Was it a purely political decision not to seek more funds from Congress, because that might have raised alarms, concerning the war, among the voting public?
2007-03-05 11:17:34 · 13 answers · asked by GeauxJoe 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Well one of my high school teachers, who was trying to deal with my self esteem issues, told me it was 122. How about you?
2007-03-05 11:21:41 · update #1
I really find you people who are going to attempt to stick to your political philosophy, even in the face of this disgrace, offensive.
Supporting the troops means just that. It doesn't mean support them as long as their support fits into my philosophy. The fact is that conditions at Walter Reed are due to privatization. You owe it to the troops to do some research, with an open mind, and be completely honest.
http://www.unbossed.com/index.php?itemid=1354
2007-03-05 11:26:17 · update #2
Ross, No offense, but all I can tell you is that you're naive and have very little understanding of politics. Or maybe you are not at all naive and understand politics very well, but refuse to give up your philosophy, no matter what. Which is it?
2007-03-05 11:34:19 · update #3
It's interesting that Trent Lott didn't suggest that Walter Reed be taken off the closure list until it wasn't needed any longer.
2007-03-05 11:55:30 · update #4
Talk to a Vietnam veteran about how well the government takes care of the men and women who defend the country. I think you'll get your answer.
FP
2007-03-05 11:20:43 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
It boggles my mind when people try to turn this into a Rep. or Dem. debate. The Department of Defense will ask for a certain amount of money, congress either approves it or denies it. That's as far as political party is involved. Once DOD gets their hands on the money it's up to them how it's spent. It is strictly the Defense departments fault. And other medical facilities are no better. Military medical is a joke. You could walk in with a broken leg, and all you'd get is a light duty chit and some motrin, and that's if you're lucky.
2007-03-05 11:26:41 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
No its a result of all the budget cuts by your boy Bill Clinton. Most VA hospitals are not very good.
I do believe that this is a very good example of when the government controls something....it stinks. Name one thing that the government can run better than the private sector. This is EXACTLY why we cannot have govt controlled healthcare. If it would happen, all hospitals would be underfunded and understaffed.
2007-03-05 11:24:37 · answer #3 · answered by Johnny Conservative 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I know that you would love for the conditions at Walter Reed to be the result of the Bush Administration, but conditions there have been deteriorating for a while and were made worse by the military cuts made by the Carter and Clinton Administrations.
2007-03-05 11:21:06 · answer #4 · answered by Skyhawk 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
It is a fallout of the Republican Administration and their total lack of competency!
To make matters worst, and what hasn't hit the papers in the wake of this, George Bush cut VA Hospitals by 100 Billion in 2006 and has another cut for them in his current budget even though there are 32,000 wounded! He has, or had, 2 tax cuts for the rich in both budgets!
The Republicans had to have the jobs outsourced to private contracters and look at the mess they have made! Not only here, but in Iraq as well!
Par for the course, just look at Iraq! You know what Bush's current back-up plan if his current one doesn't work in Iraq? He doesn't have one! That was in the NY Times today!
2007-03-05 11:34:42 · answer #5 · answered by cantcu 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The Stay the Course policy has probably contributed to the overload of injured patients they are trying to serve but it is fair to say government and military red tape and bureaucracy is behind these very serious condition at the hospital.
2007-03-05 11:48:22 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
............the vets needed correct,timely medical care and a bureaucracy with drive to attain results.those who have medical knowledge about mold and how it affects human biology(american academy of environmental medicine) should have been 'enlisted" to treat the vets,how many of us have 13yr old nieces & nephews who could have done a better job of clean up,.the problem was "purely" a matter of neglect
2007-03-05 11:36:12 · answer #7 · answered by quackpotwatcher 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No the funding has historically been cut year after year.......Congress doesn't like to spend money on Heros.
2007-03-05 11:20:17 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
I guess that's nice for political rhetoric, but I believe everybody thinks it is bureaucratic mismanagement.
2007-03-05 11:21:52 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
we can't even repair New Orleans. I feel sorry for the injured vets. The Iraq war is bankrupting the government
2007-03-05 11:20:48 · answer #10 · answered by Samantha 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋