The lead editorial in today\’s New York Times is about the enormous – and still growing – Veterans Affairs scandal.
To the Times\’ credit, most of what is written makes plenty of sense. It is only when blame is to be assigned that the Times goes into ideological idiocy mode – a mode the Times editorial board is all too familiar with.
Two passages particularly my eye. Here\’s one of them:
…the buck stops with Mr. Obama, who pledged to build a “21st-centuryV.A.” The White House says that while participation in theveterans\’ health system has jumped 16 percent since 2008, the hugebacklog of cases has, in fact, been reduced. Even so, Mr. Obama\’sRepublican adversaries now have fresh ammunition to use inquestioning his management skills, and even some Democrats, such asSenator Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat of Connecticut, have declaredthemselves “fed up and impatient.”
Why does the Times editorial board believe this administration when it says the backlog of cases has been reduced? Why would the Times editorial board, or anyone else, ever believe a word from this administration without hard data to back it up? How many times do these people have to lie to us for some people to accept the fact that they lie, continuously, about countless issues both big and small?
Why does the Times editorial board then immediately turn it into a political issue, rather than an issue of veterans being screwed royally through corruption and incompetence? There would be no political issue here if this had not happened, and if someone, somewhere, took some kind of responsibility for it. Maybe, just maybe, that is the real problem.
And, on that subject, why is there incredulity that “even some Democrats” are speaking out about this? These are our brave servicepeople, the ones who defend our country. Does the New York Times editorial board think that being a Democrat equates to not giving a damn about military veterans? Scarily, that just might be the case.
And what about this information, which was excerpted from Mark Flatten\’s article at washingtonexaminer.com – which has been out for a week, thus easily available to the Times editorial board:
WhenShinseki took office, he vowed that every disability claim would beprocessed within 125 days with 98 percent accuracy. But the backlogsonly got worse.
Ittook about four months for VA to process a claim for disabilitycompensation claim when Shinseki was sworn in. By 2012, the averagewait time was about nine months.
InFebruary 2013, the Examinerpublished a five-partseries, “Making America\’s Heroes Wait,” showing morethan 1.1 million veterans with disability claims and appeals weretrapped in bureaucratic limbo at VA.
About70 percent of the 900,000 claims for initial benefits were consideredbacklogged, meaning they were older than 125 days.
TheExaminerseries also showed how agency statistics were manipulated to hidemistakes that doomed veterans into appeals that could drag on foryears.
Not only has the article has been out there for a week, but the five-part series it references was published over a year ago. How could the Times editorial board not know about it? Do its members think this information does not count?
Then we have the final paragraph:
Someveterans groups and Republicans who sense another campaign issue arenow calling for the resignation of Eric Shinseki, the former generalwho has led the veterans affairs department for five years. Mr.Shinseki\’s future will depend heavily on whether he can respond tothis crisis with decisive action.
Incredible. Again, the Times editorial board members show their indifference to the plight of returning veterans. To them, this is nothing but a political football.
And the comment about Shinseki\’s future depending on whether he can respond to this crisis with decisive action? Who the hell do these people think was running Veterans Affairs for the past 5 years when this crisis festered and grew? Roger Rabbit?
While I have the greatest respect for Gen. Shinseki\’s performance as a military man, there is no way to get around the fact that he has been a disaster as Secretary of Veterans Affairs. This scandal, these horrific tragedies, the dead veterans who never got care, the countless others who have been scammed out of proper care by a combination of corruption and incompetence, are on his watch.
Eric Shinseki should already have been told to either resign or he would be fired on the spot. It is a disgrace that it has not happened yet….and another major stain on this woefully inept, incompetent administration.
When does the New York Times editorial board write about that? Or are they too busy constructing the next chapter of Barack Obama\’s hagiography to be bothered?
