Two generals sat next to each other at yesterday's Congressional hearings on the Walter Reed problems. Both are physicians. Both have experience commanding Walter Reed since the beginning of combat in Iraq. There, the similarities end. One of them stood tall and accepted responsibility, even though the committee gave him every opportunity to blame others. The other blamed the situation on the failures of subordinates. One of them talked only to the Congressional subcommittee. The other, when given the opportunity, turned away from the committee, looked the troops who had suffered as a result of the failures in the eye, and apologized. One of the two, in short, acted exactly as a general officer is expected to behave, while the other acted exactly as we have come to expect from Bush Administration officials.
One of the two has been relieved of command. The other, at least for the moment, is still in a position of authority. Guess which one.
- Log in to post comments
As a veteran, a daughter of veterans, and a US citizen, I was appalled when I read the other day that Weightman had been relieved of duty to be replaced by Kiley -- the very person under whose command the problems at Walter Reed festered until Weightman replaced him just last year.
"I am not accountable"!?!?!? Did this guy bunk with GWB or something?