Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

The other **loving** statement Barbara Bush made in 2003

Posted By: gt on 2005-09-05
In Reply to:

Ignorant fool that she is.


Why should we hear about body bags and deaths, Barbara Bush said on ABC's Good Morning America on March 18, 2003. Oh, I mean, it's not relevant. So why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that?




Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

here is the audio from barbara bush's insane statement

Barbara Bush-Audio


via Atrios And so many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway so this (she chuckled)--this is working very well for them....read on 


                                                                Audio-MP3


What's sad is that she doesn't even realize how insane her statements are?


Barbara Bush...........sm
She was ill during the presidential campaigns about the same time that Obama's grandmother in Hawaii passed away. I remember reading about it at the time, but there was very little media coverage of Mrs. Bush's situation.....which does not surprise me.
I believe it was Barbara not Laura Bush sm
In an effort to further divide America, this writer must have gotten some of that rabid drool on his keyboard.
Idiotic remark from Barbara Bush

What a stupid remark from Barbara Bush.  That whole family lacks compassion.  Unbelieveable.


Barbara Bush: Things Working Out Very Well for Poor Evacuees from New Orleans

By E&P Staff

Published: September 05, 2005 7:25 PM ET updated 8:00 PM


NEW YORK Accompanying her husband, former President George H.W.Bush, on a tour of hurricane relief centers in Houston, Barbara Bush said today, referring to the poor who had lost everything back home and evacuated, This is working very well for them.

The former First Lady's remarks were aired this evening on National Public Radio's Marketplace program.

She was part of a group in Houston today at the Astrodome that included her husband and former President Bill Clinton, who were chosen by her son, the current president, to head fundraising efforts for the recovery. Sen. Hilary Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama were also present.

In a segment at the top of the show on the surge of evacuees to the Texas city, Barbara Bush said: Almost everyone I’ve talked to says we're going to move to Houston.

Then she added: What I’m hearing is they all want to stay in Texas. Everyone is so overwhelmed by the hospitality.

And so many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway, so this--this (she chuckles slightly) is working very well for them.





E&P Staff (letters@editorandpublisher.com)


sound bite from barbara bush's remarks

Here is the sound bite from Barbara Bush (it actually was on The Drudge Report!)


 


Here's the clip. Let them try and spin it however they want. Her callous words cannot be denied. These are heartless group of elitists:
http://www.drudgereport.com/bb.mp3


Barbara Bush recovering from Heart Surgery
Luckily she is doing fine. Didn't even know she was having heart problems. I wish her the best.
You made the statement:

 'It's just downright immoral (again, my opinion) to profit from someone's health (be it good health or bad health) because sooner or later, we're all going to get sick, especially the older we get. '


(You were the one who drew the inference that insurance companies had something to do with transcripts.  I did not imply that.  However, now that you mention it, insurance companies one of the main reasons we transcribe reports.......)


I replied that all who work in healthcare-related fields (including MTs) profit from people's health. 


We make a living from the transcriptions of doctors who are charging money to treat people who are staying in hospitals that charge patients to stay there.  Nurses are also paid to take care of the patients, and insurance companies make money as well, all from people's illness.  Unconscionable!  We all should just donate our services!


The deal is, we all try to charge more money than it actually takes us to perform the job, so that we can earn a living.


Might as well say that home repairmen are immoral for charging for a new roof, because everybody needs a place to live.  Are grocers immoral for charging for the food we all need?  Should they just give it to you if you can't pay?  Should our electricity be free because everyone needs light and heat?  How much of a nanny state do you want to live in?


The statement was made irresponsibly.
I listened to the whole statment. Of course everyone is interested in avoiding a world war, for him to assume and outwardly say it may come from Iran if they have the knowlege was irresponsible of him. He is the president. He should think these things through before he speaks. What about North Korea? What about Afghanistan? They already have the knowledge and the weapons and I don't believe he used those terms during the crisis with North Korea.
I believe he made the statement concerning Iran...
because Ahmadinejad has said publically that Israel should be wiped off the map and he had a vision of the world without the United States. Don't recall North Korea saying anything remotely like that. The big difference in Kim Jong IL and Ahmadinejad is that Ahmadinejad does not care what happen if he nuked Israel or the US...because to him, being martyred is the most wonderful thing that can happen to anyone. And if his attack ushered in the coming of the 12th Imam, mores the better. If you will look at his statements, especially the one about the 12th Imam...that will tell you why he could very well be the one to start a world war III if he had nukes. I believe that is what was meant.

And one could surmise he used that word to shock some out of their complacency.

And Let's face it...if Iran nuked Israel, WW III would be on.
I made a statement on your posting.

"the quicker their extinction.  YEA "


Your words, not mine. Your statement makes it sound like you are all for a non-democratic (putting it nicely here) society. Did you see the ? behind my subject heading?


I did not twist your words and, no, I didn't watch the prez last night. It's the same old, same old. It will be all over the TV stations today anyway, so I won't miss a thing.


 


Obama made the same statement long before
xx
and I made that exact statement in several posts -
but, as I also stated, I do not think it would be awful to have mandatory service for this country in some form. Ya'll can get mad all you want to, but the rich benefit just as much as anybody else, but when it comes time to stand up for this country and defend it and keep it, they hide behind their money, their schooling, anything to keep from serving, so therefore only the poor people are ever at risk.
An opening statement by Bush today....sm

Seems to me, he is talking about himself again.  


For too long, the culture of corruption has undercut development and good governance and bred criminality and mistrust around the world. High-level corruption by senior government officials, or kleptocracy, is a grave and corrosive abuse of power and represents the most invidious type of public corruption. It threatens our national interest and violates our values.

 


http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Bush_lifts_Democratic_talking_point_0810.html


It's Bush's Fault...You made me laugh..sm

Does anyone recall during Clinton's 8 year presidency, the opposition constantly chanting IT'S CLINTON'S FAULT !!!..???...))) Have a good one.  


People are such hypocrites. If Bush had made the
nm
Bush made Wall St Socialist and our banks so why do you even bother
We have socialism now but it's not the poor you blinded bigot.
That's start of the war in *2003* nm

I see these numbers are through 2003...sm
Had the conflict calmed down from 2003 - 2006?

Also, mind you, the death and injury toll I posted above is from this latest one month conflict alone.
Immediate White House statement on Dr. Tiller - still no statement on

Having had at least three relevant opportunities to make a statement about the killing of an Army recruiter and wounding of another since this occurred on Monday, Obama has not said a single word about it - but a statement was forthcoming from him immediately concerning the killing of Dr. Tiller.


The media coverage of the two events has also been strikingly different.  Please note that the sympathies of the liberal cause provide a complete explanation of both of these phenomena.


More than passingly strange that they think we don't notice stuff like this, n'est-ce pas? Well, they'll discover their mistake soon enough.  The election cycle of 2010 is already starting up - and it isn't going to look anything like the cycle of 2008.


 


 


 


It chronicles the first few months of 2003...
because the director of the movie is of the opinion that there were some bad decisions made at the get-go and the rest was a domino effect, and had those first few bad decisions not been made it might be a different story in Iraq. The director of this film was actually for going into Iraq...he just blames the bad decisions he illustrates for what is happening now. I saw him interviewed; I can't remember the show. But there are several articles on the net where he was interviewed and explains his position. At any rate...that is why only a few months are chronicled.
Umm...2003...isn't that the PAST, piglet....
I thought you were interested in NOW. :-)
This link went to a 2003 article....
5 years ago....not sure what you want to talk about?
2003 Rockefeller Memo

  


    The 2003 Rockefeller Memo:

Politicize the war, run down the country, sink Bush


Just loving it
Liars always trip up eventually.  They lie and lie and lie and eventually they cant keep all the lies together and they are caught, LOL..Sit back,  American Woman, and enjoy the unraveling of the dinosaurs, LOL..Im loving it!!
Loving someone
doesn't give you the right to marry them. Everything in life has restrictions and it's important so as to avoid chaos and turmoil which is exactly what homosexuals would like to see. No holds barred. No rules. Giving a homo the right to marry is like giving a blind person the right to drive. Just because a blind person has the "love" and "desire" to get behind the wheel doesn't mean he he has the capabilities. Any man in the universe can sodomize another person or any object he so desires or has the nerve to try. Any woman in the universe can use tongue, fingers and objects for sexual gratification. It still doesn't constitute a "marriage" as there is 0% chance of conception and it doesn't matter how much "LOVE" is thrown in the mix. A marriage is made up of a couple who possess the parts necessary to conceive, whether it happens or not. Those who want to drive blind are just a danger to society. ;-)
I am loving this like you would not believe
Remember all these people who held in in such high esteem for her morality God fearing self, used the kids and then when Palin became pregnant had the nerve to bring Levi out on the stage too. See it always looks better with white folks if they are "engaged" rather than just shacking so if it is put like that then the couple is "accepted" at least more in this case. I don’t give a flip about the girl's pregnancy- I am laughing about this MORAL woman letting Levi shack up with her daughter in their home, my, oh, my....I guess SPalin can come back now and say well they were engaged and to be wedded. Big HAHA
The state of Iraq in the mid-90's was a different story than 2003...sm
**In the *mid-1990s* President Clinton himself was talking about the very real POSSIBILITY of having to invade Iraq to take Saddam out.**

Clinton also ordered various air strikes, including suspected WMD sites, that weakened Saddam's army. We marched into Bagdad within two weeks with very few casualties. You can thank Clinton for that!

**To say we prematurely went into this war is naive at best and a downright untruth at worst.**

The war in Iraq may have been long overdue, as in should have been fought in the 80's and early 90's when the Kurds and other opposers were being slaughtered chemically, BUT in 2003 the debate over whether Iraq was the target to retaliate for the 9-11 attacks because of a) link to Al Quada, or b) WMD. This has all proved to be feeble, nonexistent, mistakes or lies. The genocide argument doesn't wash on why we are in Iraq because it only came up conveniently after the reason congress approved this war was MIA.
I have lost all respect for Barbara Walters.
nm
Wow what a loving, tolerant, and compassionate

little liberal you are...NOT.  You just wished me dead.  How sweet!


Yeah, loving your spin

MT was answering a POLL, not actively saying she was going back to Iraq.  Any idiot could see that except people who have spin reality to suit their liking which goes on here all the time.


 


what I'm loving is the idea that BOTH SIDES
nm
Iraq reconstruction plans in 2003: A flat tax and a no smoking campaign. ((( s/m

Correction to This Article
A Sept. 17 article incorrectly said that one person who helped manage Iraq's budget had no background in accounting. The woman, described as the daughter of a prominent neoconservative commentator, has a background in accounting but lacked experience managing the finances of a large organization.
Ties to GOP Trumped Know-How Among Staff Sent to Rebuild Iraq
Early U.S. Missteps in the Green Zone

By Rajiv Chandrasekaran
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, September 17, 2006; A01


Adapted from "Imperial Life in the Emerald City," by Rajiv Chandrasekaran, copyright Knopf 2006


After the fall of Saddam Hussein's government in April 2003, the opportunity to participate in the U.S.-led effort to reconstruct Iraq attracted all manner of Americans -- restless professionals, Arabic-speaking academics, development specialists and war-zone adventurers. But before they could go to Baghdad, they had to get past Jim O'Beirne's office in the Pentagon.


To pass muster with O'Beirne, a political appointee who screens prospective political appointees for Defense Department posts, applicants didn't need to be experts in the Middle East or in post-conflict reconstruction. What seemed most important was loyalty to the Bush administration.


O'Beirne's staff posed blunt questions to some candidates about domestic politics: Did you vote for George W. Bush in 2000? Do you support the way the president is fighting the war on terror? Two people who sought jobs with the U.S. occupation authority said they were even asked their views on Roe v. Wade .


Many of those chosen by O'Beirne's office to work for the Coalition Provisional Authority, which ran Iraq's government from April 2003 to June 2004, lacked vital skills and experience. A 24-year-old who had never worked in finance -- but had applied for a White House job -- was sent to reopen Baghdad's stock exchange. The daughter of a prominent neoconservative commentator and a recent graduate from an evangelical university for home-schooled children were tapped to manage Iraq's $13 billion budget, even though they didn't have a background in accounting.


The decision to send the loyal and the willing instead of the best and the brightest is now regarded by many people involved in the 3 1/2 -year effort to stabilize and rebuild Iraq as one of the Bush administration's gravest errors. Many of those selected because of their political fidelity spent their time trying to impose a conservative agenda on the postwar occupation, which sidetracked more important reconstruction efforts and squandered goodwill among the Iraqi people, according to many people who participated in the reconstruction effort.


The CPA had the power to enact laws, print currency, collect taxes, deploy police and spend Iraq's oil revenue. It had more than 1,500 employees in Baghdad at its height, working under America's viceroy in Iraq, L. Paul Bremer, but never released a public roster of its entire staff.


Interviews with scores of former CPA personnel over the past two years depict an organization that was dominated -- and ultimately hobbled -- by administration ideologues.


"We didn't tap -- and it should have started from the White House on down -- just didn't tap the right people to do this job," said Frederick Smith, who served as the deputy director of the CPA's Washington office. "It was a tough, tough job. Instead we got people who went out there because of their political leanings."


Endowed with $18 billion in U.S. reconstruction funds and a comparatively quiescent environment in the immediate aftermath of the U.S. invasion, the CPA was the U.S. government's first and best hope to resuscitate Iraq -- to establish order, promote rebuilding and assemble a viable government, all of which, experts believe, would have constricted the insurgency and mitigated the chances of civil war. Many of the basic tasks Americans struggle to accomplish today in Iraq -- training the army, vetting the police, increasing electricity generation -- could have been performed far more effectively in 2003 by the CPA.


But many CPA staff members were more interested in other things: in instituting a flat tax, in selling off government assets, in ending food rations and otherwise fashioning a new nation that looked a lot like the United States. Many of them spent their days cloistered in the Green Zone, a walled-off enclave in central Baghdad with towering palms, posh villas, well-stocked bars and resort-size swimming pools.


By the time Bremer departed in June 2004, Iraq was in a precarious state. The Iraqi army, which had been dissolved and refashioned by the CPA, was one-third the size he had pledged it would be. Seventy percent of police officers had not been screened or trained. Electricity generation was far below what Bremer had promised to achieve. And Iraq's interim government had been selected not by elections but by Americans. Divisive issues were to be resolved later on, increasing the chances that tension over those matters would fuel civil strife.


To recruit the people he wanted, O'Beirne sought résumés from the offices of Republican congressmen, conservative think tanks and GOP activists. He discarded applications from those his staff deemed ideologically suspect, even if the applicants possessed Arabic language skills or postwar rebuilding experience.


Smith said O'Beirne once pointed to a young man's résumé and pronounced him "an ideal candidate." His chief qualification was that he had worked for the Republican Party in Florida during the presidential election recount in 2000.


O'Beirne, a former Army officer who is married to prominent conservative commentator Kate O'Beirne, did not respond to requests for comment.


He and his staff used an obscure provision in federal law to hire many CPA staffers as temporary political appointees, which exempted the interviewers from employment regulations that prohibit questions about personal political beliefs.


There were a few Democrats who wound up getting jobs with the CPA, but almost all of them were active-duty soldiers or State Department Foreign Service officers. Because they were career government employees, not temporary hires, O'Beirne's office could not query them directly about their political leanings.


One former CPA employee who had an office near O'Beirne's wrote an e-mail to a friend describing the recruitment process: "I watched résumés of immensely talented individuals who had sought out CPA to help the country thrown in the trash because their adherence to 'the President's vision for Iraq' (a frequently heard phrase at CPA) was 'uncertain.' I saw senior civil servants from agencies like Treasury, Energy . . . and Commerce denied advisory positions in Baghdad that were instead handed to prominent RNC (Republican National Committee) contributors."


As more and more of O'Beirne's hires arrived in the Green Zone, the CPA's headquarters in Hussein's marble-walled former Republican Palace felt like a campaign war room. Bumper stickers and mouse pads praising President Bush were standard desk decorations. In addition to military uniforms and "Operation Iraqi Freedom" garb, "Bush-Cheney 2004" T-shirts were among the most common pieces of clothing.


"I'm not here for the Iraqis," one staffer noted to a reporter over lunch. "I'm here for George Bush."


When Gordon Robison, who worked in the Strategic Communications office, opened a care package from his mother to find a book by Paul Krugman, a liberal New York Times columnist, people around him stared. "It was like I had just unwrapped a radioactive brick," he recalled.

Finance Background Not Required

Twenty-four-year-old Jay Hallen was restless. He had graduated from Yale two years earlier, and he didn't much like his job at a commercial real-estate firm. His passion was the Middle East, and although he had never been there, he was intrigued enough to take Arabic classes and read histories of the region in his spare time.


He had mixed feelings about the war in Iraq, but he viewed the American occupation as a ripe opportunity. In the summer of 2003, he sent an e-mail to Reuben Jeffrey III, whom he had met when applying for a White House job a year earlier. Hallen had a simple query for Jeffrey, who was working as an adviser to Bremer: Might there be any job openings in Baghdad?


"Be careful what you wish for," Jeffrey wrote in response. Then he forwarded Hallen's resume to O'Beirne's office.


Three weeks later, Hallen got a call from the Pentagon. The CPA wanted him in Baghdad. Pronto. Could he be ready in three to four weeks?


The day he arrived in Baghdad, he met with Thomas C. Foley, the CPA official in charge of privatizing state-owned enterprises. (Foley, a major Republican Party donor, went to Harvard Business School with President Bush.) Hallen was shocked to learn that Foley wanted him to take charge of reopening the stock exchange.


"Are you sure?" Hallen said to Foley. "I don't have a finance background."


It's fine, Foley replied. He told Hallen that he was to be the project manager. He would rely on other people to get things done. He would be "the main point of contact."


Before the war, Baghdad's stock exchange looked nothing like its counterparts elsewhere in the world. There were no computers, electronic displays or men in colorful coats scurrying around on the trading floor. Trades were scrawled on pieces of paper and noted on large blackboards. If you wanted to buy or sell, you came to the exchange yourself and shouted your order to one of the traders. There was no air-conditioning. It was loud and boisterous. But it worked. Private firms raised hundreds of thousands of dollars by selling stock, and ordinary people learned about free enterprise.


The exchange was gutted by looters after the war. The first wave of American economic reconstruction specialists from the Treasury Department ignored it. They had bigger issues to worry about: paying salaries, reopening the banks, stabilizing the currency. But the brokers wanted to get back to work and investors wanted their money, so the CPA made the reopening a priority.


Quickly absorbing the CPA's ambition during the optimistic days before the insurgency flared, Hallen decided that he didn't just want to reopen the exchange, he wanted to make it the best, most modern stock market in the Arab world. He wanted to promulgate a new securities law that would make the exchange independent of the Finance Ministry, with its own bylaws and board of directors. He wanted to set up a securities and exchange commission to oversee the market. He wanted brokers to be licensed and listed companies to provide financial disclosures. He wanted to install a computerized trading and settlement system.


Iraqis cringed at Hallen's plan. Their top priority was reopening the exchange, not setting up computers or enacting a new securities law. "People are broke and bewildered," broker Talib Tabatabai told Hallen. "Why do you want to create enemies? Let us open the way we were."


Tabatabai, who held a doctorate in political science from Florida State University, believed Hallen's plan was unrealistic. "It was something so fancy, so great, that it couldn't be accomplished," he said.


But Hallen was convinced that major changes had to be enacted. "Their laws and regulations were completely out of step with the modern world," he said. "There was just no transparency in anything. It was more of a place for Saddam and his friends to buy up private companies that they otherwise didn't have a stake in."


Opening the stock exchange without legal and structural changes, Hallen maintained, "would have been irresponsible and short-sighted."


To help rewrite the securities law, train brokers and purchase the necessary computers, Hallen recruited a team of American volunteers. In the spring of 2004, Bremer approved the new law and simultaneously appointed the nine Iraqis selected by Hallen to become the exchange's board of governors.


The exchange's board selected Tabatabai as its chairman. The new securities law that Hallen had nursed into life gave the board control over the exchange's operations, but it didn't say a thing about the role of the CPA adviser. Hallen assumed that he'd have a part in decision-making until the handover of sovereignty. Tabatabai and the board, however, saw themselves in charge.


Tabatabai and the other governors decided to open the market as soon as possible. They didn't want to wait several more months for the computerized trading system to be up and running. They ordered dozens of dry-erase boards to be installed on the trading floor. They used such boards to keep track of buying and selling prices before the war, and that's how they'd do it again.


The exchange opened two days after Hallen's tour in Iraq ended. Brokers barked orders to floor traders, who used their trusty white boards. Transactions were recorded not with computers but with small chits written in ink. CPA staffers stayed away, afraid that their presence would make the stock market a target for insurgents.


When Tabatabai was asked what would have happened if Hallen hadn't been assigned to reopen the exchange, he smiled. "We would have opened months earlier. He had grand ideas, but those ideas did not materialize," Tabatabai said of Hallen. "Those CPA people reminded me of Lawrence of Arabia."

'Loyalist' Replaces Public Health Expert

The hiring of Bremer's most senior advisers was settled upon at the highest levels of the White House and the Pentagon. Some, like Foley, were personally recruited by Bush. Others got their jobs because an influential Republican made a call on behalf of a friend or trusted colleague.


That's what happened with James K. Haveman Jr., who was selected to oversee the rehabilitation of Iraq's health care system.


Haveman, a 60-year-old social worker, was largely unknown among international health experts, but he had connections. He had been the community health director for the former Republican governor of Michigan, John Engler, who recommended him to Paul D. Wolfowitz, the deputy secretary of defense.


Haveman was well-traveled, but most of his overseas trips were in his capacity as a director of International Aid, a faith-based relief organization that provided health care while promoting Christianity in the developing world. Before his stint in government, Haveman ran a large Christian adoption agency in Michigan that urged pregnant women not to have abortions.


Haveman replaced Frederick M. Burkle Jr., a physician with a master's degree in public health and postgraduate degrees from Harvard, Yale, Dartmouth and the University of California at Berkeley. Burkle taught at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, where he specialized in disaster-response issues, and he was a deputy assistant administrator at the U.S. Agency for International Development, which sent him to Baghdad immediately after the war.


He had worked in Kosovo and Somalia and in northern Iraq after the 1991 Persian Gulf War. A USAID colleague called him the "single most talented and experienced post-conflict health specialist working for the United States government."


But a week after Baghdad's liberation, Burkle was informed he was being replaced. A senior official at USAID sent Burkle an e-mail saying the White House wanted a "loyalist" in the job. Burkle had a wall of degrees, but he didn't have a picture with the president.


Haveman arrived in Iraq with his own priorities. He liked to talk about the number of hospitals that had reopened since the war and the pay raises that had been given to doctors instead of the still-decrepit conditions inside the hospitals or the fact that many physicians were leaving for safer, better paying jobs outside Iraq. He approached problems the way a health care administrator in America would: He focused on preventive measures to reduce the need for hospital treatment.


He urged the Health Ministry to mount an anti-smoking campaign, and he assigned an American from the CPA team -- who turned out to be a closet smoker himself -- to lead the public education effort. Several members of Haveman's staff noted wryly that Iraqis faced far greater dangers in their daily lives than tobacco. The CPA's limited resources, they argued, would be better used raising awareness about how to prevent childhood diarrhea and other fatal maladies.


Haveman didn't like the idea that medical care in Iraq was free. He figured Iraqis should pay a small fee every time they saw a doctor. He also decided to allocate almost all of the Health Ministry's $793 million share of U.S. reconstruction funds to renovating maternity hospitals and building new community medical clinics. His intention, he said, was "to shift the mind-set of the Iraqis that you don't get health care unless you go to a hospital."


But his decision meant there were no reconstruction funds set aside to rehabilitate the emergency rooms and operating theaters at Iraqi hospitals, even though injuries from insurgent attacks were the country's single largest public health challenge.


Haveman also wanted to apply American medicine to other parts of the Health Ministry. Instead of trying to restructure the dysfunctional state-owned firm that imported and distributed drugs and medical supplies to hospitals, he decided to try to sell it to a private company.


To prepare it for a sale, he wanted to attempt something he had done in Michigan. When he was the state's director of community health, he sought to slash the huge amount of money Michigan spent on prescription drugs for the poor by limiting the medications doctors could prescribe for Medicaid patients. Unless they received an exemption, physicians could only prescribe drugs that were on an approved list, known as a formulary.


Haveman figured the same strategy could bring down the cost of medicine in Iraq. The country had 4,500 items on its drug formulary. Haveman deemed it too large. If private firms were going to bid for the job of supplying drugs to government hospitals, they needed a smaller, more manageable list. A new formulary would also outline new requirements about where approved drugs could be manufactured, forcing Iraq to stop buying medicines from Syria, Iran and Russia, and start buying from the United States.


He asked the people who had drawn up the formulary in Michigan whether they wanted to come to Baghdad. They declined. So he beseeched the Pentagon for help. His request made its way to the Defense Department's Pharmacoeconomic Center in San Antonio.


A few weeks later, three formulary experts were on their way to Iraq.


The group was led by Theodore Briski, a balding, middle-aged pharmacist who held the rank of lieutenant commander in the U.S. Navy. Haveman's order, as Briski remembered it, was: "Build us a formulary in two weeks and then go home." By his second day in Iraq, Briski came to three conclusions. First, the existing formulary "really wasn't that bad." Second, his mission was really about "redesigning the entire Iraqi pharmaceutical procurement and delivery system, and that was a complete change of scope -- on a grand scale." Third, Haveman and his advisers "really didn't know what they were doing."


Haveman "viewed Iraq as Michigan after a huge attack," said George Guszcza, an Army captain who worked on the CPA's health team. "Somehow if you went into the ghettos and projects of Michigan and just extended it out for the entire state -- that's what he was coming to save."


Haveman's critics, including more than a dozen people who worked for him in Baghdad, contend that rewriting the formulary was a distraction. Instead, they said, the CPA should have focused on restructuring, but not privatizing, the drug-delivery system and on ordering more emergency shipments of medicine to address shortages of essential medicines. The first emergency procurement did not occur until early 2004, after the Americans had been in Iraq for more than eight months.


Haveman insisted that revising the formulary was a crucial first step in improving the distribution of medicines. "It was unwieldy to order 4,500 different drugs, and to test and distribute them," he said.


When Haveman left Iraq, Baghdad's hospitals were as decrepit as the day the Americans arrived. At Yarmouk Hospital, the city's largest, rooms lacked the most basic equipment to monitor a patient's blood pressure and heart rate, operating theaters were without modern surgical tools and sterile implements, and the pharmacy's shelves were bare.


Nationwide, the Health Ministry reported that 40 percent of the 900 drugs it deemed essential were out of stock in hospitals. Of the 32 medicines used in public clinics for the management of chronic diseases, 26 were unavailable.


The new health minister, Aladin Alwan, beseeched the United Nations for help, and he asked neighboring nations to share what they could. He sought to increase production at a state-run manufacturing plant in the city of Samarra. And he put the creation of a new formulary on hold. To him, it was a fool's errand.


"We didn't need a new formulary. We needed drugs," he said. "But the Americans did not understand that."

A 9/11 Hero's Public Relations Blitz

In May 2003, a team of law enforcement experts from the Justice Department concluded that more than 6,600 foreign advisers were needed to help rehabilitate Iraq's police forces.


The White House dispatched just one: Bernie Kerik.


Bernard Kerik had more star power than Bremer and everyone else in the CPA combined. Soldiers stopped him in the halls of the Republican Palace to ask for his autograph or, if they had a camera, a picture. Reporters were more interested in interviewing him than they were the viceroy.


Kerik had been New York City's police commissioner when terrorists attacked the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001. His courage (he shouted evacuation orders from a block away as the south tower collapsed), his stamina (he worked around the clock and catnapped in his office for weeks), and his charisma (he was a master of the television interview) turned him into a national hero. When White House officials were casting about for a prominent individual to take charge of Iraq's Interior Ministry and assume the challenge of rebuilding the Iraqi police, Kerik's name came up. Bush pronounced it an excellent idea.


Kerik had worked in the Middle East before, as the security director for a government hospital in Saudi Arabia, but he was expelled from the country amid a government investigation into his surveillance of the medical staff. He lacked postwar policing experience, but the White House viewed that as an asset.


Veteran Middle East hands were regarded as insufficiently committed to the goal of democratizing the region. Post-conflict experts, many of whom worked for the State Department, the United Nations or nongovernmental organizations, were deemed too liberal. Men such as Kerik -- committed Republicans with an accomplished career in business or government -- were ideal. They were loyal, and they shared the Bush administration's goal of rebuilding Iraq in an American image. With Kerik, there were bonuses: The media loved him, and the American public trusted him.


Robert Gifford, a State Department expert in international law enforcement, was one of the first CPA staff members to meet Kerik when he arrived in Baghdad. Gifford was the senior adviser to the Interior Ministry, which oversaw the police. Kerik was to take over Gifford's job.


"I understand you are going to be the man, and we are here to support you," Gifford told Kerik.


"I'm here to bring more media attention to the good work on police because the situation is probably not as bad as people think it is," Kerik replied.


As they entered the Interior Ministry office in the palace, Gifford offered to brief Kerik. "It was during that period I realized he wasn't with me," Gifford recalled. "He didn't listen to anything. He hadn't read anything except his e-mails. I don't think he read a single one of our proposals."


Kerik wasn't a details guy. He was content to let Gifford figure out how to train Iraqi officers to work in a democratic society. Kerik would take care of briefing the viceroy and the media. And he'd be going out for a few missions himself.


Kerik's first order of business, less than a week after he arrived, was to give a slew of interviews saying the situation was improving. He told the Associated Press that security in Baghdad "is not as bad as I thought. Are bad things going on? Yes. But is it out of control? No. Is it getting better? Yes." He went on NBC's "Today" show to pronounce the situation "better than I expected." To Time magazine, he said that "people are starting to feel more confident. They're coming back out. Markets and shops that I saw closed one week ago have opened."


When it came to his own safety, Kerik took no chances. He hired a team of South African bodyguards, and he packed a 9mm handgun under his safari vest.


The first months after liberation were a critical period for Iraq's police. Officers needed to be called back to work and screened for Baath Party connections. They'd have to learn about due process, how to interrogate without torture, how to walk the beat. They required new weapons. New chiefs had to be selected. Tens of thousands more officers would have to be hired to put the genie of anarchy back in the bottle.


Kerik held only two staff meetings while in Iraq, one when he arrived and the other when he was being shadowed by a New York Times reporter, according to Gerald Burke, a former Massachusetts State Police commander who participated in the initial Justice Department assessment mission. Despite his White House connections, Kerik did not secure funding for the desperately needed police advisers. With no help on the way, the task of organizing and training Iraqi officers fell to U.S. military police soldiers, many of whom had no experience in civilian law enforcement.


"He was the wrong guy at the wrong time," Burke said later. "Bernie didn't have the skills. What we needed was a chief executive-level person. . . . Bernie came in with a street-cop mentality."


Kerik authorized the formation of a hundred-man Iraqi police paramilitary unit to pursue criminal syndicates that had formed since the war, and he often joined the group on nighttime raids, departing the Green Zone at midnight and returning at dawn, in time to attend Bremer's senior staff meeting, where he would crack a few jokes, describe the night's adventures and read off the latest crime statistics prepared by an aide. The unit did bust a few kidnapping gangs and car-theft rings, generating a stream of positive news stories that Kerik basked in and Bremer applauded. But the all-nighters meant Kerik wasn't around to supervise the Interior Ministry during the day. He was sleeping.


Several members of the CPA's Interior Ministry team wanted to blow the whistle on Kerik, but they concluded any complaints would be brushed off. "Bremer's staff thought he was the silver bullet," a member of the Justice Department assessment mission said. "Nobody wanted to question the [man who was] police chief during 9/11."


Kerik contended that he did his best in what was, ultimately, an untenable situation. He said he wasn't given sufficient funding to hire foreign police advisers or establish large-scale training programs.


Three months after he arrived, Kerik attended a meeting of local police chiefs in Baghdad's Convention Center. When it was his turn to address the group, he stood and bid everyone farewell. Although he had informed Bremer of his decision a few days earlier, Kerik hadn't told most of the people who worked for him. He flew out of Iraq a few hours later.


"I was in my own world," he said later. "I did my own thing."


© 2006 The Washington Post Company




Excellent interview-Senator Barbara Boxer on Countdown
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/
anybody watching the Barbara Walters interview with the Obamas tonight? nm
x
Can't believe you used the words loving and caring in the middle of that post.
What, pray tell, is spewl?  Making up words? 
MTPockets posted about SP loving to fire people.
MTPockets could've just kept her post to the issue, but she had to throw in the barb about firing, so the next poster has every right to address it. Or is what she is referencing over your head?
Looks like a loving father thanking his kids for inspiring him
getting them ready for their journey there with him, talking about where they have been, how they got to where they are and where they are going from here.

My sympathy to those not able to come along for the ride.
True Christians strive to be Christ-like, loving, tolerant...sm
nonjudgemental, understanding, washing the feet of the lowliest citizen, feeding the hungry, living life without always saying me, me, me. I could think of a lot of adjectives that would describe what being a Christian means to me but I am seeing none of that here from people whose greatest claim is that they are devout Christians. I hear only fear, lies, hate, biogotry and defensiveness instead of love, truth, hope and light in Jesus name.
Sorry. That last statement should have been
x
RIGHT, but it was actually a statement that was
nm
What an odd statement
"God's will has been done"???

Whenever somebody gets what they want they always say it's "Gods will" or what "God wants". As though they know. Then as if to try to convince us it's true they will throw in a "I prayed and was shown a sign". Well I know a lot of people who are priests, biships, and very spiritual and religious people and they were praying for a different outcome. They were praying for McCain to win. So are you saying 50% of Americans praying for a different outcome all have a different God than yours who "answered your prayers"? Also I have found that when things don't work out they way they want they'll have a different answer (but usually the same canned answer).

There is good and evil in this world. I'm not saying Obama is either. Only he and his family know his religious viewpoints. This is the kind of conversation that is 1/2 religious 1/2 political. If your talking about our government (DC people) I would say that is the least likely place to find "God". Then if your going to go there you should say say "Allah" has spoken and wants him in the office, after all that is who the muslims pray to.

Yes things happen in the world. I think that's were that phrase "$hit happens" comes in.

You said all things happen in this world for the good of those that love the Lord. Does this include the parents who murder their children because God has told them to do so, or even just murder their children for no reason (like that lady in Florida). How about the senseless shootings, robberies, gang rapes, do you think all that happens for those becuase I'm sure those victims loved the Lord too. Oh what about 9-11 all those victims who died. I'm sure there were a lot who loved the Lord. Like I say I don't want to make this a religious message because that is for the faith board but you are mixing the two together and they are very different things.

My aunt does the same thing though. She will talk of something and then add in "I prayed about it and the lord told me this or that" I guess she's trying to put validity behind her statement but it has the opposite effect.

We all hope Obama becomes a great president and does good things for the country. That is the hope of any president elected. Nobody is saying he's going to do a bad job. We're all saying we hope he will do good, but we know about his history/background, associations, voting records, and inexperience, and there is a lot that is not sitting well with us. I believe we all hope to be pleasantly surprised but only time will tell and we will be keeping our eyes open just like we would do with any person elected.

I'm just trying to figure out the logic of this post and it makes no sense and is an insult to those of us who feel differently and "prayed" for a different outcome.
I have to wonder at your statement... sm
""Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country" used to hold a positive meaning in this country."

How does this apply when people like Peggy Johnson (or whatever her name was) proclaim on national tv that they are so glad they don't have to worry about paying their mortgage or putting gas in their cars? I wonder how people who are getting ready to quit their jobs and live off the government will react if they find out that the gravy train is being pulled by the engine of "serve your country?"

I would agree with you. America has gotten greedy and spiteful. I also feel they have gotten lazy, apathetic and complacent and depend on the government now more than ever to meet their needs instead of the other way around.
Your statement a few posts above that (SM)
liberalism is the problem with this country is BASHING.

If you want to bash Liberals - go do it on your Conservatives board.

I see you haven't changed. BTW, Nan, who in the world supposedly "invited you back" as you state below? Perhaps you were invited back to the Conservative board? LOL
A statement from Shrub!

Actually, I didn't think it was funny either when he made that statement as our troops were and are being maimed and dying for him, and he thought it was funny that "whoops, no WMDs!"  Rude indeed!!!!!


dumb statement
she gets what she deserves?  All the woman wants is to meet with the person who is supposed to be our servant, the person WE put into office.  That is not asking too much, in my opinion.  It is not like he is a king or dictator.  He is supposed to be working for US.  If he had met with her, she would have went home and none of this shooting guns, crashing into crosses, etc., would have happened.  He is the reason she is getting all this press coverage.  Gets what she deserves?  What a dumb statement. He should get what HE deserves, impeachment, a criminal trial and imprisonment for this illegal immoral war of his.
broad statement

And have you taken a poll of every democrat in the country as to whether they love or hate Phil?  These broad statements are not helping your credibility. 


Not a broad statement at all.
And since you make broad statements all the time, that's a little disingenuous, don't you think?  I asked a question.  You didn't answer it.  How many politicians have you seen embrace Phil?  As far as credibilty, let's be perfectly frank.  I don't care if you find me credible and I am sure the same can be said for your feelings about me.  We are worlds apart in our thinking.  Thank God.
broad statement
I make broad statements all the time?  When, where?  LOL.  That in itself is a broad statement from you.  I make statements with facts to back them up, I post articles.  As far as how many politicals back Phil, who knows, who cares.  Is he running for office?  I must have missed it if he is.  He is a tax paying, charity giving, hard working adult who has opinions and ideas and beliefs on how our country should go and I applaud him for speaking out, with his own independent ideas.  As far as your and mine ideas?  Sure they are different.  I dont thank god for that..Frankly, I dont think god has anything to do with that.  We are free thinking human beings (at least I am..are you?) and it is great that you have your ideas and I have mine.  That is what this country was built on..differing opinions.  Heaven help us all if this country ever becomes one thought and one opinion..that is called a dictatorship.  I dont know about you but I could never live under that situation..So, long live your opinion and long live mine and never the two shall meet.
true statement
This statement shows that architects of war and politicians, they know just how to manipulate the nonpolitical masses and do it well. 
If that's not the most pompus statement ever
I don't know what is...it's a wonder you can breath with your nose so high in the air
That is just as much a racist statement as the one above. sm
Racism goes both ways.  How about let's not labeling people at all.