Walter Reed - A Casualty of the Political War

The emerging scandal surrounding the deteriorating level of care for wounded vets at Walter Reed Army Medical Center is a serious one, and one which even now seems not to be garnering the level of press attention it deserves. The reason for this, I'm convinced, is the heightened hyperbole of the political debate, and the cries of "Wolf!" coming from the left, and the smug, blind arrogance on the right.

Specifically, the left has been making charges against the Army's logistical, financial, and materiel support (this time around) since 2002. Not enough pay, not enough armor, not enough medical support. Some of them have been important and valid criticisms. Many (especially more recently) have been flatly ridiculous. But because the universal conclusion of these bomb throwers was, "So that means we shouldn't fight terrorists at all - run away!" the complaints were ignored for what in many cases they really were - an attempt to be anti-war and anti-military without sounding anti-war or anti-troop. Most telling was that almost none of them couched their critiques in terms of how to better improve the fighting efficiency and efficacy of the Army - They were nothing more than calls for pre-emptive American surrender. As a result, no one who took seriously America's crucial role in battling tyranny, fascism, and Islamo-terrorism world wide took any of the complaints seriously - even when they deserved to be soberly addressed.

Usually, I don't mind "partisanship" or "politicization." I usually consider those synonyms for "standing firm on principle" and "robust debate and democracy." But this is a case where the line has been crossed, and the team sport mentality causes substantial harm to those we can least afford to hurt - the volunteer bulwarks of freedom.

The absurdity of many of the left's complaints allowed the right - who "knew" that their status as the only serious party when it came to national security was secure - to ignore ALL the complaints. The were entrenched in power - why should they bother with introspection? Why should they give any ammunition to their political enemies, who they (not incorrectly) feared would only use it to further undermine the American war effort?

And so it was that the conditions at Walter Reed continued to deteriorate, American heroes were left to fight through the red tape of the world's largest HMO on their own, and those who have sacrificed for our freedom were given lip service instead of real help.

I'm glad that heads have rolled at the highest level. I'm glad that the Bush administration has begun taking action to remedy the situation. I hope that the Republicans have gulped enough humble pie to take the time to sort the serious complaints from the chaff thrown up by pacifist appeasers of tyranny. And I hope that Democrats, now under the weight of leadership, will tamp down the shrill and the dishonest, so they can better serve the American military.

But I'm not going to hold my breath. Thanks be to the bloggers and the few reporters who wouldn't let this problem simply melt into the roar of partisanship.

Homeless Vet Stories - Grains of Salt Required

Just after the 4th of July, this story about homeless Iraq/GWOT veterans appeared in the local paper. Y'know, just in case we were feeling too good about our country after our nation's birthday.

It's frustrating to read articles like this, because it's clear that the journalist (a) has no military experience, (b) fully expects that this is par for the course in the military, and (c) wants to further develop the idea that military people are victims who have no responsibility for anything that happens in their lives - and are, in fact, completely incompetent to exert responsibility even if they wanted to.

A more competent reporter would have asked questions like, "What does your Platoon Leader/Commanding Officer/Sergeant think about your situation? What about the Commanding Officer of the Reserve Center you drill with? What about the VA? The Navy/Marine Corps Relief Society? Your Congressman?" And then the competent reporter would have had the courtesy to actually call a military official in the know and ask them about what services they do and do not provide.

The military has never in the history of the nation been better about taking care of soldiers returning home from service than it is today. Destitute World War I soldiers marched on Washington, setting up camp to demand promised benefits they literally needed to survive. For their efforts, they were shot at, first by police, and then attacked by military forces. WWII vets were treated better, but in a time where mental illness and PTSD were seen as merely being weak, plenty of them failed to successfully reintegrate into society without anyone saying the war effort was wrong. Vietnam vets, despite the false popular image of them as depressed, drug addled failures torn by guilt over acting like "Jen-jis Kahn," have fared as well or better than the general population. Since then, programs and services, both public and private, have only gotten better.

We as a nation have gotten and continue to get better in the way we treat vets, and that's a good thing. But we need to take some care to be honest about what the problems actually are, and what we should expect of people when it comes to expending a little effort to ensure they get the benefits they deserve.

I spent two years working at a Naval Reserve Center before I started law school in 2004, the last six months of which was as the Commanding Officer. I can assure anyone that plenty of services are available to people who are having a hard time transitioning. There are dozens of people to whom demobilizing vets can turn if they are having a difficult time accessing those services. Here's an example.

One of my people, a senior enlisted sailor who frankly should have known better, was mobilized for a period of time in 2003. He was a cop in his civilian life. Just before he demobilized, he injured his ankle. During the demobilization process, the record of his injury didn't get from the active duty command he was supporting to the Naval Reserve folks processing him out, and he didn't bother to tell them he had hurt himself - he just assumed they knew or would find out eventually. He didn't inform his reserve unit or my own medical staff that he had any issues.

Instead, he showed up for work and told them he couldn't do his job, and applied for medical bennies through his civilian employer. His claim was denied, because they rightly told him that the Navy needed to pay for that care. Still, he never informed us of the problem, apparently assuming we were just handling it. I didn't find out about it until he came in nearly a month later asking me to sign a letter so he could get food stamps. One phone call to any one of half a dozen people at any point in that last month would have gotten him the care he needed, and he could have easily avoided the financial situation he found himself in. That's not too much to ask of anyone, veteran or not. The US Military and the VA are enormous and inefficient bureaucracies (often made larger and usually more cumbersome when well meaning politicians try to "support the troops").

As soon as we did find out, we dropped everything to get him what he needed, which by then was harder because of the time that had lapsed. Of course, that didn't stop him from going to a town hall meeting with one of our Senators and telling his tale of woe about how the country he served wasn't serving him, which was then dutifully picked up by the local media. I never did see a follow up story when he got the care he needed, although if there had been, the media surely would have taken credit for it, falsely assuming it wouldn't have happened without them.

Our veneration for veterans in this country, while proper, sometimes spills over to sacred cow status, which is improper. Conservatives are often the worst about this, frankly.

Veterans are well trained and well educated adult Americans who, while they deserve to be treated respectfully and well and shouldn't have to jump through 5 million hoops to obtain promised benefits, also have a responsibility to, at the very least, keep their chain of command informed about issues that they might have. They also have a responsibility not to marry their girlfriend of 2 months just prior to deployment, or worse, give them a durable power of attorney and access to all of their bank accounts. They have a responsibility to actively look for a job upon return, and contact their VA, VFW, or USERRA rep if they're having a difficult time getting work or if their employer violates federal law by not rehiring them. They have a responsibility not to do drugs.

It's never perfect and often frustrating. Pay issues do happen, and can be crippling. National Guard and Reserve forces are much worse about ensuring a smooth transition home than the active duty side, although it is a HUGE focus of the senior leadership of all the services now. Mental health issues are still inadequately addressed.

But I will go out on a limb and say that no veteran is actually homeless without a significant pattern of poor choices on behalf of the veteran him or herself.

I would be curious to see how many of those homeless vets were kicked out when the military got tough on drugs in the service. I'd be curious to know how veteran status is verified by the keepers of those statistics. Every roadside panhandler claims to be a vet because it increases the sympathy factor and generates more cash - I hope they aren't simply taken at their word.

Sometimes our vets are not treated as well as they deserve to be by the Nation that they served. But it's the rare exception, not the rule. And when it does happen, it takes more than that to lead to homelessness. The stories that appear in local, liberal media are quite simply not telling the story of these people completely or accurately.

Seattle P-I Wrong on Pappy

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer has an editorial excusing the UW Student Senate on the whole COL Boyington memorial flap. Bizarrely, they condescendingly and incorrectly claim that the memorial was shot down because it wasn't honorific enough of enough different veterans. But this is exactly the opposite of what the minutes of that meeting made clear was at issue. Sloppy journalism at best.

Hilariously, the paper also gives credit to these students for a more "inclusive" memorial that is now being supported, as if that would have happened without the entire nation shaming them into it.

Shameful. The statue was opposed not because the students wanted more, but because they wanted less. The P-I snidely looks down their nose at the bloggers while giving these students a pass for making overtly insulting comments to military members. Typically, they excuse the comments saying "asking a question is always fair."

This is as untrue as "There are no such thing as stupid questions." Because the P-I shares an ideology with the anti-memorial, anti-military students, they took the "senators" backpedaling explanations on pure faith without ANY skepticism or question.

The P-I does no favors to these students' civics education by implying that legitimate criticism for their public comments is somehow out of bounds, or by reinforcing their re-write of what was actually said at the meeting. They also do no favors to their own credibility.

Non Fidelis at UW

I'm so ashamed of my school right now. The student senate has voted not to support even the idea of honoring WWII Congressional Medal of Honor winner Gregory "Pappy" Boyington because we shouldn't honor people who kill. Apparently, even if those people killed were literally fascists who were attempting actual global imperialism.

The award for the Most Asinine Hippy Statement of the Month goes to "Senator" Jill Edwards, representing the Honors Croquet League, who said that she didn't think "a member of the Marine Corps was an example of the sort of person UW wanted to produce." This profoundly disrespectful statement for military people in general is disgusting. Are we really going to go back to spitting on the troops? Does Miss Edwards really think the world would be a better place had we not had US Marines in WWII? Certainly this goes beyond disagreement about the Iraq War.

The University itself brags about the distinguished Marine on their official alumni page. I wonder how proud the author of that article is about his alma mater now. More importantly, I wonder how much money they'll be willing to give to the school in the future. I hope President Emmert is taking notice.

Of course, this whole hoopla may wind up helping the school recognize COL Boyington. I wouldn't have known about the effort. If I find a way to donate to the effort, I'll post it here.

Read the full minutes of the Student Senate session here. Contact Miss Edwards here.

Veterans Day and Local Heros

Here's an inspiring story about a Tumwater man who was the youngest Navy recipient of the Medal of Honor in WWII who recently passed away. I, for one, am proud and humbled to be part of his tradition in a small way.

Don't forget to thank a vet for this day off!