Eugene Kane asks "Where is the 'Support Our Troops' crowd on this story?":

I've always suspected the "Support Our Troops" crowd didn't care as much about young men and women serving in Iraq as they did about staking out political territory in regard to the war in Iraq.

The confirmation is the current Washington Post investigation about poor conditions for wounded Iraq veterans at Walter Reed hospital in Washington D.C.

The series has spotlighted the sub-standard care and living conditions for Iraq veterans and others who have returned to the US after risking live and often suffering debilitating injuries in service of their country.
Even though many of them live a stone's throw from the White House, the Bush administration has apparently dropped the ball on the post-war treatment of American soldiers.

It's awful, and shouldn't be allowed to continue.  Things need to change at that facility to rectify this problem immediately.  Duh.  But what I find fascinating is that the same people who spotlight these stories in government run facilities think the solution to our health care problems is to have more government run facilities... Eugene Kane top among them.

Why is it that people think that the solution to government incompetence is always to increase the amount of government?  Shouldn't we see this as a canary in the coal mine of Universal Health Care?  If the government can't even get it's act together to care for our wounded soldiers who have fought bravely for our country, what are the chances that it will do anywhere near as good of a job caring for us?

I can't think of a better case for decreasing government regulation in health insurance, and privatizing more of it.