Levin: Last Congress Didn’t Investigate Walter Reed Because ‘They Did Not Want To Embarrass’ Bush

[Rose Siding]

On NBC’s Meet the Press today, Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) argued that the Senate Armed Services Committee did not conduct oversight of the treatment at military facilities in recent years because “they did not want to embarrass the President.” As the new chairman of the committee, Levin said he will be visiting Walter Reed this week and holding a hearing on March 6.

Levin decried the deplorable conditions at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center. “Where we need a surge is not in Iraq. We need a surge of concern for our troops, for the veterans, for the injured, for the wounded, for the families of those who have lost loved ones. That’s the surge of concern and that’s the surge that we need,” Levin said. Watch it:

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/02/25/levin-walter-reed/

and from Newsweeks cover story:

But veterans' support groups and even some former and current VA insiders believe there's a reluctance in the Bush administration to deal openly with the long-term costs of the war. (All told, Bilmes projects it could cost as much as $600 billion to care for GWOT veterans over the course of their lifetimes.) That reluctance, they say, trickles down to the VA, where top managers are politically appointed. Secretary Jim Nicholson, a decorated Vietnam War veteran who was chosen by Bush in 2005, tends to be the focus of this criticism.

The senior VA manager who did not want to be named criticizing superiors told NEWSWEEK: "He's a political appointee and he needs to respond to the White House's direction." Steve Robinson of Veterans for America levels the accusation more directly. "Why doesn't the VA have a projection of casualties for the wars? Because it would be a political bombshell for Nicholson to estimate so many casualties."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17316437/site/newsweek/page/5/

[lazer47]

1. You dont understand the term casualities

Casualities are never deemed wounded,,, that is why they never plan on wounded only on deceased.

[proud2BlibKansan]

2. K&R

The bastards.

[Turbineguy]

3. I thinkCongress should field

a bill to authorize the real cost of the Iraq war. Something on the order of say, $800 billion. Then the rethugs can stop it and be accused of not funding the troops.

[angstlessk]

4. Remember before the war they said we would bulldoze the dead

in Iraq...well seems they have bulldozed the injured instead!..Burried under the rubble of VA hosptials!

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. Note to self

WRAH is not a VA hosptial, and it falls under the purview of... drum roll, the Department of Defense

but I am sure you knew that, and yes keepting to the facts IS critical.

After all if they are not willign to fund ARMY hospitals, what else are they NOT funding?

[City Lights]

5. Who cares how Baby Bush feels?

He needs to be embarrassed up, down, and sideways. :grr:

I'm sick to death of the Republics covering for him. :mad:

[lpbk2713]

6. Millions of Americans are embarassed to have this POS as Prez.

So shouldn't that make a difference? :shrug:

[Atman]

8. Did you love how Russert said it was HIS COMMITTEE that didn't investigate?

As if Levin has been running the show for the last six years. At least Carl jumped on that one quickly.

.

[ginnyinWI]

9. I also liked his answer to "why not cut the funding if you are against the war",

which every repub who gets in front of a mic keeps saying. He said that 1) it is morally wrong to fail to support the troops in the field and 2) it would fail easily, and then Bush would say that the Congress supports the war.

And then every other repub out there would have a baseball bat to hit every Dem with politically.

[Olney Blue]

10. They supported Bush, the GOP, and themselves. Troops didn't matter.....