« Moral DNA | Main | Tuesday Odds and Ends »

April 17, 2012

Dude, That's Harsh....

From a story about the Secret Service prostitution debacle:

The 11 Secret Service agents and officers involved in the prostitution scandal ahead of President Obama's visit to Colombia have been stripped of their security clearances, CBS News reports.

All have been accused of misconduct, placed on administrative leave and barred from entering Secret Service facilities worldwide, CBS says, citing an unidentified law enforcement official. They also have surrendered their equipment.

Yikes!

Posted by Cassandra at April 17, 2012 06:28 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.villainouscompany.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/4136

Comments

Huh
After all this time I've always thought the saying was "Use it or lose it". Who knew it was *and*....?
0>;~}

Posted by: DL Sly at April 17, 2012 08:23 AM

That's what SHE said!

What what!?

Posted by: Book at April 17, 2012 08:53 AM

"Well, if you're not going to use it properly . . . ."

Posted by: Texan99 at April 17, 2012 09:23 AM

I dunno T99. Seems to me that they were using it as *designed*. Which, apparently, is the problem.
0>;~}

Posted by: DL Sly at April 17, 2012 09:33 AM

Seems to me that they were using it as *designed*.

Or not. Apparently the story broke because one of the ladies wanted more money than she'd gotten.

Eric Hines

Posted by: E Hines at April 17, 2012 09:41 AM

Apparently the story broke because one of the ladies wanted more money than she'd gotten.

It doesn't really matter HOW the story broke. It shouldn't have happened, period. The investigation's not done yet but the notion that there are any circumstances in which this would be OK is bizarre.

Posted by: Cass at April 17, 2012 10:00 AM

But, but, but....these are men in the mere presence of wymyn. They simply must have sex.
Cass, you ignorant Alpha Female B!tch! Ain't you learned nuthin' yet?
0>;~}

Posted by: DL Sly at April 17, 2012 10:15 AM

I still haven't figured out the logic on this one.

On the one hand (OK, I won't go there), because men now face something approaching the same risks women have always faced in having sex, we are in serious danger of men opting out of the so-called marriage market in favor of forming intimate relationships with Johnson's baby oil and their laptops.

Feminism (and not the ubiquity of Internet porn, or cultural decline, or waning religiousity) is to blame for this. This is so self-evidently self evident that no proof is required :p

So, if men have to think about consequences like troublesome baby-making, they won't have sex and Civilization As We Know It will end.

But the opposite theory also holds true: sex with real women is such an overwhelmingly strong natural urge that men are powerless to resist it. When they do boneheaded things like hiring prostitutes whilst on an official business trip for their employer, this is not their fault.

Now this profound lack of logic is not unique to men. The women's movement makes the same "we're always the victim" arguments in which whatever choice a woman makes, she must be absolved of personal responsibility and protected from the consequences.

And if you disagree, you're an evil, sexist womanhating womanhater.

Not sure why we need to double down on the stupidity. Am very sure that as soon as the Victim Card is played, my eyes start rolling.

Posted by: Cass at April 17, 2012 10:26 AM

No problem. Rescind their security clearances and release them from government service. The military guys get handled under the UCMJ. It's really that simple, although since there's sex and politics involved the Republicans (this time) are trying their best to make a scandal out of it.

Posted by: Pogue at April 17, 2012 10:33 AM

I know this is sexist of me, but I want to know: were these sixteen idiots all males?

And yes, "Ouch!" ;)

Posted by: htom at April 17, 2012 11:06 AM

I can't find it in my heart to be very scandalized by the sex. I'd just prefer that tax dollars weren't diverted to a bacchanalia every time I turn around.

As Iowahawk said earlier this week about the outrage over Mitt Romney's evil wealth: Am I supposed to be more outraged over how Mr. Romney spends his own money than I over how Mr. Obama spends mine?

And as Charles Krauthammer observed, people are more careful with their own money than with that of other people. So, while officials of both parties have been known to play Spring Break with the public treasury, it's a good idea to support small-government policies, because they tend to minimize the occasions when the money gets spent by people who didn't earn it in the first place. "Other People's Money" is one of the most corrosive elements in a society. It's worse than heroin. Sometimes there's no avoiding it, but why expand it where it's not strictly necessary?

Posted by: Texan99 at April 17, 2012 11:24 AM

Good question, htom! The wording of the stories implies they are, but I'm not sure that's an accurate assumption to make.

...since there's sex and politics involved the Republicans (this time) are trying their best to make a scandal out of it.

Well, I may be off base here but I think it ought to be a scandal, in the sense that the behavior is scandalous.

If this had been one guy, it would be different. But 20??? That's a whole different kettle of fish, especially when you have GS14s on the scene.

Posted by: Cass at April 17, 2012 11:24 AM

It's not the sex, T99.

When you have Secret Service and military personnel in a foreign country throwing their weight (and the furniture, and their badges and official positions, apparently) around, this goes far beyond individual discretion or the lack thereof.

Posted by: Cass at April 17, 2012 11:26 AM

On the other hand, this story gives a whole new meaning to the trite phrase, "Wait until your Father gets home!"

*rim shot*

Posted by: Cass at April 17, 2012 11:44 AM

Oh, I totally agree. I should have mentioned that it's not only a pigs-at-the-trough scandal but a serious breach in what is supposed to be their professional function, quite apart from who was footing the bill for the party. But I don't particularly care that it was sex that was distracting them from their duties as opposed to, say, crack or poker or lighting their own farts.

Seriously, though, can't you imagine how ticked off everyone is at the skinflint who tried to walk his check? Way to go, buddy. Very discreet, get the cops involved. Was he just not thinking at all (we can marshal some evidence for this view), or did he assume that the conspiracy of silence would be maintained no matter what? From what I hear, this is a pretty old tradition for advance parties. Maybe they really were that complacent. Or someone forgot to grease the right palm: penny-wise, pound-foolish!

Posted by: Texan99 at April 17, 2012 11:46 AM

"Rescind their security clearances and release them from government service. The military guys get handled under the UCMJ.

Agreed. Also looking closely at the actions of who was responsible for leading/supervising these hound dogs seems to me to be a proper course of action.

Out of a charitable spirit, let's hope they got a receipt for their equipment. After this party, their equipment may be all they have left.


Posted by: bthun at April 17, 2012 11:50 AM

Well, I may be off base here but I think it ought to be a scandal, in the sense that the behavior is scandalous.

You're right, of course. I just find it hard to get upset by incompetence among the bodyguards of politicians. Also, in my observation the GS-14's are far more likely to decide they are above reproach than are the GS-5/7/9's. Maybe we should bid Personal Protection Details out to Brinks, like back in the old days.

Posted by: Pogue at April 17, 2012 12:27 PM

Post a comment

To reduce comment spam, comments on older posts are put into moderation 5 days after the last activity. Comments with more than one link also go into moderation. If you don't see your comment after posting it, try refreshing the screen. If you still don't see it, your comment is probably in the moderation queue.




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)