5,000,000 missing White House emails due to upgrade

[OAKS]

http://arstechnica.com/articles/culture ... -mails.ars

If any decently large corporation in the U.S. had this happen, there would be huge repercussions. This is a standard e-mail system with dozens of archiving solutions that shouldn't take 7 years to get put into place.

18 1/2 minutes go missing in a tape vs 5,000,000 missing emails. Where's the outrage, the news coverage, the investigations? (There are 2 lawsuits but they don't look too tough) Where does the buck stop?

The staggering incompetence of this administration boggles the mind.

[TheBearcatHimself]

18 1/2 minutes go missing in a tape vs 5,000,000 missing emails. Where's the outrage, the news coverage, the investigations? (There are 2 lawsuits but they don't look too tough) Where does the buck stop?

The staggering incompetence of this administration boggles the mind.

The outrage is right where the administration wants it to be...on the back page.

The only thing more shocking is that they didn't wave the hand to one side and put it behind some bigger news story...Oh wait, the media is already overblowing the Reverend Wright story until our ears bleed.

[Jac Coyne]

This explains why Karl Rove didn't show up to my son's birthday. My E-vite must have been lost in ether.

Perhaps while stalling important votes like FISA, Pelosi and company can debate how many penis enlargement offers the administration is duty-bound to keep on file...

[laxfan25]

This explains why Karl Rove didn't show up to my son's birthday. My E-vite must have been lost in ether.

Perhaps while stalling important votes like FISA, Pelosi and company can debate how many penis enlargement offers the administration is duty-bound to keep on file...

Or other trivial, nonsensical topics like justifications for the use of torture, meetings of the VP's Energy Advisory committee (they've been doing a very good job protecting the interests of the members, if not the US citizens), or plotting with the telecoms to figure out how to CYA for their illegal wiretap activities...

http://www.newsweek.com/id/134930

I can't understand why Congress doesn't just roll over and give the President what he wants - don't they understand we have a GWOT on our hands? We absolutely MUST protect the telecoms from lawsuits for illegal activities!

[FLALAX]

Governments are full of incompetence and waste. That is why it is fundamental for citizens to questions what is the scope of their government. Governments are not going to run efficiently especially in some areas of technology. Data loss and breach events like this happened until Bush I, Clinton, and Bush II and it happens in the congress all the time. Do not rant and rave about the current administration, instead look at the efficieny of our government and its scope.

Some may say you look like a whining Obama supporter. Reality will hit that man fast if he takes the seat.

[StrykerFSU]

Wait, the government is inefficient?!?! But I want them to take over managing my health care. Is that a bad idea?

[peterwho]

Wait, the government is inefficient?!?! But I want them to take over managing my health care. Is that a bad idea?

Clearly. Look at the success of the USPS and Amtrak.

[OAKS]

Wait, the government is inefficient?!?! But I want them to take over managing my health care. Is that a bad idea?

Yay, some people are actually still for smaller government.

What are your thoughts on making health insurance (maybe some other aspects of the industry) not-for-profit? I'd suggest the prison industry as well. Helping people and maximizing profits don't exactly seem to go hand-in-hand.

[Dan Wishengrad]

Wait, the government is inefficient?!?! But I want them to take over managing my health care. Is that a bad idea?

Hang on, buddy, but who exactly is promoting a big, government-run health care bureacracy? Yes, the Clintons did just that in 1992-93, but it died quickly. Neither Clinton, Obama nor McCain is advocating a government-run health care system in 2008. Just different plans of providing health-insurance to the millions of Americans who are now without.

IMHO any of the three health-care plans introduced by and being touted by the three leading presidential contenders would be an improvement over the current sorry state of affairs.

[Jac Coyne]

What are your thoughts on making health insurance (maybe some other aspects of the industry) not-for-profit? I'd suggest the prison industry as well. Helping people and maximizing profits don't exactly seem to go hand-in-hand.

If this happened I'd suggest you get on a first-name basis with the kid working the Wendy's drive-thru because he'll be the one doing your next prostate exam.

Doctors aren't going to burn seven years and bury themselves in $120K (which is a lowball figure) in debt without the lure of profit, which means you'll chase away the most qualified candidates (its happening now with the Medicaid fiasco). I don't know about you, but I want my provider to have some incentive to give quality care.

Not sure about the prison thing.

Just different plans of providing health-insurance to the millions of Americans who are now without.

The moment the government provides health-care to those "who are now without," every company and organization in the country will drop their health care plans (why wouldn't they?), thus throwing EVERYONE on the dole. There is no half-way with socialized healthcare. It's all or nothing and it will be government run.

[OAKS]

If this happened I'd suggest you get on a first-name basis with the kid working the Wendy's drive-thru because he'll be the one doing your next prostate exam.

Doctors aren't going to burn seven years and bury themselves in $120K (which is a lowball figure) in debt without the lure of profit, which means you'll chase away the most qualified candidates (its happening now with the Medicaid fiasco). I don't know about you, but I want my provider to have some incentive to give quality care.

Note that I said "Health Insurance", not the service provider. When you're squeezing out every last penny from policy holders to provide returns for your stockholders, the board, etc, then your actions become antithetical to the mission of providing help & medical coverage for paying customers. While I think the free market is great for most things, people's health isn't one of them.

Even if you're not-for-profit, you can still pay your employees competitive salaries.

[Beta]

Ohhh Oaks...

[Jac Coyne]

Note that I said "Health Insurance", not the service provider.

I see.

When you're squeezing out every last penny from policy holders to provide returns for your stockholders, the board, etc, then your actions become antithetical to the mission of providing help & medical coverage for paying customers.

When lawyers are allowed to squeeze every last penny out of physicians, or convince insurance companies to settle a frivolous lawsuit because it will be cheaper than going to court, it is going to drive up the costs for HMOs (insurance costs are what drove Docs to HMOs in the first place). And they will then pass the cost along to the patient.

If part of your not-for-profit plan would include a barrier against ambulance chasing lawyers who are looking for an easy buck, I, and many physicians, would probably go along. Some surgeons have to pay $200K in malpractice insurance a year to battle this trend. Does this seem reasonable?

If you want to pay Docs under the assumption that their service is necessary to the public good, you'll have to indemnify them to lawyers. Otherwise, you will have the risk-reward scenario.

Even if you're not-for-profit, you can still pay your employees competitive salaries.

Some of them. The Executive Director of the Salvation Army is making a killing every year, but the stiff ringing the bell is making bubkus. In your model, it's the Docs ringing the bell.

Beta, I'm not sure if you were zinging me or Oaks, but that made me laugh.

[Sonny]

If you want a small taste of how efficient universal health care would be in this country.... take a look at the security line at your local airport and multiply it by a million.

Government does so few things efficiently. OAKS case above is the sad reflection of how inefficient our federal government is in general. And rises about both parties. IT happened before under 8 years of Clinton and it will happen again under McCain/Obama/Hillary.

[Zeuslax]

The missing email story got some traction for a couple days in 2007, then it disappeared. The attorney firings were the bigger story, even though the cover up was a result of this issue. I didn't read the whole story attached here, just the first page. There's some other very interesting pieces to this story and they are probably the larger story. I can't remember exactly who it was, but a high ranking Cheney aid had his computer wiped, then all the private emails of Rove and others were "wiped" at the same time, then a high ranking Bush official had his computer under investigation. He brought in an outside service (which is illegal and completely outside of the scope that anyone would do in his position or autonomously when you have an IT department and a high level security clearance) and had his computer completely wiped. Not a typical wipe and reboot. He requested a "deep" wipe (a little weird writing that). No secret that a lot of white house employees use DNC or RNC email accounts to handle White house business. They're not tracked and access is not allowed due to being outside of federal law.

Government does so few things efficiently.

That's actually one of the biggest fallacies. Actually the largest US health care system is govt run and operates more efficiently and is cheaper than any private system. In addition, it consistently rates higher than any private health plan/system/HMO. We just have to take care of the corruption (5 billion a year due to automated billing and payment system, which also happens to be the most effective in the world) and elected officials taking money out of allocations! Even with these issues it's still better!

The lines and wait lists are a complete joke. Lawsuits are a big deal for some, but still smoke and mirrors for the health insurance companies. Doctors in overwhelming majorities rate health insurance companies as the biggest issue and the primary reason for soaring costs!