home

Injured Soldiers Face Neglect at Walter Reed

This is simply shocking.

Behind the door of Army Spec. Jeremy Duncan's room, part of the wall is torn and hangs in the air, weighted down with black mold. When the wounded combat engineer stands in his shower and looks up, he can see the bathtub on the floor above through a rotted hole. The entire building, constructed between the world wars, often smells like greasy carry-out. Signs of neglect are everywhere: mouse droppings, belly-up cockroaches, stained carpets, cheap mattresses.

This is the world of Building 18, not the kind of place where Duncan expected to recover when he was evacuated to Walter Reed Army Medical Center from Iraq last February with a broken neck and a shredded left ear, nearly dead from blood loss. But the old lodge, just outside the gates of the hospital and five miles up the road from the White House, has housed hundreds of maimed soldiers recuperating from injuries suffered in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

John Aravosis of AmericaBlog expresses his outrage. So should we all.

< Immigrants: They Are America | Sunday Reading >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Hillary Clinton is one of those responsible (none / 0) (#1)
    by Andreas on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 03:40:41 AM EST


    Walter (none / 0) (#2)
    by Wile ECoyote on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 04:09:05 AM EST
    Reed is closing down.  It was Brac'ed

    there is no excuse for this (none / 0) (#3)
    by cpinva on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 04:45:20 AM EST
    period. with all the preening and braying the republicans have done for the past 6 years, they couldn't even sully their pretty little hands to ensure that those wounded in service to their country, regardless of what you think of their mission, are being treated in the best facilities we can give them?

    for this alone they should all be impeached.

    the next time the supremes have an obscenity case on their docket, and they need an example, just take a peek down the road.

    WOUNDED IN ACTION (none / 0) (#4)
    by TKindlon on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 07:20:27 AM EST
    Somebody needs to compare-and-contrast our government's excellent treatment of our wounded from Vietnam with the shabby way we're mistreating wounded veterans today.  I was a Marine NCO, one of many wounded in 1968 during the Tet Offensive. Ironically, it was probably the best investment I ever made.  After being helicoptered to a field hospital for preliminary surgery I was evacuated to a fine Army hospital in Japan for further treatment.  It seems that, at present, the first round of treatment for our Iraq/Afghanistgan people is as good as, or perhaps even better, than it was during Vietnam. So far, so good. Unfortunately, that seems to be where the similarity ends.  After a short period of recovery in Japan a planeload of us were sent to St. Albans Naval Hospital, a clean, modern, well-run facility in Queens, NY, for extended convalesence. At St. Albans we were were accorded good medical care along with dignity and respect. Eventually, I was medically retired, given a fair disability pension and then the VA paid ALL the bills to send me to college and law school under the VA's "Disabled Veterans Rehabilitation Program".  There were four of us on the program in my law school class(and, every single month, this nice old grandfatherly guy from the Veterans Administration would stop in, buy me a cup of coffee and say "You're doing a great job, kid, keep up the good work!"--I'm not kidding). Meanwhile, I read and hear story after story about how badly our current crop of wounded veterans is being treated (once they get past that first level of care). Shabby facilities--cockroaches, dead mice, routine neglect and, after their discharge, slow response and/or indifference from the VA.  It isn't right, it isn't fair and it isn't smart, either. The Vietnam vets who were were patched up, educated and, in many cases quite literally saved by the military hospitals and the VA system, have returned the government's investment many times over. This is just one more Katrina-like failure of the Bush administration, and it is an area that badly needs to be fixed once they've been driven into the wilderness.  Thanks for listening.  Terry Kindlon      

    Surely..... (none / 0) (#5)
    by kdog on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 08:19:43 AM EST
    if Bldg. 18 is in such bad shape, there are loads of governement buildings our wounded could stay in until they are ready to go home.  The White House has plenty of spare bedrooms, for example.

    Whatever it takes, no wounded soldier should be sleeping with roaches and staring at holes in the wall.  

    Re: Wounded in Action (none / 0) (#6)
    by Skyho on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 10:43:50 AM EST
    The chickenhawks these days never think about what happens to the wounded.  They just think they can hit, "restart".

    Being a vet I've seen some pretty bad situations for our returning vets, but it seems at the VA that things have really gone downhill.  The stories I hear from the few coming back recently really makes me think Americans have lost their way.

    You can't expect the $2-billion+ we borrow... (none / 0) (#7)
    by Bill Arnett on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 12:03:07 PM EST
    ...everyday from the Communist Chinese to cover all our expenses: Two wars, weapons systems (many of which are very expensive yet don't work), money to pay hugh enlistment bonuses (and issuing more waivers for a greater range of criminal offenses than ever before), armor for vehicles (still lacking), body armor for the troops (still lacking), training soldiers on sparse equipment here that differs from the equipment that will be used in Iraq, and the reckless spending of the bush maladministration that has ballooned our total obligations from $20-trillion to over $50-trillion dollars in just six years (over 400% of GDP!).

    The United States is insolvent, broke, bankrupt.

    But it is the moral bankruptcy of the Republican party sycophants of bush/cheney that causes this neglect of the troops they allege they "support."

    Stories such as these further exposes the sham and shows how Republicans really feel about the troops.

    We haven't just "lost our way" Skyho, bush/cheney have dug us into a hole so deep that the sun is no longer visible; a new Dark Age.

    Funding for the VA (none / 0) (#8)
    by clio on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 12:04:04 PM EST
    has been relentlessly cut for years.  The VA cut the muscle years ago and is now sawing on bone.

    A telling point in the Post story is the fact that the vets walk (hobble) to their appointments on the Walter Reed campus.  No jitney buses making prescribed rounds, no "dial-a-rides" - no money.  

    [And what's with wounded sergeants being made responsible for other wounded?  My god!  That's not rehab.  It's abuse.]

    Like every other system the VA has prioritized: if the patient (veteran) isn't going to die immediately or directly from lack of X, then X doesn't get funded.  Ergo inpatient care, where harm is visible, gets the funding.

    I don't dare start on the loss of the patient advocates that help veterans navigate the maze of regulations and applications and other criminal decimation of support staff or I'd never stop.  If there's no one to do the work, the work doesn't get done.  Veterans (and their families) suffer.

    Fourth rate salaries to medical and support staff and politicized administrative positions filled by the incompetent provide bottom of the barrel, and often worse than that, results.

    Funding for the VA has not been cut (none / 0) (#12)
    by Jason Van Steenwyk on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 07:35:29 PM EST
    In fact, VA funding has increased every year since 1994... and according to FactCheck.org, the rate of increase for VA funding was significantly faster under the Bush administration than under Clinton.

    Yes, it was not adequate to cover demand.

    But the argument that VA funding has been cut is a lie.

    Parent

    Lies, damned lies, and RNC talking points (none / 0) (#23)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Mon Feb 19, 2007 at 12:37:59 PM EST
    A quick course in Budgeting 101: If the cost of something increases and you don't increase the funding to match that increased cost, that is in effect a CUT IN THE FUNDING.

    Do you guys ever get tired of lying??

    Parent

    Ernesto (none / 0) (#27)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Feb 19, 2007 at 07:18:24 PM EST
    No that is a claim that the Left has made for years and it defies all logic.

    Why not stick with facts? You have a valid point that it wasn't increased as much as it should have been.

    But that isn't a "cut."

    Parent

    No it's not. (none / 0) (#32)
    by Jason Van Steenwyk on Mon Feb 19, 2007 at 08:52:40 PM EST
    That's absurd. A cut's a cut. An increase is an increase. A small increase is still an increase. A TOO SMALL increase is still an increase. Carried further, a reduction in the planned rate of growth in a program is also not a "cut."

    You can carp by adjusting for inflation - but that won't leave Bill Clinton looking very good early in his term.

    But stop lying by trying to obfuscate what a cut is and what an increase is. Factcheck.org already slapped you for it. Don't dig a deeper hole.

    Parent

    Slapped wha? (none / 0) (#40)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Tue Feb 20, 2007 at 06:19:29 PM EST
    Go ahead and try explaining those semantics to the wounded vets who are getting the short end of the stick. Maybe they will award you the debate points...

    Parent
    Everybody loses in a war (none / 0) (#9)
    by Al on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 12:07:10 PM EST
    Everybody who is actually involved in the war, that is. The soldiers, quickly forgotten when they can no longer fight, like this; and the ordinary people whose lives are destroyed by a bomb, a battle, a mistake at a checkstop, a revenge attack, a murderer who should never have been in the army in the first place. Everybody loses. Nobody wins a thing.

    The war racket has a weak point: It depends on people falling for all the patriotic slogans, and the hollow flattery of marching bands and yellow ribbons. It's all just a sales pitch, to convince you to put your body on the line for whatever the grand strategic delusion of the season is. So don't fall for it. Don't sign up. You tell them, when someone comes to invade my country, I'll grab a gun and defend my home and my family. But if you want to attack somebody else's country, somebody else's home and family, you go. Leave me alone.

    I wish I wasn't blinded by BDS (none / 0) (#10)
    by scarshapedstar on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 12:44:45 PM EST
    ...so that I could see the patriotism and troop-supportin' inherent in all of this.

    PPJ! Wash the scales from my eyes!

    He never meant (none / 0) (#11)
    by jondee on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 12:56:02 PM EST
    literally Support the Troops; its a catch-all like "terrorists", the metaphorical "Gen. Giap", and Marxist Climate Change Scientists.

    scar and jondee (none / 0) (#13)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 07:55:55 PM EST
    Well, well, folks.

    What part of Jason's comment don't you understand?

    What part of Wile's comment don't you understand?

    What part of this don't you understand?

    they outnumber hospital patients at Walter Reed 17 to 1 -- that they take up every available bed on post and spill into dozens of nearby hotels and apartments leased by the Army. The average stay is 10 months, but some have been stuck there for as long as two years.

    Now I am sure you will join me in calling your Congressman's office and demanding that the building of the new Walter Reed be given top priority..

    Perhaps Pelosi can be presauded to tell the Pentagon to forget that new Jet she wants and put the money into fixing this.

    I mean with her being in charge and supporting the troops so much..

    The transfer of services from the existing to the new facilities will be gradual to allow for continuity of care for the thousands of servicemembers, retirees and family members that depend upon Walter Reed AMC. The date for final closure of the current WRAMC facility has been set for an unspecified date in 2011.

    In the meantime, can you please quit protesting, etc and improving the enemy's morale? That should help immensley by getting the war over.

    Synchronicity is not causality (none / 0) (#14)
    by Repack Rider on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 08:30:29 PM EST
    can you please quit protesting, etc and improving the enemy's morale?

    Who are "the enemy" you speak of, and what evidence do you have that rational discussion about important issues helps their morale?

    I would think that you would be concerned about the disintegration of the morale of OUR troops.  C'mon Jim, join us in wanting the morale of OUR troops to be a matter of more concern than some unidentified people whose "morale" is not available for analysis and whose fighting ability does not seem to be a function of American public opinion.

    If you have EVIDENCE that discussion of important issues helps "enemy morale," why don't you put it on the table so we can judge its merits?

    Parent

    RePack (none / 0) (#15)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 11:01:53 PM EST
    You may choose to deny the obvious, but denial does nothing but call attention to your lack of logic, or your extreme bias.

    Your call. Which is it??

    Parent

    My call (none / 0) (#16)
    by Repack Rider on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 11:38:39 PM EST
    My "call" is that you have failed to supply any evidence that the fighting ability of unidentified people is a function of American public opinion, and you are trying to divert attention away from your logical failure with a false dichotomy, which is itself a logical failure.

    You're not doing very well today, are you?

    Parent

    RePack Keep trying to deny. (none / 0) (#17)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Feb 19, 2007 at 08:55:25 AM EST
    That you won't admit that the terrorists view the protests, demonstrations and Democratic Congressional statements as a very good thing is just a classic case of denial.  Even Dadler understands that demonstrations within the US helps the enemy. Even Peaches agreed that it "might."

    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:59 PM EST

    that protest worked. Sorry it helped "the enemy", but no Vietnamese communist fighting Western colonialism ever did a thing to me.

    You say you were in the military. Okay. I'll buy that. BUT, when you claim that morale is not important, that good news doesn't improve it and bad news doesn't hurt it, well you either have no knowledge of military affairs or you are denying because you recognize just how hurtful it is.

    Parent

    OFF TOPIC TROLL POST (none / 0) (#21)
    by Sailor on Mon Feb 19, 2007 at 11:00:53 AM EST
    the rest of us are trying to discuss the horrible treatment vets are being given.

    Please try to knock off all the personal insults and stay on topic.

    Parent

    Sailor. (none / 0) (#28)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Feb 19, 2007 at 07:38:44 PM EST
    I agree. Will you please tell RePack to say on subject.

    Parent
    PPJ EMBOLDENS TERRORISTS (none / 0) (#24)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Mon Feb 19, 2007 at 12:42:39 PM EST
    By defending the inexcusably shabby treatment of our vets by his preferred ruling class madmen.

    Parent
    actually (none / 0) (#26)
    by Jen M on Mon Feb 19, 2007 at 02:18:06 PM EST
    Wally World treats active duty soldiers.

    Parent
    Morale (none / 0) (#18)
    by squeaky on Mon Feb 19, 2007 at 08:55:34 AM EST
    Protesting the scam war sure doesn't seem to make a dent in your moral. Why should it affect the troops? Do you think that they are less thick skinned then you?

    Not likely.

    Parent

    squeaky (none / 0) (#19)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Feb 19, 2007 at 09:40:33 AM EST
    So you are an expert on what effects the morale of the troops?

    I have mostly not commented about the morale of American troops.

    What I have noted is that it is the enemy who is cheered by the various demonstrations, and now Congressional Resolution.

    Think about it. Put yourself in their place. You are up against the best fighting machine in the world. You have never won, and never will win, a straight up battle.

    So how can you make them go away? You can't.

    Now I submit that this would discourage you.

    But, as you watch the news from your enemies country, you see demonstrations and protests demanding that we give up. You see the war being called illegal and immoral. You see the President being called a liar and killer. You see prominent Democrats saying the war must end and the troops brought home. That America can't win. And now the enemy's elected representatives have passed a resolution that says the troops must leave!

    And all of the Democratic candidates are saying the same!

    And you are going to tell me that the above wouldn't improve your morale. Wouldn't tell you that if you just hang on a little longer, kill just a few more troops that the Democrats and the anti-war left will help you run the hated infidels off?

    Look, you are anti-war and anti-America. Perhaps because of our involvement, perhaps for other reasons that I don't know. But please, don't pee on my shoes and tell me it's raining.

    Admit what you are doing. After all, you are winning. You should be proud.

    Parent

    What a failure (none / 0) (#22)
    by Dadler on Mon Feb 19, 2007 at 11:38:54 AM EST
    Jim,
    This is a thread about the gross negligence in caring for injured soldiers, and you don't give a sh*t.  You really don't.  You can't even bring yourself to address it, you can't face what needs to be face because it is too difficult for your mind.  Amazing.  You actually think that the soldiers themselves, if they protest their conditions, are helping "the enemy".  (And don't claim otherwise, because that is what your argument boils down to.)  That is beyond the realm of absurdity and into the realm of mental incapacity.

    Stand up, be a man, and tell that soldier in his mouse-sh*t and cockroach infested room, getting his inadequate physical and psycological care, missing limbs and suffering from PTSD, go tell him or here what a traitor they are, and what a bad American they are, and how they should just shut up and suffer.

    Your position on this particular story is disgraceful and inhumane and shows a complete disdain for American values.  I am increasingly convinced that there is nothing you do in your life, not a single thing, ever, that actually requires freedom to carry out.

    Parent

    Dadler. You are exposed for false claims (none / 0) (#29)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Feb 19, 2007 at 07:52:47 PM EST
    You either didn't read my comment, or either you are just trying to smear. I hope it is the former, but I suspect it is the latter.

    Let's look at what I said.

    I noted that Wile had pointed out that Reed was being closed.

    I noted that Jason said that the funding had been increased, but not enough.

    I then noted that the demand was very high, 17 to 1, and that many had been moved to hotels and other lease facilities...

    I then called on you to help me correct this problem.

    Now I am sure you will join me in calling your Congressman's office and demanding that the building of the new Walter Reed be given top priority..

    Did you??? Be honest. Did you? I did. I gave one of his assistants an earful, and I'd believe he'll get the message. Will he do anything? Nope. What he has done is vote against military spending for years and years.

    Oh. Did I mention he was a Demo??? And did I even have to??

    I then gave a demonstration of the concern that the Demos have about such things. I reviewed for you your Dear Leader's priorities.

    Perhaps Pelosi can be presauded to tell the Pentagon to forget that new Jet she wants and put the money into fixing this.

    I mean with her being in charge and supporting the troops so much..

    A clear call for the Demos Leader to do something. (Of course she won't.)

    BTW - Did you know that the cost of one cross country trip in her (demanded) new jet will cost $30,000. That sure would keep a wounded vet in a very nice hotel as he recuperates. Will she? Good heavens, no.

    I then provided information as to how long the problem may exist, if nothing is done.

    (my quote from Wikipedia)
    The transfer of services from the existing to the new facilities will be gradual to allow for continuity of care for the thousands of servicemembers, retirees and family members that depend upon Walter Reed AMC.The date  for final closure of the current WRAMC facility has been set for an unspecified date in 2011.

    Now, how did I close?

    In the meantime, can you please quit protesting, etc and improving the enemy's morale? That should help immensley by getting the war over.

    You know what, dadler? I think you have went over to the dark side, and like squeaky, just make claims and try to smear with no regard for what was said.

    That's shameful. It is also dumb when the comments are right in front of you.

    Parent

    Professionalism (none / 0) (#20)
    by squeaky on Mon Feb 19, 2007 at 09:50:27 AM EST
    People say all sorts of things, ppj,  and that should have no affect on professionals. Besides if the troops are fighting for the freedom of americans, particularly free speech.

    But, as you watch the news from your enemies country, you see demonstrations and protests demanding that we give up. You see the war being called illegal and immoral. You see the President being called a liar and killer. You see prominent Democrats saying the war must end and the troops brought home. That America can't win. And now the enemy's elected representatives have passed a resolution that says the troops must leave!

    And all of the Democratic candidates are saying the same!

    And there are many that say the opposite, people like you.

    How does that figure in to your argument?

    As I said, your morale seems to get better as you fend off the war critics. Why wouldn't it be the same for the pros fighting in Iraq?


    Squeaky (none / 0) (#30)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Feb 19, 2007 at 07:58:38 PM EST
    You can run, but you can not avoid this fact. It is not our troops I am concerned about.

    What I have noted is that it is the enemy who is cheered by the various demonstrations, and now Congressional Resolution.

    So spare me the straw horses and face the facts.

    Parent

    Yes We Know (none / 0) (#33)
    by squeaky on Tue Feb 20, 2007 at 06:01:27 AM EST
    It is not our troops I am concerned about.


    Parent
    squeaky tries another smear.. sigh.... (none / 0) (#34)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Feb 20, 2007 at 10:18:14 AM EST
    That's a smear. It is out of context and incorrect because of that. But we know what you said.

    Posted by Squeaky at September 19, 2005 11:19 PM

    Rove never needed proof for his smear machine, why should I.

    Now, let us fast forward to 2/19/07.

    Let us read what you said at 9:50

    As I said, your morale seems to get better as you fend off the war critics. Why wouldn't it be the same for the pros fighting in Iraq?

    Now. Why would you assume that our troops' morale would get better in the face of constant attacks on the war, being told that their dead comrades lives' were wasted (Obama), that they are Nazis (Durbin), etc.

    I ask. Why would it get better? And why use the snarky "pros?"

    My reply, in which I chose to ignore your snarky remarks about the troops was:

    Squeaky (none / 0) (#30)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Feb 19, 2007 at 07:58:38 PM EST

    You can run, but you can not avoid this fact. It is not our troops I am concerned about.

    "What I have noted is that it is the enemy who is cheered by the various demonstrations, and now Congressional Resolution."

    So spare me the straw horses and face the facts.

    And yes. Despite all of the negative things being dumped on them, I am not concerned about their morale being damged. I believe that they are capable of understanding who, and what, the people constantly criticizing them, and the war, are.

    But, as I said:

    What I have noted is that it is the enemy who is cheered by the various demonstrations, and now Congressional Resolution.

    Read the whole thread.

    And if you want to keep trying to smear like you did, I'll be happy to respond each and every time.

    Parent

    OFF TOPIC TROLL POST (none / 0) (#35)
    by Sailor on Tue Feb 20, 2007 at 11:10:47 AM EST
    and only consisting of personal attacks.

    Parent
    Sailor (none / 0) (#44)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Feb 20, 2007 at 07:07:15 PM EST
    Bill, your buddies attack and when I note this, you complain.

    Your as transparent as a window panel

    Parent

    Smear King ppj Speaks (none / 0) (#39)
    by squeaky on Tue Feb 20, 2007 at 05:01:56 PM EST

    Posted by Squeaky at September 19, 2005 11:19 PM
    Rove never needed proof for his smear machine, why should I.

    I couldn't agree more with your assertion:
    That's a smear. It is out of context and incorrect because of that. But we know what you said.

    You are only concerned about regurgitating talking points from wingnuttia. You could care less about our troops. For you they are mere political pawns.

    You have claimed that protests hurt our troops morale. Switching to the talking point that protests embolden the enemy is BS. The spinmeisters have decided that it is a better talking point because there is no way to disprove the point as no one hears from the enemy. You repeat this as a full fleged drone of the echo-chamber.

    We do hear from the troops and they are heartened that some care enough about them to protest the war and demand that they are brought home. That is why your talking point below is now stale and outdated.

    So a public display such as this is terrible. It does hurt morale ....

    link

    Worse, if in the process of "wishing" you demonstrate/protest, etc., you will lower their morale and improve the morale of the people they are fighting.
    link

    Parent
    There is no morality in decrying free speech... (none / 0) (#25)
    by Bill Arnett on Mon Feb 19, 2007 at 01:58:07 PM EST
    ...especially when it comes to the troops themselves detailing the problems they are facing from a government that wants eternal war and that is breaking the back of what used to be the most highly vaunted fighting force in the world.

    Those troops, as others have in the past, are standing up for the very highest of American ideals: the right to freedom of speech, without which your other rights seem like parsley on top of your salad, perhaps a nice touch, but no real substance.

    Go tell those wounded and those still in combat that the former sycophantic 109th Congress and bush and cheney want to eliminate THEIR right, the RIGHTS of THEIR families, and the RIGHT of all citizens to freedom of speech and to label free-speakers traitors and allege they give aid and comfort to the enemy.

    Then get ready for the @$$whuppin' of your life as those true soldiers and heros take your head off for daring to say that what they fight for, American freedoms, are the subject of efforts to destroy our constitution and the country they love and that the government wants to silence them and their families.

    Go on, go tell 'em that all their families wishing and talking about how badly they want them home are giving aid and comfort to the enemy and they are TRAITORS.

    I dare you.

    Bill (none / 0) (#31)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Feb 19, 2007 at 08:00:58 PM EST
    Dearest Bill

    The only possible response to such a comment is:

    Horse Hockey.

    No one is doing what you claim.

    They know it, I know it and you know it.

    sigh......

    Parent

    The only possible responce (none / 0) (#36)
    by jondee on Tue Feb 20, 2007 at 12:24:47 PM EST
    from a lying, eternally obfuscating, errand boy that is.

    Of course equating free speech with treason isnt an attack on free speech.

    Jondee (none / 0) (#42)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Feb 20, 2007 at 06:43:48 PM EST
    My, my Jondee. Tell us who is doing that.

    Parent
    If anyone wants proof (none / 0) (#37)
    by jondee on Tue Feb 20, 2007 at 12:40:35 PM EST
    of what happens when you embolden the enemy, just read what Gen Giap said about that.

    Oh thats right, Jim lied about that story. But, it was a noble, patriotic, lie.

    Smear (none / 0) (#43)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Feb 20, 2007 at 07:05:42 PM EST
    Prove that I lied.

    You can't, but you can smear. You're almost as good as sequeaky.

    Parent

    VA is an example of socialized medicine (none / 0) (#38)
    by Slado on Tue Feb 20, 2007 at 04:28:49 PM EST
    The VA has always been "under" funded etc because it is an impossible government beuracracy.

    If the government truely wanted to help the wounded troops they would give the contract to Haliburton.

    Look to the VA for a preview of how socialized medicine would operate in this country.

    This is a bipartisan issue.   The VA just didn't all of the sudden become a problem.

    Hey it could be worse... (none / 0) (#41)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Tue Feb 20, 2007 at 06:29:06 PM EST
    They could be in an HMO.

    Parent