Freindly Fire: Walter Reed Fiasco: The Final Nail In Bush's Legacy

[babylonsister]

http://www.thebulletin.us/site/news.cfm?newsid=18054456&BRD=2737&PAG=461&dept_id=576361&rfi=6

Freindly Fire: Walter Reed Fiasco: The Final Nail In Bush's Legacy
By: Chris Freind, The Bulletin
03/08/2007

snip//

Just when you thought that the Bush administration had exhausted itself of all of incomprehensible actions, and that its leaders couldn't get any more incompetent, along comes the Walter Reed fiasco.
Whether the president is operating in his own insular world, or whether his advisors are too scared or too inept to properly counsel him, the result has the same damning effect on the administration's credibility.

It is one thing to make the decision to go to war and then to prosecute said war in a wildly inefficient, ineffective and bumbling manner. A war, mind you, with no stated definition of victory and no clear objectives for how to achieve "democracy," let alone how to deal with a strengthening insurgency and impending civil war.

What makes this a mortal sin is the fact that this country failed to provide the best facilities in the world to the men and women who sacrificed everything to do their incredibly difficult job. How could the president not make absolutely sure that our military hospitals were in top working order? How could the generals he commanded not provide everything that these facilities needed, immediately and without red tape? Whether it was additional equipment, technology or personnel, places like Walter Reed should have been free of any and all bureaucracy and budget issues, without exception.
It is the least we could have done for our troops, and the least that they should have expected in case of injury.

The fallout is that an unpopular war just lost one of the last remaining segments of support. The president's governing effectiveness, already marginalized because of his lame-duck status and an opposition Congress, was reduced to near nil. The Democrats gained more ammunition in their quest to retake the White House and strengthen their control of Congress, and that much of the world mocks America again for its arrogance in telling others how to live, yet can't seem to take care of its own people, especially its soldiers.

The president's legacy - and, to a large extent, that of his father's - will continue to take a tremendous hit, with no foreseeable manner in which to reverse that trend. It is said that history looks upon leaders more kindly as time passes.

In this case, it may be a long wait.

[Demeter]

1. Ah, No, Sorry! The LAST Nail Will Be Driven in the Hague

and then the Bush legacy will be fixed for all time. If Poppy's still around, maybe we can get a twofer.

[Felix Mala]

3. With 22 months left and no end to his ability to screw things up...

we'll probably be at war with Mexico, Canada, and or Europe...

What if visitors from another planet visited us and he was all they learned about us? "...I'm glad Squiddy and Drooly could travel several million live years to see us... light years... Do light years have less calories and fat?"

They'd be removing earth for that inter-galactic expressway in no time...

[AndyTiedye]

6. Here Are Illustrations to Go With That Thought

[tanyev]

2. Anyone who thinks that the Bush administration has exhausted all of its incomprehensible actions

has a few surprises coming. I have full confidence that we are in for many more horror stories between now and 1/20/09 or Impeachment Day, whichever comes first.

[Felix Mala]

4. Sum of all fears... he gets to name another SC nominee, during an election

to pander to the right and get them all excited...

[Ress1]

5. However,

we control both Houses this time.

[POAS]

7. "Control" may be too strong a word.

Well at least we can get committee hearings now! Whether or not it leads to meaningful legislation making it into law is another matter.

[pnorman]

8. This is an extremely "conservative" publication.

FAR-RIGHT wouldn't be stretching it. But that title,"Freindly Fire", although obviously a word-play on the writer's name, is an apt title for that article.

Here's an observation from a PRE-Sixties "leftist", and currently a Chomsky "leftist": It doesn't matter all that much, HOW 'outrageously' contrary to your beliefs, another person or publication may be. The ONLY thing that really matters is how much HONESTY & INTEGRITY there is at that end, and whether or not free discussion is permitted. In the Marketplace of Ideas, I'm also an admirer of Adam Smith (as is Noam Chomsky).

Another observation, although not necessarily linked to the above article: The "Right" is frequently prating on about how "honest" leftists ultimately turn rightwards. Perhaps, but when they go from an uncertain and frequently dangerous position, to one where David Horowitz for example now occupies, certain questions linger in the air ("Follow The $$$$$!"). But with far greater satisfaction, we can look at those who go AGAINST that $$$$$ flow, and progress leftwards --- those such as James Webb, Kevin Phillips, or even John Dean. Bob Barr, fercrissakes, is now a consultant for the ACLU! And I've quoted Barry Goldwater on occasions, to the consternation of Bush-lovers.

pnorman