Many have been offended by Rep. Allen West’s (R-FL) disgusting and unnecessary verbal attack on a fellow, lady Representative—an attack for which he has “steadfastly” refused to apologize.
Some were also offended by the Congressman’s sleazy use of these very same insults for fundraising purposes.
Others have found quite reprehensible this former military officer’s attempts to blame the military and his military service for his boorish behavior.
All of the above offended me.
When I wrote about this subject, a few readers came to West’s defense or rationalized his remarks.
For example, “Why should women get special treatment?” and “Please don’t make up bogus ‘sexism’ charges the way we’ve seen also bogus ‘racism’ charges and other bogus charges by the Left. It demeans not only those making it, but the environment as well.”
And there were the usual, “But the other side does it, too, and far worse” justifications.
All well and good. We are all entitled to our opinions and gratefully so.
However, one comment, which may have been made in jest, or sarcastically, especially caught my attention:
For crying out loud West was an Artillery Officer. Today’s artillery is mobile, he’s supposed to be a loose cannon!
Give the guy a break, he’s stressed
The comment made me realize that, perhaps, I had not done a good enough job of explaining what conduct—what language—is expected of a U.S. military officer.
Well, Richard Allen Smith, Vice -Chairman of VoteVets.org does a much better job.
In “No, Rep. West, That’s Not How We Speak in the Military,” Smith says:
Let’s be clear: the sexist and disrespectful language West directed at a colleague is incompatible with military service. There is not one officer worth his or her salt that would refer to a peer as “vile, unprofessional, and despicable”. If an Army leader were to criticize another’s performance, that leader would criticize them as a Soldier, not levy the insult that the individual is not “a lady”. Soldiers are Soldiers, and the same is true of members of Congress.
As a retired military, I know that we make all kinds of “unfortunate” remarks.
Smith puts it this way:
Now certainly, we say things in the military that you wouldn’t repeat in church or in front of your grandmother. As a noncommissioned officer in the 82nd Airborne Division, I dressed down my share of subordinates (which, of course, is not analogous to West’s tirade), but a leader attacks the work performance, not the Soldier. It’s no surprise, however, given the circumstances surrounding West’s military discharge, that he lacks many of the qualities of a good leader.
One of those qualities is respect, and it is taught to all Soldiers, not just leaders. In fact, respect is one of the seven Army Values that all Soldiers are taught within the first days of Basic Training…
Smith also addresses West’s “history of being little more than a bully,” both in Iraq and here at home.
For those who perhaps rightfully claim that “everyone else—from both parties—“ is at times disrespectful in Congress, Smith agrees with them: “And really, being disrespectful in the United States Congress is fine with me. If we starting booting all the disrespectful members in that institution we’d severely reduce its population.”
But, he continues, “when Allen West asserts that he learned disrespect from the Army, he is disgracing every Veteran and currently serving member of that honorable institution.”
Smith concludes:
I won’t stand for such disgrace, and neither should anyone else who has worn the uniform of our country.
No, Allen West, that’s not how we talk in the military. If you aren’t going to apologize to your Congresswoman, you should at least apologize to the brave men and women you insulted with your pitiful excuse.
Thinking back to my military service, yes, I have said some “not-so-nice” things, but never to a “Woman in the Air Force,” (WAF) and I would never blame any of my ungentlemanly conduct on my military service.
The author is a retired U.S. Air Force officer and a writer.