Lawmakers vow Walter Reed scandal probe

[pberq]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070306/ap_on_go_co/walter_reed

By ANNE FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer 39 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Lawmakers say they want to know why U.S. troops returning from combat are being stuck in dilapidated housing and battling excessive red tape to get medical care.

"We want answers," said Sen. Ben Nelson (news, bio, voting record), D-Neb. "We want to know why things were overlooked and why matters were not addressed when brought to the leadership's attention."

Nelson and other members of the
Senate Armed Services Committee were expected to pepper Army officials Tuesday with questions about Walter Reed Army Medical Center, where wounded soldiers have said they experienced neglect and substandard living conditions.

During a hearing Monday, two soldiers wounded in combat and a spouse of a wounded soldier recounted nightmarish stories of frustration as they tried to get medical attention and disability compensation.

Several lawmakers say they are concerned Walter Reed reflects a much broader problem of the nation's ability to care for the thousands of soldiers gravely wounded from wars in
Iraq and
Afghanistan.

"I'm afraid this is just the tip of the iceberg, that, when we (get) out into the field, we may find more of this," said Rep. Tom Davis, R-Va., a member of the House Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee that held the Monday session.

[Doctor_J]

1. Just like they vowed tough oversight on the war

Can't wait :eyes:

I remember when we lived in a democracy.

[razorman]

2. At least some heads have started to roll.

The resignations of a couple of high-ranking people shows that there seems to be some sense of honor in the military, as opposed to civilian politicians, who always pass the buck.
This situation is horrendous, and must be fixed. Unfortunately, it is nothing new, and is pretty typical of government health care in this country.

[EST]

5. Welcome to DU!

:toast: :toast:
I don't want to nit pick, but you might want to re-think your conclusions and widen them in some places as well as avoid such a broad brush treatment.

Government supplied health care, in most cases is excellent, particularly military supplied. The problems tend to arise, both military and civilian, when sleazy, self concerned, and slippery ethics people occupy positions of control and delivery for far too long with insufficient oversight and a strong management ability with a well versed awareness of the peter principle.

Lousy people, with a slick veneer cover over their shortcomings (in other words-dishonest and lacking in empathy,)as well as an aggressive, take-no-prisoners approach toward the rest of the world, run their positions in either a lazy, pass the blame fashion or steal you blind one. Or both.

I have a more than passing understanding of civilian medical care, being the recipient of sloppy, better lucky then skilled, surgical procedure that included almost a year with a hose in my arm for infusing a daily attempt to conquer a MRSA infection that was a gratuitous, deadly dangerous gift.
The attendant intense indoctrination and investigation that I had to do was quite informative.

The big difference is that military medicine focuses on and is enormously competent at trauma care on young, healthy bodies. Their expertise does not rise so high in the empathy area-what does it cost the patient,physically and mentally and how do you fix it.

Military function has to regard people a lot like mobile intelligent gun platforms and that attitude does not stop at the edge of the battlefield.

[EST]

3. Dumbfuck Tom Davis made it abundantly clear via his

questioning, yesterday, that he does not regard the fundamental reason for this fiasco, that of privatizing everything and destroying government in any aspect other than terrorizing and manipulating the public, as a problem. He is trying to solve the problem by doing the same shit that ruined Walter Reed and put incompetents in control.

The namby-pamby almost neocon democrats in the majority are too politically compromised to do much about it.
THere are a few shining stars in the dem leadership who may make a difference but they are walking a fine line and haven't a lot of authority.

[pberq]

4. exactly right - "too politically compromised"

This is the sad state of the Democratic party right now. How many crimes does this administration have to commit before something will be done?

Yesterday I got a call from the DNC asking me to join. I told them that if the Democratic leadership was acting like Russ Feingold and a few other standouts, I'd be happy to join them, otherwise forget it.

[EST]

6. I think the problems arise from exposure.

Psychological studies inform me that in any sufficiently large group or society, approximately six percent of the population is pathologically anti-social and that tendency ranges across the population in ever decreasing levels until you come to the six to ten percent of the other end of the spectrum, from which come the mother Theresas of the world.

The anti-social types have no respect for anyone, no boundaries, no empathy, no values.
They tend to be authoritarian, can be quite intelligent, even brilliant and, chameleon-like, adapt any cover they need to project an image that advances their interests.

You will always find the serial murderers, child molesters, thieves and haters here and will never find them among the Mother Theresa types.
As I am sure you are aware, these ugly personalities are drawn to the republican point of view, authoritarian, viewing other people as little more than obstructions, tools, weaklings and fools.

Most humans entering politics, especially those who are of a liberal/progressive mien, start out with high ideals and strong ethics but, in the struggle with the destroyers and berserkers, those fine qualities erode and stultify, eventually dying to the point where the possessors thereof find themselves having to triangulate and pretend, faking it to try still to be the high minded persons they once considered themselves to be.

There are some things one cannot compromise on, but an assumed identity has no real steel supporting it, no backbone that supports and defines limits. The "honorable" whatever, who once prized fine mettle, finds himself wandering and compromised, trying to do a good job but somewhat rudderless and trying to keep up a good act. Fakes.

A commendable few get angry. Each challenge, because they make the right choices, is totally defensible; the guiding principles held tightly, serving as both sword and shield. Any ground that is given is given reluctantly, only after a fierce struggle and a vow to self, rattling the rafters, the fight will go on and, eventually, that ground will be retaken.

Majority leader Reid is a profound case study in these principles, a good man, imagining himself the man he used to be. As shallow evidence, witness his continually repeated stories of his heroic youth, a pugnacious, victorious boxer, a buzzsaw prosecutor, keen of eye and strong of limb, moral mettle and mind.

He's still the hero of his own universe, but only of his universe.

We will not bring America back from the edge and off the endangered species list with such men unless they have a strong majority backing them up.

[pberq]

7. good points, EST!

as with Vietnam, I fear that getting out of Iraq is going to be a slow and painful process, with the American people taking the lead.