Democrats & Liberals Archives

Screw the Wounded

Privatization-The transfer of responsibility from public sector to private sector.
If military families had a choice between letting the military take care of it’s own wounded or turn that duty over to Haliburton KBR, I think the choice would be easy given the work ethic and business practices we’ve seen in Iraq and New Orleans.

Privatization, the “Golden Child” of the GOP is once again proving to the American people that corporate whores and their pimps can profit on the backs of someone else’s misery and suffering.
The Bush administration can call the robbing of the American people privatization all it wants, we know what it really is.

First it was the privatization of the Iraq war and rebuilding effort. We all know that's gone swell.
Then the rebuilding effort in New Orleans. Another "good job."
Why not privatize our troops health and wellness? They did so well with body armor right?
What could go wrong?


The Washington Post has released information regarding an Army memorandum written as far back as September by the garrison commander of Walter Reed Col. Peter Garibaldi, warning Gen. George Weightman that “patient care services are at risk of mission failure” because of “staff shortages brought on by the privatization of the hospital’s support workforce.”

Who was awarded this A-76 military contract against the hospital's wishes?
IAP Worldwide.
How much were they awarded to safeguard our troops? $120 million dollars.


The Washington Post confirmed that immediately after the contract was awarded the facilities management staff was reduced to 50 privately employed workers.
Who is the CEO of IAP Worldwide? Al Neffgen, who was previously the COO of government and infrastructure for the Americas Region of Kellog Brown and Root.
I know what you’re thinking, I’ve heard of that company before…but where?
The president of IAP Worldwide is Dave Swindle, (I shit you not) formerly the vice president in charge of government affairs, and also served as the manager of Halliburton’s Government affairs office. Now I remember… its Cheney’s “old company.”

By the way, how much does red tape, mold and cockroaches cost?


Once again the Bush administration is profiting on the backs of our brave soldiers. Once again the Bush administration is claiming to support our troops while shorting them at every turn to make a buck for their cronies and themselves. Many of the sheep will claim this is one more in a laundry list of coincidences and does not prove anything.
I’m saying that any reasonable person, thanks in part to their own incompetence, can see that Bush and his corrupt administration have intentionally built into the “War on Terror” ways that they can fleece the American people, undersupply our troops and disregard the wounded, all to make a buck.
Inferior service done by a skeleton crew for a bloated price is an insult to any American.
According to this administration, it’s good enough for our troops.
The “decider” decided to abandon and disregard other people’s children, who fought for this country, in favor of the GOP “Golden Child” privatization, cronyism and greed.

Posted by Andre M. Hernandez at March 7, 2007 10:43 AM
Comments
Comment #210919

Andre…. It would seem that not a day goes by any more that some other outrageous acts by this administration don’t surface. But, the big “BUT” here is, what and when might we make a move to stop it?? Oh I know there are investigations and petitions and challenges taking place regularly all over, and they are serving to add credence to our frustrations and demands for justice. We can’t seem able to get beyond that just yet….though impeachment is what we’d love to see, it isn’t a reality right now. We simply don’t have the votes ! Pelosi is getting lambasted for having taken it “off the table”….but we would only be subjecting ourselves to greater frustration and humiliation by launching a demand to impeach. This is the most disgusted, angered, frustrated and impotent I have felt for a very long time ! What are our alternatives??

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at March 7, 2007 1:10 PM
Comment #210921

This Administration cares for the soldiers, sailors and marines just as long as their masters in mega-business make money from it. It all is about the money, just follow the money and we will know who they realy care for.

I have not heard anyone thanking Rummy for having Walter Reed become the mess it has. Should Duba award Rummy with the Freedom Medal like he did for other incompetant fools?

Posted by: C.T. Rich at March 7, 2007 1:32 PM
Comment #210926

It is not just screw those at Walter Reed, but any VA hospital or Veteran. Bush and company talks a big talk, but they can’t do the walk. Vet’s are getting screwed period.

Posted by: KT at March 7, 2007 2:03 PM
Comment #210936

Andre:

You got it right. Republicans believe in less government. So they privatize as much as possible. They give plums to their buddies. And the horrible results in the Iraq War, the Katrina debacle, and now at Walter Read show how terrible their approach is.

Let’s revive our government by electing a Democratic president who believes in government.

Posted by: Paul Siegel at March 7, 2007 3:39 PM
Comment #210945

Funny, we were just discussing Ayn Rand’s novel Atlas Shrugged at lunch today. Friend was saying, “And you know what, for some people that’s the only book they ever read, and they base their whole life path on it.”

For those who haven’t read, it’s point is, if everyone is out for his or herself, then everything will eventually equal out. Practically a religion in some circles as it vindicates all sorts of selfish behavior.

Posted by: Thomas R at March 7, 2007 4:25 PM
Comment #210954

The mess we’re seeing at Walter Reed and other Military Hospitals has been around a whole heap longer than Bush has been President. Why is it just now coming out? Give ya three guesses and the first two don’t count.

KT

It is not just screw those at Walter Reed, but any VA hospital or Veteran. Bush and company talks a big talk, but they can’t do the walk. Vet’s are getting screwed period.

Again this has been going on for a whole heap longer than Bush has been President. Every administration at least sense Kennedy, and most likely before, is guilty of this.
I served under every President from Johnson to Reagan. Just about every Military Hospital that I ever went to during the 20 years I was in service was in generally bad shape.
And I won’t even go into that farce they call the Veterans Administration.

Posted by: Ron Brown at March 7, 2007 4:57 PM
Comment #210953

Vets have been getting screwed for a very long time. To bad it took this long for it to go public. It’s the fault of both parties, not just rep. or dem. When I was in the service during Nam it was the same way and the DEM’s had control then. The VA. hospitals were really a mess.

Posted by: KAP at March 7, 2007 4:57 PM
Comment #210984

Thanks Andre
This is important stuff. Has the MSM doing anything with it?Important especially as the right wing spin is to show how bad an idea government healthcare is.
Walter Reed is an Army hospital. It is not part of the VA.Most that I’ve talked to have good reports of of VA care. Many have posted here also to that effect.

Posted by: BillS at March 7, 2007 9:24 PM
Comment #210986

Terrific article, Andre! I really wish I had something more to add, but your article really said it all.

Posted by: Adrienne at March 7, 2007 9:42 PM
Comment #210988

BillS
That’s right Walter Reed is an Army Hospital. That means it’s Government. Do you want your local hospital run like that? If not you don’t want the government anywhere near it.
The MSM is running with the story with a passion. and they’re spinning it like it’s something that has just happened sense Bush has been President. When if fact it’s something that’s been going on for a long time.

Posted by: Ron Brown at March 7, 2007 9:45 PM
Comment #211005

Ron Brown
Do you mean that the care of our wounded soldiers was let out to private companies with connections to the vice president before Bush 2?Isn’t that what Andre is talking about?

Posted by: BillS at March 7, 2007 11:04 PM
Comment #211018

I noticed at the web site of the libertarian “reason” (www.reason.com) magazine they seem to be cynically taking advantage of this issue, by writing an article claiming that this proves government can’t provide healthcare and that we should privatize it. I personally find this offensive. If it was true, then it would be different, but this is NOT the result of some general principle that gov’t can’t helps it own troops, but rather the incomprehensible greed and incompetence of this administration. It reminded me of a CEI (competitive enterprise institute) nutjob who said that 9/11 wouldn’t have happened if the trade center used asbestos, so the people who banned it are guilty of it. That turned out to be a lie, and I think both of these situations show how immoral right-wing, market fundamentalist, and Ayn Rand types can be, by trying to take advantage of heinous tragedies in order to falsely “prove” how their ideology is correct.

Posted by: mark at March 8, 2007 3:00 AM
Comment #211040

There is something here re: Walter Reed, that most people are missing, and that is the workers. The word is called pride. If you allow your workplace to become a pigs stie, that is your problem, not the federal gov. They were paid to clean and keep things neat. And it sounds like they did neither. Remember this and our country will be a better place: The best kind of pride is that which compels a person to do his best even if no one is watching.

Posted by: Pineknot at March 8, 2007 11:11 AM
Comment #211060

BillS
I haven’t heard anything about the private sector taking control of Military and VA hospitals. When did this supposedly happen?
I’m talking about the general conditions in Military and VA hospitals. As far back as Johnson conditions from maintenance to treatment of patients has been poor at best. And they really got bad under Carter.
As I wasn’t in service before Johnson was President I can’t say how things were then. But in order for them to get in the conditions I saw it just well could have been going on long before Johnson.
The Presidents that I’ll give the blame for conditions though are, Johnson, Nixon, CARTER, Reagan, Bush 41, Clinton, Bush 43.
Believe it or not but there are a lot of things that the government is doing that the private sector can do better and a whole heap more efficiently. But I reckon if your one of them that thinks government should be involved in every aspect of your life you’ll choose not to believe it.

Posted by: Ron Brown at March 8, 2007 1:15 PM
Comment #211066

Ron Brown,

Here is more information for you to process before deciding if we’re just Bush bashing or not.

From Slate writer Fred Kaplan.

“The Pentagon’s Defense Health Program—which includes the Tricare health-insurance plan, used by 9.1 million veterans and involving 65 inpatient clinics, 414 medical and dental clinics, and 257 veterans centers—has actually had its budget cut the past two years. In fiscal year 2006, the program’s budget for medical care went up from $15.9 billion to $21.2 billion. But since then, it’s gone down slightly—to $20.8 billion in FY 2007 and a proposed $20.7 billion in FY 2008.
These numbers understate the magnitude of the cuts. To keep up with inflation in the cost of goods and payroll, the Defense Department actually had to cut medical-care programs by $1.6 and $1.4 billion in FY07 and FY08, respectively.
Money is similarly tight at the Department of Veterans Affairs. The VA’s budget for medical care has risen in the past few years—from $28.8 billion in FY 2006 to $29.3 billion in FY 2007 to a request for $34.2 billion in FY 2008—but this hasn’t been enough. In each of the past four years, according to a March 1 report by the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, the VA has systematically underestimated the number of veterans applying for benefits in the coming fiscal year. The result is a shortfall of $2.8 billion in the FY08 budget, just to cover the current level of medical services.
The administration is trying to make up for some of this by raising deductibles on prescription drugs (from $8 to $15) and by imposing an annual enrollment fee (ranging from $250 to $750)—in short, by shifting costs to the veterans themselves. (Even so, these charges would make up only $450 million, or about one-sixth of the shortfall.)
Another instance of ignoring the wars: Despite a vast increase in the number of returning soldiers coming to the VA’s veterans centers, the budget for these centers has remained flat. Similarly, despite a vast increase in the number of soldiers filing disability claims, the VA budget includes no money for additional claims processors. To justify the lack of money for trained processors, the VA’s budgeteers assume that the number of new claims—and the backload of past claims—will drop in 2008. This is patently ridiculous: Elsewhere in the budget (see page 1-2), they state, “[W]e project that VA’s patient caseload will peak in 2010” (emphasis added). In other words, they predict a rising caseload for another three years—but cut the money for the caseload this coming year.
An even grander sleight of hand comes in the section of the budget dealing with the “out-years”—FY 2009-12. The VA’s budgeteers are projecting no increases in spending for medical care during that entire four-year period. They can’t possibly believe this. (Again, they note elsewhere that the caseload won’t peak until the middle of this period.) They are engaging in the political game of making the future appear less grim—and the president’s budget more balanced, the need for tax hikes or cuts elsewhere less compelling—than is really the case.
This is a familiar game in peacetime. But it’s a damaging, deceptive game in wartime—for the soldiers who fight the war and for the citizens who are called upon to support and fund it.

Ron, if you support the war and I don’t, who cares. If you support the troops and I support the troops we should push our representatives to look into the privatization of Walter Reed and the problems that has caused and veterans health cuts. It’s not right to screw these folks after what they’ve been through.

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at March 8, 2007 1:47 PM
Comment #211074

Andre
I’m not defending Bush. In fact I blame him for allowing the condition to exist.
The fact is though that these conditions have existed ever sense at least Johnson and maybe further back. Y’all are trying to make out like they didn’t exist until Bush took office. That’s where the Bush bashing comes in.
Blame him all you want for the conditions still existing. I’m right there with ya. But don’t try to make out like they didn’t exist until he took office.
I’m aware of the budget cuts. But that doesn’t excuse the conditions existing before Bush took office. Reckon y’all don’t want to talk about that because it might shed bad light on Billy. Well guess what? He’s responsible for letting the conditions exist under his watch. Just like Bush is for allowing them to exist under his.
I’m pushing for Congress to look into conditions at ALL the Military and VA hospitals. Then actually do something to improve them instead of turning it into another political football at the expense of our fighting forces and veterans.

Posted by: Ron Brown at March 8, 2007 3:02 PM
Comment #211081

Ron Brown-
The neglect of veterans regardless of the time period is wrong. However, you must recognize one important fact: this administration has asked soldiers to sacrifice their lives, their health and their peace of mind for their country, as they have not been asked to do so in well over a generation.

And yet he is not prepared for what is by now the obvious aftermath. It is worse for Bush to fail the soldiers because he both claims to be their best friend, and he’s the Commander in Chief who’s ordered his soldiers into a war where, thanks to medical technology, more Soldiers are surviving to need long term care.

What puzzles me is that there is no downside to resolving this problem besides having to admit that things were bad before. Apparently, though, admitting mistakes is worse than continuing them in his book.

When it comes down to it, Bush is going to get bashed for things like this, because Bush is in charge. If somebody else were president, they’d get the blame. It’s naive to expect that a leader will not be held responsible for what occurs while he’s in office. They certainly found plenty to blame Clinton for. Why should Bush be given a pass by the media when Clinton wasn’t? The Republicans were not forgiving about Clinton, yet they expect the media to be forgiving about Bush. That’s not how it happens. They set precedent with the last president that leaders would be under constant scrutiny, and the Republicans managed to elect the one guy who was least mature in his approach to message control.

I think here’s a little tip for people trying to create absolute message control: don’t. There’s no such thing. What you have instead is a perpetual runaround of spin, denials, non-denial denials, and all the stuff that is just a dead giveaway that you’ve got an interesting story hidden away that people should pursue. You can’t intimidate people in a Democracy out of pursuing the truth.

The best way to defuse criticism in a Democracy is either get things done right the first time, or correct them when they go wrong. Those who don’t correct their mistakes, but lie and spin instead, don’t fool anybody nowadays.

In the end, the best way to fend of criticism is not to merit it with the substance of your actions.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at March 8, 2007 4:44 PM
Comment #211082

Vets will continue to get screwed even after what has been exposed. Even if they, the VA, ramp up benefits for today’s soldiers what happens to those from other eras? They get pushed backed and kicked to the curb. There’s no money. No pot of gold. Vets have been ignored for years and nothing will change.

This is another reason for socialized medicine and that’s a good thing. We all should get the same medical treatment whether we’re the President, a soldier in war or a bum on the street.

Posted by: chuck soda at March 8, 2007 4:57 PM
Comment #211089

IMO, none of that is what Ron is saying Stephen.
IF things like this are going to be fixed, then people have got to realize that it has been an on-going problem and nothing has been done to remedy it.
As Ron said, its a “political football” and people don’t give a damn when the ball is in their hands.

Good try Ron, but I’m sure you know its useless.
They didn’t give a shit about us in the 90’s and they sure as hell won’t give a shit about us in 09 when they take total control and don’t need us anymore.

Posted by: kctim at March 8, 2007 5:06 PM
Comment #211093

And with all these problems at Walter Reed, How many of you STILL want the Federal Government to take over our healthcare? Remember that something that big would probably involve a Haliburton or other giant. Also remember that Walter Reed is located in Washington D.C.. If they can’t monitor it, how can they monitor the rest of the hospitals acrocc the nation?

Posted by: tomd at March 8, 2007 5:24 PM
Comment #211098

If you haven’t been in a Military Hospital or VA Hospital you don’t know what your talking about. Vets have been getting screwed a long time. It’s both DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS who have let these problems go on. Now it’s time for both parties to put up or shut up and fix the system.

Posted by: KAP at March 8, 2007 6:07 PM
Comment #211119

kctim-
It doesn’t matter whether everybody else did it before. Bush is president now. He is putting us through a war now. It would logically follow, at the scale we’re fighting it, that we would see a greater influx of soldiers into the veterans system. Yet he, President at this time, has not decided to do anything about it, besides restrict press access.

Ron doesn’t realize that the argument he’s giving is essentially designed to relieve Bush of any blame. It’s another way of saying it’s Clinton’s problem. However, Bush has gone three-quarters of the way through his administration without tending to this matter, even though we’ve been engaged in military operations for half a decade now. He’s had plenty of time to reverse any unjust decisions Clinton has made, to get this and other parts of the army on a War footing.

He simply hasn’t done it.

The irony of all this is I think practically everybody agrees that this is a problem, and every side could win by taking care of this. It’s fundamentally useless to spread the blame around, since we’re dealing with present conditions under this president, not what anybody else did.

The further irony here is that Walter Reed is not even VA. The problem with the VA isn’t that the care is bad at this time. The VA is actually the best rated health service of any kind in the country. The problem with the VA is getting in.

This is not a problem to be considered historically, but instead in terms of present and future policy. If you want to de-emphasize Bush’s role, fine. But the truth of the matter is, right now, he’s the man who can decide to change this for the better. There’s a chance for him to get something done on a bi-partisan basis, for everybody to unite to show support for the troops, and for Bush to reverse his own neglect of the troops through the last five years of a period that he’s consistently maintained is a time of war.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at March 8, 2007 8:23 PM
Comment #211132

Stephen D
Have you ever been in a Military Hospital or a VA Hospital?

Posted by: KAP at March 8, 2007 9:55 PM
Comment #211139

KAP-
From the link:

Look, the VA has its problems. Because the White House and Congress won’t give it the funding to honor past promises to veterans, it now has to limit new enrollments to vets who have service-related illness or who can meet a strict means test. It’s also having trouble ramping up to meet the needs of the unexpectedly large number of young vets diagnosed with mental illness. But despite these challenges, the fact remains that the VA enjoys the highest rate of consumer satisfaction of any American health care system, public or private.

And outside experts agree that the VA deserves this high rating from its patients. A RAND Corporation study published in the The Annals of Internal Medicine concludes that the VA outperforms all other sectors of American health care in 294 measures of quality. In awarding the VA a top prize in 2006 for innovation in government, Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government gushed that “While the costs of healthcare continue to soar for most Americans, the VA is reducing costs, reducing errors, and becoming the model for what modern health care management and delivery should look like.”

No, I have never been in one, but apparently a lot of people who do like the care that they’ve got better than all the other hospitals in the study. I’m not sure what you consider credible, but this was from a study by the RAND corporation.

Of course, the question may just be whether other hospitals have simply gotten so bad that this is possible, but nonetheless, from what the article says, this is not simply a fluke.

When was the last time you went to one of these hospitals, and how many of them have you visited?

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at March 8, 2007 11:04 PM
Comment #211140

The quote should read like this:

Look, the VA has its problems. Because the White House and Congress won’t give it the funding to honor past promises to veterans, it now has to limit new enrollments to vets who have service-related illness or who can meet a strict means test. It’s also having trouble ramping up to meet the needs of the unexpectedly large number of young vets diagnosed with mental illness. But despite these challenges, the fact remains that the VA enjoys the highest rate of consumer satisfaction of any American health care system, public or private.

And outside experts agree that the VA deserves this high rating from its patients. A RAND Corporation study published in the The Annals of Internal Medicine concludes that the VA outperforms all other sectors of American health care in 294 measures of quality. In awarding the VA a top prize in 2006 for innovation in government, Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government gushed that “While the costs of healthcare continue to soar for most Americans, the VA is reducing costs, reducing errors, and becoming the model for what modern health care management and delivery should look like.”
Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at March 8, 2007 11:06 PM
Comment #211145

tomd. Why would you blame the Feds for not monitoring itstead of the company that contracted to do the work? Should just a tiny bit of responsibility be put on the corporations that take the money and run?

Posted by: j2t2 at March 8, 2007 11:32 PM
Comment #211152

“tomd. Why would you blame the Feds for not monitoring itstead of the company that contracted to do the work? Should just a tiny bit of responsibility be put on the corporations that take the money and run?”

For the same reason that the Feds are blamed for Walter Reed.

I think this shows on a miniature scale what kind of service we could expect from a national health care system. Is this what we want?

Posted by: tomd at March 9, 2007 3:12 AM
Comment #211162

Stephen
Neither myself nor Ron are trying to “relieve” Bush of any responsibility. And passing our experiences with the matter off as being nothing but partisan in nature, does nothing to fix this long running problem.
You are correct, Bush is President and now it is his duty to fix it. But anything he does will be for nothing if the following administrations do nothing.

You are looking for a scapegoat. Bush is a Republican. And blaming him for all of these troubles gives your party a political advantage. But that does not fix the problem.

The only way to fix this, is for everybody to quit acting like this is something new, quit blaming the “other side” and to work together so that we can take care of those who have served their country with honor.

Posted by: kctim at March 9, 2007 9:25 AM
Comment #211190

kctim and Ron,

The privatization of Walter Reed is Bush and the Pentagon’s fault. Putting ex Haliburton cronies in charge is Bush’s fault.
Cutting funding for veterans during a war is the fault of the commander in chief who is in command during said war.
Where in my post does it say Bush is responsible for all the veterans woes?
I specifically assign blame for the events this administration is responsible for.

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at March 9, 2007 12:34 PM
Comment #211192

kctim-
Of course the administrations that follow should do something. It’s not a partisan concern.

It’s not partisan to hold only certain people responsible when those certain people have authority over the situation and others do not. If this was a Democratic president, it’d be the same situation. It’s no good to spread the blame when we’re dealing with current actions that fall under the authority of only a select group of people.

As for political advantage? To be quite blunt, that’s how the system is supposed to work. If Bush doesn’t want to give up more political advantage, it’s up to him to do something positive here, rather than cover his butt.

Problems like this will not be fixed when the politicians know they won’t be held accountable. As long as Bush thinks the problem will go away eventually, he’ll do nothing about it. That’s been his pattern of behavior every other time. He didn’t even begin to drop “stay the course” until it became apparent that most Americans had lost patience.

People have every right to defend politicians when they think they’re getting a raw deal. However, we have to be careful the extent to which we defend these people, because apologizing for their actions excessively will remove any motivation for them to reform those actions.

In this case, I think we can both agree, despite our differing opinions about the matter, that Bush needs to take care of this problem. I think Democrats, Republicans, and independents should set aside their differences and call as one for a change in policy. Regardless of who you are, real support for our soldiers means paying back these people for what they’ve done for us.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at March 9, 2007 12:36 PM
Comment #211226

Stephen D.
14 yrs Navy. The last time I was in a Military Hospital was in 1979. They weren’t very good then. One time I dislocated my left thumb and they put me in a cast to my elbow, why to this day I can’t figure that out. One other time I sliced my thumd in a paper shear I got the real run around on that one. The VA Hospitals, the one in my home town was in the news shortly after I got out of the service for being a real dump. So this is a partisian thing. The conditions in Military Hospitals has been around a long time. By the way if you haven’t experienced a Military Medical facilities or VA DON”T RELLIY ON THE MEDIA>

Posted by: KAP at March 9, 2007 4:47 PM
Comment #211367

Stephen
Why is is worse for Bush to neglect our soldiers and veteran than is was for Johnson? Didn’t he ask them to put their lives on the line for their country?
If you’d of read my post you’d know I’m not giving Bush a pass on any of this. Like you said, he is the Commander in Chief. And he is the President. As such he bares the ultimate responsibility for the conditions at Walter Reed and every other Military hospital. As well as the VA hospitals. And for him to let these conditions to exist and maybe even worsen shows a lack of respect for the folks that are putting and have put their lives on the line for this country.
Your right it was Clinton’s problem. And now it’s Bush’s. And both have dropped the ball. But the problem has existed longer than either of them have been President. The Presidents before them dropped the ball too.
I blame Johnson, Nixon, CARTER, Reagan, Bush 41, Clinton, and Bush 43. They all have had a hand in this. And they all deserve blame.
Bush is the man that needs to get thew ball rolling on improving conditions at Military and VA Hospitals. And if he doesn’t the he deserves any criticism that comes his way.
I notice that now of y’all have mentioned that it’s Bush’s new Secretary of the Army that has brought this to light. Now if Bush will act on it or not is the question.
If Bush does start making the improvements need the next administration needs to keep the the ball rolling. If he doesn’t then the next administration needs to start making them as soon as it takes office.
BTW, You haven’t answered KAP’s question. Have you ever been in a Military or VA hospital?

kctim

Good try Ron, but I’m sure you know its useless.
They didn’t give a shit about us in the 90’s and they sure as hell won’t give a shit about us in 09 when they take total control and don’t need us anymore.

Unfortunately your right. And I wounder how much they give a shit now. Except for the political mileage they’re getting form it.

Andre
Nobodies answered my question. When was Walter Reed privatized? If y’all can’t answer that then why bring up a false accusation.

KAP
Thank you for your service to our great country. There are those that truly appreciate it even if the politicians don’t.

Posted by: Ron Brown at March 10, 2007 5:14 PM
Comment #211396

Ron Brown
Thank you

Posted by: KAP at March 10, 2007 8:19 PM
Comment #211537

Walter Reed was privatized a couple of years ago. IAP took over after the Army finding in 2004 that keeping medical care “in- house” would be more cost effective.
IAP is run by two ex-Haliburton executives. Cheney’s ex-company.
Most of the discussion recently is about the Army receiving pressure from the White House Office of Management and Budget to privatize.
IAP received $120 million dollars to improve conditions that were already bad in 2004. Instead they cut staff, ignored the conditions of the facility and pumped money into the pockets of their buddies. Sound familiar?
If you want you could check Boston Globe article.
Airforcetimes.com
Washington Post
Post Standard and most news outlets other than FOX news

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at March 12, 2007 10:02 AM
Comment #211549

Andre
OK, you answered my question. I hadn’t heard about Walter Reed being privatized. That’s why I was asking.
It sounds to me like it’s time to pull IAP’s contract for breach of contract. Don’t know why they privatized in the first place. All that’s needed to improve conditions at Military and VA hospitals it to keep firing the Big S—- In Charge until they find one that will do the job right. And it wouldn’t take very many times firing the BSICs until that happened.
I can’t say for sure on the civil service side (VA Hospitals), but with the military 99% of the time when a officer is relieved of command for any reason other than taking another assignment their military career is over. The best thing they can do is resign their commission. They can stay in but they’re usually given the BS assignments and are pasted over for promotions. And after three time being passed over they’re forced out. Not very many officers, specially career officers, want that on their military record or resume.
It seems that when the government is involved with contracts that the taxpayers are the ones that get the shaft. And this looks like more of the same.

Posted by: Ron Brown at March 12, 2007 12:41 PM
Comment #211568

Ron,

“It seems that when the government is involved with contracts that the taxpayers are the ones that get the shaft. And this looks like more of the same.”

“The government?” See this is why we can be dragged into a war based on faulty intel or invented hostilities, price gouged by large corporate entities and denied our rights. Instead of holding specific members of our government who are responsible for wrongdoing accountable, some of us coin the generic “our government” shield for them to step behind and hide.
The first time an American said our government is comprised of thieves, the corrupt and lazy and did nothing to change it, members realized that the expectations are low and they can, over time continue to lower them. Our government is failing us, you are correct, but until we hold them accountable for their individual screw-ups, we will continue to have a screwed-up government as a whole.
Duke Cunningham busted for corruption. William Jefferson doesn’t. Why not? Why are the Democrats ignoring a corrupt individual in their party while using the “Dukester” to obtain their power?
We have allowed both parties to set the bar so low, we just sit back and take it.
Newt Gingrich was cheating on his wife while he’s chasing down the Monika Lewinski story.
Clinton lied to a grand jury, he’s loved. Cheny didn’t testify in front of one and the world has already convicted him.
The Bush administration is responsible for Walter Reed, not our government. Clinton is responsible for his failures. We need to hold all of them accountable, individually and as a whole.

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at March 12, 2007 1:55 PM
Comment #211612

Andre
Yes! The government. It’s not just the President or Congress that awards contracts. Bureaucrats award contracts too.
Everyone involved in corruption from the President right down to lowest civil employee needs to be held accountable.
But most of all our elected officials need to be held accountable. And that goes for anyone that’s elected to office regardless of party affiliation or lack of it. None of them have a handle on corruption, or is more corrupt or less corrupt than other.

Posted by: Ron Brown at March 12, 2007 4:51 PM
Post a comment