The leaders of the Armed Forces are in hot water because of an increase in sexual assaults. They promise to combat sexual assault and admit they let the ball drop. In a grilling by members of Congress two Democrat female Senators had a field day and went all in over the issue. Senator Gillibrand implied some commanders were stupid by claiming “…not every single commander can distinguish between a slap on the ass and a rape…” While I get the dramatics I think just about all can tell the two apart.
Senator McCaskill made the claim that looking at someone the wrong way can be sexual assault. I guess there could be looks that can be considered assault but can’t seem to think of one. What look conveys imminent harmful contact?
I am not making light of the issue of sexual assault whether it is in or out of the military. However, I do have a few problems with all of this.
The incidence of sexual assault has had an uptick over the past year or two. What is the root cause of this? It seems as if the uptick happened after gays were allowed to openly serve so it would be worth looking to see if the increase is same sex assault. Not that it matters BUT in order to solve a problem the root cause needs to be found and if the uptick is because of the repeal of DADT then it needs to be looked into to see why it happened.
I also have a problem with Congress wanting to take the discipline of sexual offenders out of the hands of commanders. If the issue is reporting and punishment then require commanders to report all claims of sexual impropriety to their higher commander and have that higher commander review the results of investigations. Commanders need to retain the ability to investigate and punish those who have done wrong. If any commander is not doing that job then relieve that commander. Do not use some blanket policy because of an increase particularly if that increase is due to the repeal of DADT. Find a solution for it that does not involve hampering all commanders.
My last issue is with these Democrat females and their indignation. Where were they when Bill Clinton was sexually molesting women? I realize that these two were not in office when that occurred (not in federal office anyway) but their body, the Senate, voted to let Bill off the hook.
How come there was not the same uproar from liberal woman about Bill Clinton’s alleged rapes and his confirmed affair back then? Why are these folks acting as if they have some moral authority when they still worship the ground Clinton walks on?
It seems to me that folks who apply their anger selectively over the same subject lose credibility.
Sexual assault is a crime. My solution is to investigate the accusation, prosecute those with merit; if they are guilty put them in jail and if they are not guilty put them back to work.
That seems like a good solution to me.
As far as Gillibrand and McCaskill, how do you ladies feel about Bill Clinton and what he did? What do you say about the accusations of rape?
Are you as mad at the Senate for the way they let him off as you are at the way the military handles sexual assault cases?
Your answers will tell us a lot about you…
Never surrender, never submit.