Is George W. Bush Responsible For Building 18 at Walter Reed Hospital?

Responsibility? Accountability?

VP Cheney is caught on tape saying to the VFW today that “He will get the problem fixed!” Lt Gen Kiley - he ran Walter Reed 2 years - says he “accepts responsibility” but he adds he also “accepts the challenge” to get it fixed. Which is to say, “Hey, I’m not quitting, I’m not resigning, I’m staying on!”

So what’s the matter here? I thought “Accountability” meant something. Apparently it does not mean anything. Lt Gen gets paid about $13,000 a month and when he retires he’ll draw 75% of that for life! $10,000 a month. Plus, a Lt Gen has a field grade officer for an aide, a EM for a valet, an EM as his private driver and a cook and maid for his house. Not bad, eh?

OK, let’s get to the nitty-gritty. The Republicans gained control of Congress in 1994. The Newt Gingrich Contract with America scheme. They ran the congress in a most disagreeable way and never, I say again, never challenged Bush or Cheney or Rice or the Oberfuhrer, Rumsfeld. Congress under the Republicans performed as the Three Monkeys! Hear no, See no and Speak no. Except on tax curs for the R&Fs. Then it was Yes, Yes, and Yes.

Over on Capitol Hill, it was Mr Nasty, Speaker Hastert and his just-as-bad, the nuclear option man, Bill Frist in the Senate. For twelve years the Republicans had it their way, to semi-paraphrase Sinatra, all the way up to November 7, 2006. The new 110th Congress was sworn in on January 4, 2007. Barely in office 2 months, we’re holding hearings here, hearings there. Wow! Maybe the system does work?

OK, after the 2000 Florida debacle in which the United States Supreme Court made its unconstitutional foray into the presidential electoral process, robbing the House of Representatives of its constitutional obligation to choose a president when no one has a majority of the electoral votes, it gave us our first minority, first designated president.

Rather than act a little bit humble, Bush43 said he would deliver on his promises. He did. With a vengeance. Under Clinton, we had at last got the Federal government back in the black. After12 years of Reagan and Bush41. We even projected a $1.8 T. surplus. Now, we have raised the national debt to an all-time high. Our grand-children will be paying for services the current generation is using but is too cheap to pay for. Wow. What a heritage! I’ve heard of the Lost Generation, the Greatest Generation and the Baby Boomer Generation. This generation surely is the Muck You Generation.

So who’s responsible for the Veterans Administration snafu? Republicans controlled Congress by the neck for 12 years, and the same goes for the Bush43 administration, for 6 years.

Now, the weak-kneed #*2!% at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue wants a “Bi Partisan Commission” to find out what’s wrong. What the &%@#! has he been doing these past 6 years? I thought he was the DECIDER?

When the going gets tough, Bush43 wants a commission. Geez. What a legacy.

[edit on 3/5/2007 by donwhite]

mod edit, spelling in title

[edit on 10-3-2007 by DontTreadOnMe]

You know what bothers me the most . . . is how the complains are flying now under the Democratic congress but for 6 years and 4 of war soldiers and families seems to me that they were under a Gag order.

Or just people after the blunder of Rumsfeld and his gestapo the military found their voices . . .

I wonder. . .

posted by marg6043

You know what bothers me the most . . . is how the complaints are flying now under the Democratic congress but for 6 years and 4 of war soldiers and families seem to me they were under a Gag order. Or just people after the blunder of Rumsfeld and his gestapo the military found their voices . . . I wonder. . . [Edited by Don W]

I don’t think it was anything sinister. It was institutional inertia. Plus, I’m pretty sure the money was being spent on Humvees and body armor. Can you imagine how much we paid to have the Humvees armored on the hurry-up? How much we paid for a suit of body armor, running the plants 24/7? We have developed a sensor that detects some IEDs and I’ll bet we paid 1000X what that was worth. There was no money left for the state-side operations.

Plus, there was nearly zero media attention on vets. Every night we got the latest body count - say hello Vietnam - and a couple pictures of the troops in action. Then the usual complaints and so on. But a tv news cast can only allot 4 to 6 minutes to the War in Iraq. Then it’s “move on.” I like Kattie Kuric, but she is just part of a larger overall plan to catch us for Judge Judy.

I smell "political agenda", this country has a long history of less than acceptable treatment of our Veterans.

Our Veterans deserve much better than they are getting, YES, but

The saddest part of this continuing saga is when an election is near and one side can throw this subject out as leverage against another political party, they will do it to gain votes and not to take care of the heroes who are used as pawns in the game.

These soldiers did not "Defend Our Country", to gain political advantage, but , (in the minds of politicians), they fought to give those "Seeking Power" some political chips to play in the upcoming elections.......

It is WAY beyond the time, where this type of political game is an accepted political practice, by the citizens of this country.

I consider it a slap in the face......

posted by JacKatMtn

I smell "political agenda." This country has a long history of less than acceptable treatment of our Veterans. The saddest part of this continuing saga is when an election is near and one side can throw this subject out as leverage against another political party, they will do it to gain votes and not to take care of the veterans [let’s stop the overuse of “heroes” - Aesop principle] who are used as pawns in the game. The soldiers did not "Defend Our Country" to gain political advantage . . It is WAY beyond the time when this type of political game is an accepted political practice, by the citizens of this country. I consider it a slap in the face. [Edited by Don W]

Yes, Mr JaM, you are right-on! Because the fledgling US Government had little money, the Revolutionary soldiers were frequently paid by land grants. Land speculators stood by with ready cash to buy those grants for next to nothing. The lands were usually located in the far western part of the country and were virtually inaccessible and totally isolated.

Civil War veterans fared no better. The responsibility for caring and supporting the horribly disabled veterans was then regarded as a function of the individual states. The South was broke, and the North had a short memory. As in, “What have you done for me today?” It is an unresearched story how many of them died for lack of medical care or of nourishment. I.e., starved to death.

Then came 1917. Three million men were drafted. 1.5 million had been sent to France to complete their basic and advanced infantry training. 125,000 went KIA in the short time we participated in the War to end all Wars. Promised a bonus to make up the sacrifice soldiers made compared to wages paid at home, the bonus was not to be paid for 20 years. By 1932, the Great Depression had put so many veterans out of work they marched on Washington to seek Congressional approval to pay the bonus early. President Hoover ordered Gen. Douglas MacArthur, then Army Chief of Staff, to evict the soldiers from W-DC.

MacArthur’s aide, Major Eisenhower, advised a “go slow, go easy” approach, but Major George Patton had no qualms leading a cavalry charge into the very men who had fought in France. In fact, the story goes that Patton’s life had been saved in France and the veteran who did so was one of those who were forcibly evicted from the temporary encampment. Patton ordered the burning of their shelters and possessions. MacArthur authorized the use of CS - tear gas - on the vets. Yes, you are right. The US Congress - but elected by the people - has no good record vis a vis the vets.

And more. I am a disabled American veteran. Until 2001 - Clinton era - we paid $2 co-pay for a 30 days supply of medicines. The medicines are mailed in 90 day quantities. Suppose you need 3 medicines. That meant a co-pay of $18. Under Bush43, that has risen to $8 co-pay, and will go to $9 co-pay. Those same 3 medicines now coat $72 and will soon cost the disabled veteran $81. And Bush43, VP Cheney and the former Oberfuhrer, Herr Rumsfeld, all claim to “love” our vets and never fail to assure the public they will not rest until the vets get the bets care available.
Who is lying to who?

On a higher note, I must say that the out-patient treatment I receive is A1. First class. The appointments are kept promptly, the personnel are polite and helpful and the general ambience at a stand-alone clinic is favorable. I have been seeing a Nurse Practitioner as my primary physician for more than 3 years. She is great! I have only good things to say about them, but I have never been an in-patient so on that I cannot comment.

Dear James,
What do you get when you mix Halliburton and health care? Walter Reed.
The stories of abysmal living conditions at Walter Reed Medical Center are bad enough. But there's more to the story. To cut costs, the support services and facilities management at Walter Reed were outsourced to a company called IAP - which is run by a former Halliburton official and whose board consists of people like Dan Quayle.

If IAP sounds familiar, that's probably because it's the same contractor that was asked to deliver relief services to Katrina victims but came up short. www.americansunitedforchange.org...; The privatization of support services has proved ineffective and lacks the kind of accountability our government is founded upon. In the case of Walter Reed, it drove out skilled doctors, psychologists, and caseworkers in favor of penny-pinching profit oriented private contractors.

This nickel-and-dimed approach to serving those in need is par for the course in the Bush Administration. Before the start of the Iraq war, Bush approved a budget which slowed cost growth of medical care for veterans compared to national health spending. [Or, when is an “increase” really a “decrease?” A. When the “increase” is 2% but the costs rise 8%.]
Jeremy Funk, Americans United for Change