A perfect example of how NOT to be a leader

Colleges and Universities A-Z Naval Academy - Annapolis
21

<p>What ever happened to loyalty? It should be one of the attributes of a good officer. Loyalty is a part of the Academy mission statement. Loyalty is a one-way street. It goes up the chain of command, not down. It is mandatory to good order and discipline. It is essential in any military environment. It should be a given. A Navy Captain Commanding Officer of a ship deserves and should expect loyalty both due to her rank and due to her position. And yes, I understand that integrity can sometimes supersede loyalty and we can debate all day when and if it should prevail. UCMJ does support the premise that so long as an act is ‘lawful’, it should be obeyed. Also, the erosion of respect might legitimately affect loyalty. However, I would argue that professionally, one’s position should remain loyal to the position of a reporting senior. On the day of Commissioning, we all take a “loyalty” oath and it does not exclude those seniors with whom we do not like their leadership style.</p>

<p>I am still not sure this hasn’t happened because she was a female. Male skippers curse all the time. Male skippers have been known to hurl clipboards, sound powered phones, and coffee cups across the bridge, Male skippers have ”grabbed junior officers or sailors to get their attention or move them elsewhere”, especially on the bridge where non-essential conversation is highly discouraged. Male skippers are applauded for following established procedures when there is an incident at sea such as accidentally running over a whale by shutting down the email and satellite phone services and allowing the fleet PAO to make the news release. The last thing the Navy needs is to read about one of their ships running over a whale as described by some seaman to his mom and reported in a Podunk weekly newspaper. Relieved male skippers are not accused of having friends in high places when being shuffled off to some backwater assignment to await their earliest retirement date. And they don’t have blogs dedicated to them. There have been six Navy skippers relieved already this year. Five were male. I can only find one of the six that is the subject of a blog. And what I really don’t understand is why the JOs on the USS John McCain probably applauded their skipper for “drag racing” the Cowpens, while their counterparts on the Cowpen reported theirs for endangering the ship. “Racing” happens all the time. It is a part of breaking away from unreps.</p>

<p>There are all types of leadership styles. Many will not meet the example on page 3 of one’s Leadership 101 textbook. We have no idea what the condition of the Cowpens was before Captain Graf arrived. It could have been in the shape to require tough love. Perhaps she was personally sent there for a reason, specifically because of her leadership style, not despite it. Allow me to let you in on a little secret. Most fleets keep a few crusty old Captains around just to report to ships which are having issues in order to square them away. I had a good friend who once served in this role. When he initially reported to a ship, he handed the quarterdeck watchstander his personal burgee with detailed instructions as to how and when it should be flown. It was a Tasmanian devil. You think he was a nice guy? I never saw him in action but rumor has it that he had some rather unique methods of gaining the JO’s attention, none of which you will read about in Leadership 101.</p>

<p>My personal opinion is that perhaps blogs and other forms of instant communications have attributed to the downfall of loyalty. “Back in the day”, a whistleblower, for the lack of a better term, had better be darn certain of improprieties before reporting a senior. The consequences for being in error were dire. The anonymity of modern communications combined with the propensity of the press to report these ‘facts’ have removed this fear.</p>

<p>“Witch”? “Wench”? Please. Give me a break. If you haven’t experienced the loneliness, the awesome responsibility of command at sea, cut her some slack. Perhaps she did ‘break’. Let her retire in peace. She has served her country for her entire adult life. Let her be an example of a leadership style that, since you were not there, you may not understand and cannot appreciate, but perhaps can learn from.</p>

<p>There is an old adage that the black shoe Navy ‘eats its young’. There is also the understanding that it is the respite of the “five and dives”. The bridge of a US Navy ship is a very serious place. Perhaps the interrelation of the above three statements is why COs such as Captain Graf exist. As an aside I did not read one incident where anyone accused her of incorrect fitness reports. Think about it.</p>

22

<p>Luigi - </p>

<p>Don’t you think that if the Navy is going to make a case remove someone as high profile as Captain Graf that they will characterize her behavior in the most unflattering terms in attempt to show the evidence as overwhelmingly damning?</p>

<p>Using that method, you’d force the “super feminists at the Pentagon and the U.S. Naval Academy” to either be quiet or mount a pretty strong effort in her defense, right?</p>

<p>I had several CO’s who were buttholes. I went to at least three changes of command where when the words, “I relieve you,” were uttered by the new CO, he got a standing ovation because the squadron despised the outgoing guy so much that they were thrilled to see him leave.</p>

<p>Is militarycorruption.com a reputable site, or just one that happens to fit the POV of people who don’t like Captain Graf, or the military in general?</p>

23

<p>mombee, you’re a windsock.</p>

<p>Why do you believe, with 100% certainty, everything about the official US Navy stance issued by the USNA in regards to “what happened” (whatever it was) but you turn tail and hide from the OFFICIAL US Navy investigation and Inspector General’s report that DETAILS quite fully all of the acts of Holly Graf?</p>

<p>You can’t have it both ways - since you were not there on the ship, the only thing you can rely on is the official word (isn’t that what you continue to say about every dope-smoking Mid or Mid accused of child porn or Mid accused of stealing generators, etc), and the official word and investigation says she is unfit for command. </p>

<p>Your premise of “they are going after her and doing this because she is a woman” is another red herring. Have you ever considered that her actions and behaviors up until now have been tolerated because she is a woman, and that a man would have been relieved years ago!</p>

<p>Wait, the wind is changing again, prepare to come about mombee. :rolleyes:</p>

24

<p>

</p>

<p>I would never suspect that the United States Navy’s Office of Inspector General would ever print anything that wasn’t true, would you? Or do you believe that the US Navy is lying about her behavior? </p>

<p>From the IG Report:</p>

<p>“The evidence shows” that Graf violated Navy regulations “by demeaning, humiliating, publicly belittling and verbally assaulting … subordinates while in command of Cowpens,” the report concluded. Her actions “exceeded the firm methods needed to succeed or even thrive” and her “harsh language and profanity were rarely followed with any instruction.” Her repeated criticism of her officers, often in front of lower-ranking crew members, humiliated subordinates and corroded morale, “contrary to the best interests of the ship and the Navy.”</p>

<p>Why would anyone associated with the US Navy want someone like this in command of a ship?</p>

<p>

I would expect her big sis (RDML Robin Graf) is doing just that.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>As seems to be the case here, given that the official IG report doesn’t contain much in support of her, and every interview/comment by anyone who served under her in any capacity hasn’t come forward with any words to minimize her actions (save for mombee :rolleyes: ).</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I don’t know anything about them, they just happened to be mentioned in the quote I copied from The Washington Post article (linked in the post). You can make your own judgement about their site, but they seem to be coming down on the side of the Navy and the crew who served under this woman.</p>

25

<p>Well, you’re experienced enough to know that there’s true and then there’s piling on.</p>

<p>Why are you alleging that her sister is involved in influencing the disposition of the case? Do you have information that suggests that? In effect, you’re impugning her without evidence to support your claim.</p>

<p>I checked out militarycorruption.com. It looks like a “2 standard deviations out of normal”, conspiracy theorist website. I’m not sure I’m buying what they’re selling.</p>

<p>I’m no mombee apologist, but I’m not sure what is to be gained by continuing to debate this ad nauseam.</p>

26

<p>

most reasonable people would agree with that.</p>

<p>Luigi - do you have a point? do you want her head on a platter? How about arguing the cases of the other 5 Navy Captains who were fired this year?</p>

<p>from the Washington Post article -

Luigi, why do you think that is?</p>

27

<p>She’s earned it. What’s your point?</p>

28

<p>JAMO4, good catch. I guess maybe I should start paying attention to Luigi’s posts. Wait. Nah. Never mind:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>“exacting mutinous revenge”. Maybe there is hope for the WP yet. Wait, nah, they still quoted the “2 standard deviation” conspiracy blogs.</p>

<p>

</p>

29

<p>

</p>

<p>The 5 others? Go ahead and start another thread if you are so concerned about what others think about their cases, although I’m sure most people would agree with their “firing” (well, maybe not USNA69, but most reasonable others).</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Umm, because it’s true?</p>

30

<p>

</p>

<p>mombee - why did you change your name from “USNA69” to “oldgrad” and then why did you change it again to “mombee”?</p>

<p>Then give us all a lecture about honor, integrity, and truth. :rolleyes:</p>

31

<p>I don’t particularly care what mombee calls him/herself. Unless all posters give there real name what difference does it make?</p>

32

<p>Quote:
Originally Posted by mombee
I guess maybe I should start paying attention to Luigi’s posts. Wait. Nah. Never mind: </p>

<p>mombee - why did you change your name from “USNA69” to “oldgrad” and then why did you change it again to “mombee”?</p>

<p>Then give us all a lecture about honor, integrity, and truth.</p>

<p>Well said Luigi. It is a shame that the one who talks the most about honesty and the rules seems to skirt around it the most.</p>

33

<p>mca2011, the point is the TOS forbids using other sign on names to regain access after being banned. The poster talks about honesty, yet is dishonest. That my friend is the difference.</p>

34

<p>

Apparently no one else understands either your question or the WP statement. Is it possible that she was railroaded by a bunch of overzealous mutinous JOs?
Several things bear to mention. First, any accusation of physical assault is going to draw an IG inspection. Once an investigation is in the hands of the IG, all bets are off. Everything and anything will come to light. I am relatively certain that the accusations for physical assault were not found factual and that the IG assault findings were verbal in nature, a very nebulous charge. If she were guilty of physical assault, her case would have definitely gone to a courts martial. The hardest thing to explain about the entire episode is that Seventh Fleet came on board the Cowpens the day she was relieved and announced to the crew what a great job she had done. He would only have done this as a show of support. Very unusual for a relieved CO. Therefore, I think the Admiral believed she was railroaded. SO, JAMO4, in response to your question, it is a distinct possibility that Captain Graf was railroaded by a mutinous crew. There may be a movie, The Mutiny on the Cowpens.</p>

35

<p>No, I think HAL’s the name …</p>

<p>[YouTube</a> - 2001 A Space Odyssey - HAL Stanley Kubrick](<a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poZp0Xzc-d8]YouTube”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poZp0Xzc-d8)</p>

36

<p>For the newer viewers . . . a history lesson might be in order. </p>

<p>In might be necessary to explain how a few years back, one poster [an alum] was banned from the site, then permitted to return, then banned again if I recall correctly. THEN, lo and behold, another alum arose from the ashes to start anew the flame wars, was banned, migrated to antoerh forum, was banned from there [and here it gets a little foggy], may have come back to this forum [was banned AGAIN!] and, NOW, seems to have resurfaced. [At least that is the conjecture.]</p>

<p>Others may have a slightly different recollection and may be able to clarify . . .</p>

37

<p>[url=<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/05/AR2010030504326.html?nav=most_emailed_emailafriend]washingtonpost.com[/url”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/05/AR2010030504326.html?nav=most_emailed_emailafriend]washingtonpost.com[/url</a>]
"Findings of “cruelty and maltreatment” – the judgment levied against Graf – are few and far between. </p>

<p>The Naval Inspector General’s office launched its investigation of Graf in June after receiving three anonymous complaints. Of the 36 sailors who were subsequently interviewed, 29 said she had verbally abused them, according to the 50-page report. Crew members cited an “environment of fear and hostility” on the Cowpens, with one saying, “21 years in the Navy and this is the poorest climate I’ve ever seen.” </p>

<p>Investigators upheld other allegations against Graf, including that she abused her position for personal gain by forcing sailors to walk her dogs and by compelling a junior officer to play piano at a Christmas party at her house. "</p>

<p>Mombee likes to have it both ways- when it is the Supe at USNA over ruling the Commandant on retaining a Mid after testing positive for drug use; authority is not to be questioned. However when the IG SUSTAINS the charges against an obviously unfit Commanding officer and the Flag officer in command takes action to relieve that Commander- then he questions the Flag decision?!
This Captain CLEARLY deserved to be relieved, just as there clearly were justified reasons for the relief of 5 other Captains this year.</p>

<p>BTW- it would appear that Capt Graf was a disciple of Mombee’s command philosophy:
“What ever happened to loyalty? It should be one of the attributes of a good officer. Loyalty is a part of the Academy mission statement. Loyalty is a one-way street. It goes up the chain of command, not down.”
Regardless of what they might actually practice I never saw anyone actually allow that to be put in print before- but then we in the Army - and I know in the Marine Corps as well-were taught that loyalty is both up and down. Leaders owe their soldiers just like soldiers owe their leaders. Mombee and Captain Graf however ascribe to a different approach- " your subordinates exist for your bidding - treat them however you wish in order to personally succeed."</p>

38

<p>

And what is the basis of your ‘history’ lesson? That anyone who disagrees with a few of the posters on here, no matter how absurd their posts, has got to be a single individual? That only one person in the world is capable of disagreeing with them?</p>

<p>Captain Graf suspected her wardroom of GroupThink. An interesting phenomena. Group unity is paramount. Dissent is discouraged, even prohibited. Unity to the extent that the group loses grasp of reality and atrophies to total uselessness. The solution is a devil’s advocate. Someone who presents an alternate view. Someone who causes the group to think. In too many unsuccessful failed groups, these individuals have been ostracized. As the poster stated on one of the blogs in support of Captain Graf, “Lord knows, there is no paper so thin that there aren’t two sides - just like this story.”</p>

<p>This forum should be about helping candidates, presenting a factual view of the Academy. Many of the threads on here have no place on here. One or two of the posters here, whose sole agenda seems to be to derogate the Academy have no place on here. Take it below to the Parents forum, or better yet, forget it.</p>

<p>Bill, I see the accusations about multiple user names, etc as a white flag of surrender. When a post, no matter how absurd the accusations, is countered, usually the first rebuttal is a “because I said so” type of response, followed by some sort of ad hominem attack. To me, an indicator that they have no logic to support their initial post.</p>

39

<p>In incriments. First:

The definition of ‘loyalty’ is complex. And the military definition of ‘loyalty’ is most definitely different than, say, the marital definition of ‘loyalty’. A loyal commander may never place his troops in harm’s way. How could he therefore be loyal to his commander when orderd to charge the hill? I think the attribute to best describe a senior’s relation to his subordinates would be ‘respect’.</p>

<p>LOL. Just googled ‘military loyalty’ and my least favorite person in the world popped up first in line:
[Military</a> Loyalty](<a href=“http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,91945,00.html]Military”>http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,91945,00.html)
Fleming’s views:

</p>

<p>All in all, a pretty good description. I particularly like his closing comment:

Probably none of the JOs in Cowpens had Fleming as a prof.</p>

40

<p>

</p>

<p>Bill’s recount is 100% correct. That person, under 3 different screen names, has been recognized as a ■■■■■. </p>

<p>■■■■■ - n.</p>

<ol>
<li>One who posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup or message board with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument. ■■■■■■ often go by multiple names to circumvent getting banned. </li>
</ol>

<p>Why do ■■■■■■ do it?</p>

<p>Most ■■■■■■ are sad people, living their lonely lives vicariously through those they see as strong and successful.</p>

<p>Disrupting a stable newsgroup gives the illusion of power, just as for a few, stalking a strong person allows them to think they are strong, too.</p>

<p>For ■■■■■■, any response is ‘recognition’; they are unable to distinguish between irritation and admiration; their ego grows directly in proportion to the response, regardless of the form or content of that response.</p>