are women in the military, a man's domain? Where they shouldn't fucking be??

Troglodyte.

The last battle in which the She Wolf of the SS participated was the 40 yard dash to Argentina.

No, sweetie, women are in the military because "distinguished educators" like William Ayers and the media types have turned young American males into metrosexuals.

They're there to fill the gaps. If they could get enough men to enlist, the only women who would be there would be those people Kristin Gillibrabd demanded be there.; 6/13/13, 9:43 PM
Anonymous said...: "No, sweetie, women are in the military because "distinguished educators" like William Ayers and the media types have turned young American males into metrosexuals.

They're there to fill the gaps. If they could get enough men to enlist, the only women who would be there would be those people Kristin Gillibrabd demanded be there."

6/13/13, 9:43 PM

Armchair troglodyte.; 6/13/13, 9:48 PM
Henry said...: So Jason, given that a commissar is an officer, do you trust all officers to treat their subordinates fairly?; 6/13/13, 9:48 PM
Henry said...: They're there to fill the gaps.

That tends to be a pretty important function.; 6/13/13, 9:57 PM
Revenant said...: Sorry I hurt your feelings, Rev.

Yes, I was deeply hurt. You should be ashamed of yourself, you bad bad man.; 6/13/13, 10:00 PM
Nomennovum said...: Do you trust all officers to treat their subordinates fairly?

Not directed at me, but that's a fairly silly question. All? So, if we can satisfy your demand for perfection, we should get the corrupt US Senate involved. Good idea.

What's a better idea? Get women out of the military. You say that's not realistic? How about out of combat and support roles? Give them administrative duty, so they can fuck up military human resources they way they did corporate HR. Still a no-go? Then do nothing. Because this is likely all bullshit on stilts anyway. Rapists tend not to be tolerated by those around them who are not rapists. The military can handle it without a bunch of pompous preening cowardly lying idiotic and foolish Senators mucking around.; 6/13/13, 10:00 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: I have read a report that this crisis of sex assaults is highly exaggerated. Its genesis was a single survey where less than 3% of all service members responded. So I am not convinced the claim that there is a crisis has been substantiated.; 6/13/13, 10:01 PM
Henry said...: You were right. That question wasn't directed at you.; 6/13/13, 10:01 PM
Nomennovum said...: Yes. I just said that, Henry. No need to repeat it. I answered anyway. No need to read it at all. It's a free country. I write. You don't read. Liberty.; 6/13/13, 10:04 PM
Revenant said...: It's the brown nosing careerists who couldn't find their own cocks with a map who will take the commissar gigs.

I would assume so; anecdotally, there aren't enough of the other kind to fill a Humvee. :)

Seriously, though, calling them "commissars" is childish. It is especially childish when deployed in defense of "officers" too incompetent to keep their subordinates from raping one another.; 6/13/13, 10:04 PM
edutcher said...: Inga said...

No, sweetie, women are in the military because "distinguished educators" like William Ayers and the media types have turned young American males into metrosexuals.

They're there to fill the gaps. If they could get enough men to enlist, the only women who would be there would be those people Kristin Gillibrabd demanded be there.

Armchair troglodyte.

You wear it better than me.

And the truth is a bitch, but it takes one to know one, n'est ce pas?; 6/13/13, 10:07 PM
edutcher said...: Revenant said...

It's the brown nosing careerists who couldn't find their own cocks with a map who will take the commissar gigs.

I would assume so; anecdotally, there aren't enough of the other kind to fill a Humvee. :)

My brother-in-law is an Army aviator and he says differently.; 6/13/13, 10:13 PM
Anonymous said...: Edutcher's fictitious "brother in law who is an Army aviator". Surrrrre Ed, sure.; 6/13/13, 10:24 PM
edutcher said...: Notice I don't trot him out every time I have to try to snow people that I actually know what I'm talking about.

And, with all the She Wolf's skulking through the Althouse archives, she knows I've mentioned him a time or two.; 6/13/13, 10:34 PM
Jason said...: Inga... That "whooooosh!" Sound you just heard was the point sailing over your ingnorant little head.; 6/13/13, 10:38 PM
Anonymous said...: Just because you mention you have a relative in the military doesn't make it believable or true, does it now, hmmmmmm?

See how that works eddy?; 6/13/13, 10:39 PM
Anonymous said...: I have serious doubts about you too Jason.; 6/13/13, 10:40 PM
Jason said...: Like I give a fuck about your opinion of me.; 6/13/13, 10:46 PM
Anonymous said...: Good! I feel the same way Jason.; 6/13/13, 10:48 PM
edutcher said...: Inga said...

Just because you mention you have a relative in the military doesn't make it believable or true, does it now, hmmmmmm?

See how that works eddy?

Considering I don't make a passive-aggressive hypocritical horse's ass of myself every time I comment, nor do I invoke my brother-in-law every time I want to make a point, but I do back up most of what I say with source material, I'd say my credibility is a lot better than yours, particularly since I don't change my story every time it's convenient.

See how that works?

BTW when do you tell us how those male Navy corpsmen fended off the advances of those spartan BAMs?; 6/13/13, 10:50 PM
Anonymous said...: "Considering I don't make a passive-aggressive hypocritical horse's ass of myself every time I comment..."

6/13/13, 10:50 PM

Bwhahahahaah! Oh eddy.; 6/13/13, 10:52 PM
edutcher said...: Thank you for agreeing.; 6/13/13, 10:54 PM
Howard said...: Oh, No. Cruz is Anti-Rapist and Edutcher is pissed.

Jason: The graveyard is full of indispensable people. They did find someone else to command your units, now enjoy your uncle sugar pension.; 6/13/13, 11:02 PM
Howard said...: 21-years is a careerist.

Novonumbnutts: The consternation of the urinary status made legit by the floundering fatters said the civilians of government cheese shall direct the armed forces. If they were smart enough to make those decisions, they would not become ossifers and live the uncle sugar teet life, they would start a bidness like his Mittness; 6/13/13, 11:07 PM
edutcher said...: No, Howard, if you could actually read, I was warning Senator Cruz of the perils of bipartisanship.

Howard is another of our visitors who shows up on the overnight when the guards nod off and his meds have worn off.

Either that, or he's mojo after draining all the sherry in the cellar.; 6/13/13, 11:25 PM
Revenant said...: This kind of reminds me of the justifications police departments used to make for why they didn't need an IAD to investigate criminal activity by cops.; 6/13/13, 11:37 PM
Revenant said...: I was warning Senator Cruz of the perils of bipartisanship.

Actually first you suggested he was being blackmailed by the NSA, then you warned him he might get attacked by feminists if he tried allying with them. As opposed to Republicans who don't ally with feminists, I assume.

All in all, not a very coherent narrative for what Cruz is supposedly doing wrong.; 6/13/13, 11:38 PM
Chip Ahoy said...: Cruz must have been shown evidence that was incredibly cogent.

(As an observer -- I've been stationed on a rock within a ring of Saturn to keep out of range but moved in closer for current events -- it's worth blowing my cover to put out there, it is not a Republican trait to ogay uckingaroundfay with institutions ay.); 6/13/13, 11:53 PM
Chip Ahoy said...: Wouldn't it be incredibly funny if you could foil nsa data mining with simple iglatinpay?; 6/13/13, 11:57 PM
Unknown said...: There is already a zero tolerance for sexual assault in the military.

Take any group of 2 million people, and no matter how honorable, dedicated, and hard-working most of them are, there will be some crimes.

Is the US Senate totally free of sexual assault?

Is the Obama administration totally free of sexual assault?
Really?
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.shared/image.html?/photos/uncategorized/2008/12/06/favreaujonwashpost44.jpg

Why this push right now?; 6/14/13, 12:10 AM
Unknown said...: Some will say the push is because of an increase in sexual assault.

Well, almost all that increase has been an increase of homosexual sexual assault against men...but allowing homosexuals in the military will never be questioned.

The rest of it is due to redefining "sexual misconduct" to include misunderstandings and normal human dating behavior.

Just like the new sexual misconduct definitions the Obama admin handed down to U of Montana.

The intent is to proliferate rules and guidelines, which make it easier to catch people doing things "wrong". The correct people can have their wrongdoings ignored or waived (like Fast and Furious, Benghazi, the IRS executives, the NBP polling location violations, etc, etc, etc), and socio-political opponents (conservatives and non-liberal white men) can have their lives, careers, wealth ruined to the benefit of favored groups.

No Democrat can say anything about sexual assault in the military.

That includes you, Inga, you ignorant hypocrite: Bill Clinton.; 6/14/13, 12:17 AM
exhelodrvr1 said...: Well, they've already stopped the oceans from rising, and according to the latest data they've stopped global warming.

Now it's time to fix the military!; 6/14/13, 12:17 AM
Anonymous said...: "The rest of it is due to redefining "sexual misconduct" to include misunderstandings and normal human dating behavior."

6/14/13, 12:17 AM

There is something seriously wrong with the way you view the world Nathan. Good lord.; 6/14/13, 12:34 AM
Roger J. said...: Since I retired in 1986 and in a period where there were no women in my combat arms branch, I simply have no knowledge of the incidence of rape. I have served on courts martial, and my experience he military justice system worked fairly well. The military judge system, IMO, worked well to mitigate possible effects of command influence. The noted defense Attorney Melvin Belli IIRC was quite impressed with the military justice system. Of course, all of this is purely anecdotal.

Since I tend toward conservatism, I am always leery of changes to something that seems to have worked fairly well.

Just my .02; 6/14/13, 12:36 AM
exhelodrvr1 said...: Inga,
If you took a look at the regulations, you would see that there are a very wide range of actions that meet that criteria, that could fall into the range of misunderstandings to the mildly rude.; 6/14/13, 12:49 AM
Revenant said...: Is the US Senate totally free of sexual assault?

Does the Senate Majority Leader make the call on whether or not junior senators should be investigated and/or prosecuted? Would we have better government if he did?

As for the crack about the Obama adminstration... yeah, sadly the executive branch DOES investigate itself. How's that working out this last few years?; 6/14/13, 1:01 AM
Roger J. said...: what Rev said.; 6/14/13, 1:05 AM
Jason said...: Henry asked: But I would ask Jason and SGT TED: do you have the same faith that every commanding officer you've served, or served with is equally attentive and fair?

It's not a matter of faith. All of them are different, have different strengths and weaknesses. But at the company level, they were all selected for command from among their peers. That puts them head and shoulders above and beyond 90 percent of the JAGs, right there, the vast majority of whom will never sign for a unit property book in their lives.

Unlike the JAG commissars proposed, the commanders are actually responsible for the welfare and safety of people in their units, and for their discipline. The JAGs will never be responsible for more than their own TA-50 and the files in their briefcase.

There is a world of difference between the two groups. They wear the same uniform, but they are not the same tribe. Not even close. If the JAGs are so wonderful, and so far superior to the commanders, then let THEM command the units. Oops. They can't. Not one in ten is capable of it.

Every commander has a senior commander to hold him or her accountable, and to act as a backstop. If they aren't doing their jobs, they also have an IG system, and an NCO support channel. These special prosecutors or whatever you want to call them will not add anything, but will generate a shitload of paperwork and cause a ton of problems, they'll take up time at briefings, and they will take up office space and suck the life out of a command like a tick.

Hell, I can see it now... one of these fucktards is going to show up with a briefcase in country and say "I need a humvee and a driver," and the command is going to have to waste a perfectly good E-4 to follow this oxygen thief around.

That's AT BEST. At worst, you'll have some crusading ninny. Any decent battalion commander would hamstring these idiots and turn them into the 'shitty little jobs' officer to limit the damage they cause. But then they'll go to their handlers and complain, and how are their own commissar handlers going to be able to tell shit from shinola at their level?

It's a shitty idea, and thank God almighty the joint chiefs shot that nonsense down.; 6/14/13, 1:53 AM
Jason said...: Howard: The graveyard is full of indispensable people. They did find someone else to command your units

Yes, they did. My successors were all warriors. Exactly zero of them were lawyers.; 6/14/13, 1:57 AM
Krumhorn said...: Justice requires honest Judges. Cruz is not afraid of the dishonest military judges, a/k/a careerist Majors and Colonels. Good for him.

I'm missing the linkage between "careerist" officers and "dishonest" officers. Except for summary courts martial, all military judges are attorneys. Most have served as defense counsel for a good part of their careers before elevation to military judge.

Does making your career as a lawyer in the military make one dishonest? Are lawyers special in that regard, or does that characterization apply to any career officer?

I'd take my chances before any random military judge before any randomly selected politically appointed civilian judge any day of the week.

Sexual assaults must not be tolerated. But let's don't be stupid about it. We're in Tawana BrawleyLand here. Just because the charge is "serious" doesn't mean that the charge is true.

Military structures and unit cohesiveness have been forged over thousands of years.....among men. It's a relatively new thing to have placed women n combat units and aboard ships in close proximity to men in a culture that wasn't built for it. The military will have to be given the time to find their own way through this without the destructive influence of those who have other objectives than the security of our nation in mind.

-Krumhorn; 6/14/13, 2:09 AM
Steve Koch said...: I was in the army way back during the Viet Nam war, there were not too many women in the military back then. It seems to me that the simplest and most effective solution to reduce rape would be to separate the women soldiers from the men soldiers, that is, some units would be composed entirely of men and some units would be composed entirely of women. Fighting wars is complicated and dangerous enough without adding the unnecessary distraction of sexual tension.
----------------------

Re: the proposed legislation to modify the military justice system, it is important to take the time to study the current system (and justice systems in other armies that are effective) and whatever it's current strengths and weaknesses are. Any proposed changes should be tried out on a limited scale to see how they work out in real life and to make sure they don't make the military worse at it's main job, killing our enemies. My fear is that politicians will get a wild hair (seemed like a good idea at the time) and force it down the military's throat without taking the time to understand reality, figure out the best solution, and test it very thoroughly before wide scale adoption. One huge problem with congress is that they simply don't understand the laws they are passing. I think they should have to pass a rigorous test of their detailed knowledge of a bill before they get to vote on that bill.; 6/14/13, 6:26 AM
Nomennovum said...: Apparently the majority of conservatives (and almost all liberals and one hundred percent of the manboobs -- [cough cough] Howard) are unable to detect patterns ... at least as far a sexual politics are concerned. (1) Women come into realms traditionally occupied solely by men. (2) Women find it difficult to adapt, because the totally predictable happens. (3) Women cry abuse. (4) Women get the rules changed to the detriment of the men.

We are now is stage 3 of the same old same-old. I wonder what the results will be? (Note: I really don't wonder.); 6/14/13, 6:46 AM
HA said...: Jason,

"If these little tin-pot libtards don't trust me in command of my own unit, they can find another fucking officer. But when they go to war again, they'll be begging for another commander like me. "

To borrow a phrase from our illustrious former Secretary of State, what difference does it make? Is there anything left of our republic that is worth fighting and dying for?

Our republic was glorious while it lasted, but it simply doesn't exist any more. Our Constitution is dead letter and we've fundamentally transformed ourselves into yet another indistinguishable socialist shithole running on fumes. Our illegimate government has become a spoils system by which the ruling class redistributes half the nation's wealth (and counting) for the sole benefit of itself. Our illegitmate government persecutes those who attempt to peacefully restore constitutional limits and the rule of law. Our illegitmate government spies on each and every one of us while Islamic terrorists like Nidal Hasan the Tsanaev brothers practically announce their intent by every means short of placing a Super Bowl ad with the date and target they plan to attack. Our paper borders merely coincide with those of the former constitutional republic that only self-taught future historians will fully understand.

This former nation of free men is dead by its own hand. So now our ruling class is in the process of corrupting our military just as it has every other institution without exception. But there's nothing left to defend of our republic except its dessicated corpse. So what difference does it make whether our military is populated by warriors or apparatchiks?

Maybe its time for our warriors to go Galt and look after themselves and their families. Leave missions like "liberating" Libya and enforcing Obama's amorphous "red lines" to the apparatchiks.; 6/14/13, 6:57 AM
Nomennovum said...: The US Senate is corrupt. It tends to corrupt its members. Marco Rubio was a fav of conservatives. I think now we have the evidence necessary to say he has been corrupted based on the Gang of Eight experience. Cruz is a conservative-favored Senator. Cruz will be corrupted. Watch. This could be the beginning of that process, though he will be widely praised, especially by bien-pensants.; 6/14/13, 6:58 AM
Steve Koch said...: Nomennovum,

It is understandable that some women want to defend their country. Having one army that is all women would permit women to do all the roles in that army: communications, infantry, artillery, engineering, MP, medical, etc. It would also make it easy to evaluate the relative effectiveness of the all women army vs the all men army.; 6/14/13, 7:01 AM
Nomennovum said...: Who'd rescue all the women POWs, Steve? It would become a full-time job.; 6/14/13, 7:05 AM
Steve Koch said...: The women would rescue the women POWs. Women would do everything. When the conflict was small enough, only the women's army would be fighting, no men at all. It would be an excellent way to evaluate the effectiveness of the women's army.; 6/14/13, 7:10 AM
Anonymous said...: What about false claims? The chain of command may be more interested in detecting the truth of a claim than this "independent" group.; 6/14/13, 7:11 AM
Nomennovum said...: As for the crack about the Obama adminstration... yeah, sadly the executive branch DOES investigate itself. How's that working out this last few years?

Straw man. The rape statistics are a part of the typical dance of feminist politics. A conservative just agreed to join the dance, and he can't even lead.; 6/14/13, 7:16 AM
Nomennovum said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 6/14/13, 7:24 AM
Nomennovum said...: Watch out, Steve. You can expect nothing but vitriol and invective for your views here. Now, this is totally par for the course from liberals, but you can expect it from many conservatives here too. You will get the old "troglodyte" from the unimaginative liberal idiots. From the conservatives, you will be compared to such well-known Althouse trolls as Whores of the Internet. Ignore the mindless invective, because it's just invective and it's mindless.; 6/14/13, 7:26 AM
John said...: Sure, lets pass a "send more innocent men to jail on trumped up charges" law. What could possibly go wrong?; 6/14/13, 7:50 AM
X said...: Inga said...
So it's a bad idea? This from a career military officer? Good lord, I'm glad you've retired.

almost every argument Inga makes is an appeal to authority. suddenly it's not a good enough standard. did you serve Inga? if not, stfu. veterans are talking.; 6/14/13, 7:51 AM
Henry said...: @Jason -- Thanks for the reply.; 6/14/13, 8:08 AM
HA said...: RiverRat said...

"A truly "independent" 3rd party always makes the most sense...if we could just find some."

I'm sure there are plenty of Lois Lerner types available. Hell, maybe Lerner herself will get the assignment.; 6/14/13, 8:15 AM
exhelodrvr1 said...: And in a very related note, the administration does not have a plan yet for the aid they will be providing the Syrian rebels.; 6/14/13, 8:31 AM
SGT Ted said...: No, not every commander is worth a shit, but that's what the NCOs, particularly Senior NCOs, are there for, in case it happens. My unit had a sexual misconduct incident involving our Commander that was resolved by 2 senior NCOs. The Commander got UCMJed out.

Like I said, one doesn't have to support this bad idea and be all for locking up or shooting rapists.

You wanted to hear from enlisted, well I was one my entire career and spent most of it (22 of 26 years total) in a line unit with the grunts.

And currently, with the physical fitness double standards, women in the Military is just another Affirmative Action hand-out for career minded girls who wouldn't cut the mustard if true equality of effort were enforced.

Oh and this It's the brown nosing careerists who couldn't find their own cocks with a map who will take the commissar gigs. SO very true.

And this I have read a report that this crisis of sex assaults is highly exaggerated. Its genesis was a single survey where less than 3% of all service members responded. So I am not convinced the claim that there is a crisis has been substantiated.

That's why I said the idea that sexual assault goes unpunished in the Military is a big fat Feminist Supremacist lie.

It's a giant huge big fat fucking lie that impugns everybody who is, or has been, in a position of authority as unprofessional and uncaring of their soldiers.

It is the Feminist equivalent of "All women in the Military are there for the cock." But, since its only men being impugned, its completely OK to go with the lie unquestioned.

It is especially childish when deployed in defense of "officers" too incompetent to keep their subordinates from raping one another. More bullshit. No one here is defending them. What we are saying is that this idea will not solve the problem, but will create new ones.

But, what do I know? I only served 26 years with women. I'm sure some civilian clowns with a credentials who've never served a day in ranks has all the answers.; 6/14/13, 8:31 AM
Anonymous said...: If this is a sampling of what women face in the military, then an independent council is essential. My point has been proven.

NoNo, are you hurt? Poor NoNo, who never throws out "mindless invective", can dish it out but can't take it.; 6/14/13, 8:32 AM
X said...: did you serve Inga?; 6/14/13, 8:39 AM
Chef Mojo said...: Jason, I find your attitude towards JAG befuddling, but typical of the "warrior" jocks out there.

First of all, many of the JAG school people I know at UVA are combat vets these days. Multiple tours in Iraq and Afghan. Half of them are mustangs.

is it your position that JAG is not needed? I do not get this. IGs are obviously insufficient.; 6/14/13, 8:41 AM
edutcher said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 6/14/13, 8:42 AM
edutcher said...: X said...

did you serve Inga?

A couple of aircraft carriers and a Marine division, but, other than that, no.; 6/14/13, 8:43 AM
X said...: when Inga attacks the US military, just remember it's a family tradition.; 6/14/13, 8:46 AM
Anonymous said...: Did you serve Ed? What division, The Armchair Division? Are you an old vet of the armchair warriors now Ed?; 6/14/13, 8:48 AM
Chef Mojo said...: For those morons bleating about women in the military? Way to miss the fucking point. Women ARE in the military, and they're going to stay there. We heard the same whining with racial integration, and went through the same pains accordingly. Anybody remember "Z-grams" in the Navy in the early 70's? Near mutinies on ships?

Big boys crying about girl cooties? Spare me. Adjust to the reality or get out before your feelings get hurt.; 6/14/13, 8:50 AM
Roger J. said...: I enlisted in 1961; went to West Point on a regular army appointment--I suppose that makes me a "mustang" by marine and navy terminology. Never served with women, as I said above, but it seems to me, as an old colonel blimp type, women are a distraction when it comes to good order and discipline in a combat arms outfit. Please note I specified combat arms where women, at least to this point, cannot serve.

I appreciate the service of women who choose to serve--God bless them. But keep them away from the combat arms.; 6/14/13, 8:55 AM
edutcher said...: I see mojo's sobered up enough to find the keyboard.

Sad to say, the opinions of real soldiers makes no dent.

Inga said...

Did you serve Ed? What division, The Armchair Division? Are you an old vet of the armchair warriors now Ed?

The She Wolf of the SS must truly be out of ammo when she has to start screaming, "Chickenhawk!!!!".

At least when she's not screaming, "Troglodyte!!!!".

But you were going to tell us all about how the Marines told the corpsmen they had to walk in groups to the head.

Tell us, please, about all the sexual attacks Navy men endured.; 6/14/13, 9:01 AM
Chef Mojo said...: Ed, I am addressing the real soldiers, not you. If I want to hear anything further from you, I'll make sure to toss you a peanut. Now go back to your history books and creeping senility.; 6/14/13, 9:08 AM
edutcher said...: No, you addressed me the way you addressed them.

BTW where did you serve?

No peanuts for drunks.; 6/14/13, 9:35 AM
edutcher said...: PS I think we can all agree mojo is just another sockpuppet.

(get some new writers, guys); 6/14/13, 9:39 AM
Chef Mojo said...: Ed, I did not have the honor of serving.

Glad to know that civilians cannot contribute to a discussion on military matters.

Not that I'm going to resort to an appeal to authority like yourself, but I come from a Navy/Marine Corps family. Father put in 35 years, first as USMC enlisted, then as Navy commissioned. After retiring from the Navy, he spent 10 years at CIA. My brother served as Navy enlisted. I worked as a civilian contractor for NAVSEA, back in the day, though I do not equate that as service.

Have a peanut, now. I've found that people who attempt to needle people about drinking are self righteous prigs or recovering drunks. Which are you?; 6/14/13, 9:50 AM
Jason said...: Who said JAGs are not needed? Where do you get this crap from? We need good JAGs. We do not need special sex commissars undercutting the authority of commanders.; 6/14/13, 9:54 AM
Chef Mojo said...: And you, Ed, are a liar. I've never commented on any blog other than as Chef Mojo or Karl Bock (my real name). At Althouse, its always been Chef Mojo and nothing else. Sock puppetry is not my style.

Again, typical of you to resort to such lies. I shouldn't be surprised. Anyway. You've made the accusation. Care to back it up, clever boy? Put up or shut up, you senile asshole.; 6/14/13, 9:59 AM
Chef Mojo said...: Jason, you said:

It's not a matter of faith. All of them are different, have different strengths and weaknesses. But at the company level, they were all selected for command from among their peers. That puts them head and shoulders above and beyond 90 percent of the JAGs, right there, the vast majority of whom will never sign for a unit property book in their lives.

Unlike the JAG commissars proposed, the commanders are actually responsible for the welfare and safety of people in their units, and for their discipline. The JAGs will never be responsible for more than their own TA-50 and the files in their briefcase.

There is a world of difference between the two groups. They wear the same uniform, but they are not the same tribe. Not even close. If the JAGs are so wonderful, and so far superior to the commanders, then let THEM command the units. Oops. They can't. Not one in ten is capable of it.

Gee. So supportive of JAG. Make up your mind.; 6/14/13, 10:04 AM
X said...: edutcher said...
PS I think we can all agree mojo is just another sockpuppet.

nice try althouse, but I know you're edutcher, Inga, whores, alex, titus, eelpout, Baron York, Chip Ahoy, and everyone else and I'm the only real person on here.; 6/14/13, 10:06 AM
Roger J. said...: As an old soldier, if I may, I would like to make a point: I appreciate the comments of "civilians" about the military--the input the military has from the civilians the more likely it will not turn into a praetorian guard. The danger of an all volunteer force is, IMO, that it gets divorced from the rest of society. Not a good thing, otherwise you end up with Sejanus as a general.

I genuinely appreciate the comments from "civilians" about their views on the military and would to see them stifled.; 6/14/13, 10:07 AM
Roger J. said...: Wow--I butchered my comment in a couple of ways--sorry. The MORE input from civilians; and I would not WANT to see them stifled.

Mea Culpa; 6/14/13, 10:10 AM
edutcher said...: Chef Mojo said...

Ed, I did not have the honor of serving.

Glad to know that civilians cannot contribute to a discussion on military matters.

No, that was your schtick ("I am addressing the real soldiers, not you. If I want to hear anything further from you, I'll make sure to toss you a peanut."), too bad that door swings both ways.

Not that I'm going to resort to an appeal to authority like yourself, but I come from a Navy/Marine Corps family. Father put in 35 years, first as USMC enlisted, then as Navy commissioned. After retiring from the Navy, he spent 10 years at CIA. My brother served as Navy enlisted. I worked as a civilian contractor for NAVSEA, back in the day, though I do not equate that as service

Swell, I have relatives in the US Army going back to the American Revolution and the War of 1812.

So you're no better than I am.

Take you peanut and shove it up your ass.

Which, no doubt, will give you a thrill.

And you, Ed, are a liar. I've never commented on any blog other than as Chef Mojo or Karl Bock (my real name). At Althouse, its always been Chef Mojo and nothing else. Sock puppetry is not my style.

Again, typical of you to resort to such lies. I shouldn't be surprised. Anyway. You've made the accusation. Care to back it up, clever boy? Put up or shut up, you senile asshole.

The senility ploy was a dead giveaway, O She Wolf.

As I say, you people need better writers.

And a lot more detox.; 6/14/13, 10:11 AM
harrogate said...: "Edutcher" is just a handle, a moniker of course. But as time passes more and more, one can see the sadness of the human being behind the moniker.

When they start yelling "sockpuppet," it's just another way of admitting they don't have anything else to do but comment on blogs constantly.; 6/14/13, 10:11 AM
Chef Mojo said...: Ed, you're a liar. Put up or shut up on your accusation.

C'mon, liar. Sock puppetry is easy to prove. Prove it.; 6/14/13, 10:15 AM
Chef Mojo said...: Ed, sounds like you have issues with drinking and drinkers. Some ugly family history there?; 6/14/13, 10:17 AM
edutcher said...: You come in here with your loud mouth trying to shout down anybody that doesn't share your opinion and we're all supposed to be terrified.

Take your accusations and stick 'em with your peanut.

I don't recognize any challenges by you and don't give a damn what you say.

When you can approach an issue like an adult and not a foul-mouthed idiot, maybe you can come back and actually discuss something, but until that time, find an outreach program.

You need it desperately.

harrogate said...

"Edutcher" is just a handle, a moniker of course. But as time passes more and more, one can see the sadness of the human being behind the moniker.

When they start yelling "sockpuppet," it's just another way of admitting they don't have anything else to do but comment on blogs constantly.

Says another of the trolls who would be lost without his talking points.; 6/14/13, 10:20 AM
edutcher said...: Chef Mojo said...

Ed, sounds like you have issues with drinking and drinkers. Some ugly family history there?

I'm supposed to be ashamed of that?

You are desperate.

but anybody coming in here and shooting off his mouth the way you do is probably under the influence one way or another.

Seek help.; 6/14/13, 10:22 AM
Roger J. said...: Please--as they say in a british pub: Time Gentlemen. This was a pretty good thread until devolved into personal attacks--and Ritmo wasn't even here. Truce please--
I think the issue is important enough to engage on its merits. Personal attacks don't do much for the discussion. just my .02; 6/14/13, 10:26 AM
edutcher said...: Roger, you get no argument from me.

All I'll say is I offered an opinion based on how politics goes these days and got attacked.

You are right, of course, but that kind of gratuitous abuse is hard to ignore.; 6/14/13, 10:33 AM
Anonymous said...: Edutcher thinks I'm Chef Mojo, bwhahahahaah!

Edutcher sees Sockpuppets.; 6/14/13, 10:35 AM
Roger J. said...: ed--ignore it. I have appreciated your input--don't always agree but that's the nature of a blog there is a reason why there is a way to delete stuff; 6/14/13, 10:38 AM
Chef Mojo said...: So, you've got nothing, Ed. Typical.

Ed, if you're going to preach on adult manners, I suggest you practice said manners.

Making unfounded references to drinking habits and sock puppetry is so adult after all.; 6/14/13, 10:40 AM
Roger J. said...: Chef--and ed maybe its time to take it outside. Both of you make good comments, but when you get into pissing matches, doesn't do much for the substantive commentary.; 6/14/13, 10:42 AM
Roger J. said...: Oh well--the suns over the yard arm here and time for my first gin an tonic for the day.

Peace; 6/14/13, 10:45 AM
Nomennovum said...: Poor NoNo, who never throws out "mindless invective", can dish it out but can't take it.

Silly woman, you misunderstand. I wear your epithet "troglodyte" as a badge of honor. If you told me the sky were blue, I'd go have my eyes checked.; 6/14/13, 10:50 AM
harrogate said...: It's funny how none of us no matter what our politics, believe for a second that Cruz was actually persuaded by Gillibrand's argument in the way that Cruz says he was.

Probably the rejoinder is something like: if only. if only they actually took each other's arguments into account and sometimes had that affect their votes. Then it really *would* be worthy of the "deliberative body" descriptor.

And yes, ed sees Sockpuppets. It's the Seventh Sense.; 6/14/13, 11:33 AM
edutcher said...: Considering how all you people use the same boilerplate, the same verbal tics, the same lines of attack, and the same talking points, you're either one or two guys or the dullest pack of morons to ever soil the face of the earth.; 6/14/13, 11:44 AM
Revenant said...: We do not need special sex commissars undercutting the authority of commanders.

Yes, yes, we get it: officers think that officers should get to make the decisions. You could knock me over with a feather after THAT revelation.

Independent criminal investigators are not "commissars". If you think they are, you don't know what the word means. Grow up.; 6/14/13, 11:51 AM
Revenant said...: Considering how all you people use the same boilerplate, the same verbal tics, the same lines of attack, and the same talking points, you're either one or two guys or the dullest pack of morons to ever soil the face of the earth.

Of course, by that logic like half the conservatives here are *also* the same person. ;); 6/14/13, 11:53 AM
edutcher said...: Hardly half.

The ones who sound alike are the 4 or 5 who go straight for the invective.

Revenant OTOH could be replaced by our old pal Seven Machos without missing a beat.; 6/14/13, 12:02 PM
X said...: does anyone believe there is actually a Meade?; 6/14/13, 12:22 PM
edutcher said...: I've emailed him and seen pictures of him, but you never see him and Diego De La Vega at the same time.; 6/14/13, 12:51 PM
Revenant said...: Revenant OTOH could be replaced by our old pal Seven Machos without missing a beat.

Oh, I doubt that very much. :); 6/14/13, 1:01 PM
B said...: Inga said...Edutcher thinks I'm Chef Mojo, bwhahahahaah! Edutcher sees Sockpuppets.

It's reasonable to suspect new commenter who agrees with inga or whom she mentions positively to be a sockpuppet of hers.

Chef Mojo is neither new nor do I believe for a moment he is anyones sockpuppet but I can see where someone who suspects differently that would immediately think of Inga. That's the problem compulsive liars have. You can never believe them on any subject. Palladian definitively outed her for running more than 10 sockpuppets on this site.

It's a good bet that outed for more than 10 likely means that she got away with 2 or 3 times. Just not Chef Mojo.; 6/14/13, 1:43 PM
Nomennovum said...: Big boys crying about girl cooties? - Chef Mojo

Are you high? Cooties? Who's talking about cooties? What kind of douche willfully misrepresents what people are saying? What kind of idiotic liar are you, Mojo?

You clearly have zero consideration for the military, so you call the men in it "jocks" and the people who think women in the military is a bad idea kindergardners who fear girl cooties. Seems to me that you are still in junior high school, little boy.

Women in combat will lead to unnecessary death and the exit of good and valuable men from the service. The US military will be weaker as a result.

Now get back to class. Finals are coming.; 6/14/13, 2:24 PM
Anonymous said...: B so brave, so anonymouse. Squeaks like a lion, big brave mousey.; 6/14/13, 2:28 PM
Anonymous said...: My sockpuppets were a lark for one day, what is your excuse, "B". How many sockpuppets do you hide behind, you cowardly hypocrite.; 6/14/13, 2:31 PM
Nomennovum said...: Nurse, we all know you're as phoney as a three dollar bill.; 6/14/13, 2:42 PM
Anonymous said...: NoNo, no wonder......; 6/14/13, 2:56 PM
B said...: Inga said...My sockpuppets were a lark for one day...

Liar. Palladian had you dead to rights for sockpuppets in multiple days in multiple threads.

...what is your excuse, "B". How many sockpuppets do you hide behind, you cowardly hypocrite.

None. I am what I am and comment only under this handle. As for being anonymous...yes, I am. What of it?

The basis for your nonsense in this case is that so many regular readers and commenters here have seen you prove youself to be a transparent liar that nothing you say can be believed. You try to comfort yourself by grouping them into one persona. And because you are so apt to sockpuppetry, you find it easiest to make that accusation in support of that.

The difference is that you have been caught doing it, and there is no evidence supporting any of your accusations of others being sockpuppets.; 6/14/13, 3:21 PM
Anonymous said...: B,
You take yourself and this blog far too seriously, get a life. Your fixation is showing again.; 6/14/13, 3:33 PM
harrogate said...: Still, at first glance edutcher's obsession with who is really writing what post, seems to outstrip most others on the boards.

But then look closer at the moments where he really starts caterwauling the most about "sockpuppetry." Why, as though by sheer coincidence, it's always the sequences where he is getting his ass kicked the most thoroughly. So yeah, edutcher sees sockpuppets.

But all of this relates to the topic of the thread! Because Cruz's suggestion, that he was actually persuaded into changing his vote by a human being in the rival political party--by the arguments she put forward!!--seems refreshing, even though we know it is not true. Refreshing because it it were true, it would mean there are a few in Congress who are not... wait for it... Sockpuppets.; 6/14/13, 7:02 PM
Methadras said...: Inga said...

Armchair troglodyte.

Honey, you wouldn't know what a troglodyte was if he was fucking you in the ass and yelling in your ear, "I'M A TROGLODYTE, BITCH!!!"; 6/14/13, 8:32 PM
Methadras said...: Inga said...

My sockpuppets were a lark for one day, what is your excuse, "B". How many sockpuppets do you hide behind, you cowardly hypocrite.

Of course your shameless lying has no bounds. Why should it. Lie once, it's easy to do it again isn't it, you drunken sot? You got caught with your pants down and your meat flaps showing. Own it.; 6/14/13, 8:33 PM
exhelodrvr1 said...: This is interesting.

http://www.stripes.com/judge-obama-sex-assault-comments-unlawful-command-influence-1.225974; 6/15/13, 1:23 AM