WT Forums

I love it! A porn star that GETS IT! lol

http://cnn.aimtoday.cnn.com/news/story. ... 868949.htm

Porn Star Tells Military 'Bullets, Not Boobs'
By Jeff Franks

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A group supporting natural breasts staged a small street protest in Hollywood on Wednesday against a U.S. military policy offering free breast implants to female soldiers.

The group, led by porn star and former California gubernatorial candidate Mary Carey, said the military should spend its money on "bullets, not boobs."

"I think girls should have natural boobs and natural beauty," Carey said after unveiling her own breasts in the protest at an Army recruiting office on Sunset Boulevard.

"Women should be happy with their bodies and what they're blessed with," the 24-year-old star of 37 porn films said.


Her words and deeds drew cheers from a small group of men who had gathered to watch the event. Passing cars sounded their horns in response to a sign that read "Honk if you love natural breasts."


Carey, who wore green camouflage shorts and bikini top, assured all that her own breasts were real.


The protest was organized by porn impresario Mark Kulkis, president of Kick Ass Pictures, the company for whom Carey stars.


It follows recent news stories about the military offering free plastic surgery, including breast enhancements, to soldiers and their families so military doctors can practice their skills.


Kulkis said he opposed military breast implants because they are an unwise expenditure of tax money and because he does not like fake breasts.


"We support our military 100 percent. Part of the reason we're protesting is that we think these tax dollars would be much better spent on essentials (for soldiers)," Kulkis said.


"I'm personally opposed to boob jobs, but more so when they use our tax dollars for them," he said. "It's an issue near and dear to my heart."


Kulkis' porno films come with a promise that none of his female stars have breast implants


He and Carey presented a $500 check to Jennifer Zandstra of Commerce, Texas, who was honorably discharged from the U.S. Army two weeks ago and answered a Kick Ass announcement seeking military women opposed to breast implants.


"Thank you for coming up here and thank you most of all for keeping your real breasts," Kulkis told Zandstra.


Carey invited her to star in her next film, "Mary Carey Rules: No. 6," but Zandstra, now a college student, politely said, "No, thank you."


A military spokesman for the recruiting office where the protest took place said he had no comment.



08/19/04 08:13


© Copyright Reuters Ltd. All rights reserved. The information contained In this news report may not be published, broadcast or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of Reuters Ltd.

Livin' life in the fast lane and just passed a blur reading "BRIDGE OUT!"

Thanks for sharing this story. I quite enjoyed it. I want that on a bumper sticker! LOL.

Life...stranger than fiction.

"I came here to kick ass and chew bubblegum...and i'm all out of bubblegum".

What a moron. I don't understand why everyone is jumping around about this. It's not like tons of women are falling all over themselves to go get enlarged. The policy includes a whole lot more than boob jobs, nor are the boob jobs entirely free. The surgery is free, but the implants aren't. Is he also protesting the nose jobs, eye jobs, liposuctions, etc? I don't know about any of you, but if I were in a horrible accident and my face was to be reconstructed, I'd sure want that surgery done by someone who's played with skin before. I don't want to turn into the fricking Joker or something.

Ever dance with the devil in the pale moonlight?<img src=icon_smile_clown.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=icon_smile_evil.gif border=0 align=middle>

They're jumping around about this because in a world of tight budgets and short funds, is this really necessary? My impression is that since military doctors are required to do a minimal number of different surgeries in order to remain qualified as "doctors," unecessary elective surgeries are recommended to unsuspecting service personel with potentially disasterous results. My grandfather and uncle are MDs, my grandfather gaining the bulk of his experience after graduating from St. Louis with the 50th General Hospital from Normandy on in to Dachau, and a family friend, Donald Trunkey, one of the nation's top surgeons, was in-theater for ODS, also with the 50th. Note, all three were privately trained. Surgery is a work-up, learn-as-you-go-process trying to build experience. Unfortunately, the proper training, knowledge base, and accountability seem to be rarities in the military medical system, and many of those "horrible accidents" occur right there on the military operating table with incompetent surgeons doing work they haven't been properly trained or qualified for. They can, and most likely WILL, do irreparable harm. Even I've run-amok of doctors fresh out of the military and entering the private sector. NOT a confidence building experience. I DON'T want someone who's only "played" with skin, before. I want a professional who KNOWS his business, or you ARE liable to become the "frickin joker" in the process, with no recourse.

Livin' life in the fast lane and just passed a blur reading "BRIDGE OUT!"

oh please jump up and down.

I could not resist the last post. But you are correct as some of you know I was paramedic and run a telemedicine company. The worst thing is someone trying to do some thing they have only read about before in a book. When I was in training I had a set number of patients who require IVs, intubation, and defibrillation (shock) to name a few. Had to attend and participate in a set number of deliveries. This hands on training gave me to comfort to know that I could perform under pressure, that no simulation or book could provide.

From the delivery training I came up with my motto mam 'dont push, cross your leg, i will not pull, and my partner will drive like Mario Andretti'. Had only one still birth caught half in and out of the birth canal in the field and learned my limits from right then and there.

The whole thing here is these doctors need the training, I think what rubs some people is the elective nature of the proceedure. In my mind I would rather send these doctors to inner city facilities to reconstruct the breast of cancer and trauma victims, where there is a definite social need.

Right-on.

Livin' life in the fast lane and just passed a blur reading "BRIDGE OUT!"

I REALLY DONT THINK THEIR IS A SHORTAGE OF "MEDICAL RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE FOR ANYONE IN THE DOD, THEY SHOULDNT HAVE ANY PROBLEM GETTING PRACTICE.




MONEY TALKS,B.S. JUST PILES UP.

_________________
\"Live Free Or Die\"

I would argue that doctors don't NEED to know how to do any of the things discussed in this thread. None of them are life saving measures....they only serve the vain.

Then again, that's probably cause i'm good looking.

LOL

"I came here to kick ass and chew bubblegum...and i'm all out of bubblegum".

Just to play devil's advocate...what about plastic surgery to help mitigate a combat injury that would might lead to despondency and suicide?

On the flip side, when my eye doc retired he sold his practice to a retired (but young) AF or Army doc. Only took one visit to convince me he would be doing his OJT on someone else.

"Live every day like it's the last, 'cause one day you're gonna be right!" Ray Charles (6/10/04 was the day)

_________________
\"Those who hammer their guns into plows
will plow for those who do not.\"
- Thomas Jefferson

And you've hit the two issues, 30mm. I fully recognize the need for treating disfigurement. What seriously bothers me is the lack of training, skill, oversight, and accountability of those performing the surgeries. Mattlott makes a good point by having them work in a an environment where those procedures can be properly monitored by those more qualified and experienced, and on people that really do need the treatment. That way, real doctors can play duck hunter and cull the quacks. I sense the current system puts the "trainees'" interests first, rather than the patients', and may pressure someone to undergo a "voluntary" treatment. This can lead to disfiguring a healthy person, and that's not right.

We get fresh-out-of-service docs on campus all the time. After they misdiagnosed friends' pneumonia, whooping cough, lupis, and tried to give me an injection for a different patient, I only went there for a note to miss class on account of illness. The veterinary students are sincerely some of the most competent and dedicated medical professionals I've been treated by. lol

Livin' life in the fast lane and just passed a blur reading "BRIDGE OUT!"

Horrido, some times the oops can be the best train on earth. Provided your not the patient. lol

Nothing is sadder than funnier that watching residents pass the buck on a f*** up. And the worst time to visit the trauma center in at the start of the new year, when the residents can not figure out rectal exams require lube. (seriously that does happen)

now snipe about good looks I have heard of males getting dd implanted for wife's pleasure dont kill you options off lol.

Nah, i dont like big boobs. Gravity does terrible things to them over time.

I like small, yet healthy and perky boobies.

They stand the test of time.

"I came here to kick ass and chew bubblegum...and i'm all out of bubblegum".

Horrido, they aren't learning, they are maintaining currency. All of the reasons you put forth are exactly why they are doing these surgeries. By "played with skin" I obviously meant perform surgery and not turned skin into a ball and bounced it, but good semantics. No where in any of these news articles does it say these doctors are trainees, interns, or otherwise unqualified to do these surgeries. You made that outrage up on your own. It's also only in your imagination that anyone would be pressured to receive one of these surgeries. It takes 6 months to a year of paperwork, time away from work (yeah, right! Get that approved in today's ops tempo) and your own funds for the supplies. Who would be applying the pressure? Not your boss! No one is that ugly that any supervisor would rather be short a man than see your face one more day.

As for sending said doctors to breast cancer or trauma wards, is that then the correct way to spend National Defense money? Who is liable should one of the patients decide to sue? Who pays for the supplies, and will the military pay for use of the hospital or the hospital pay for use of the doctor? It's a whole can of worms.

Snipe, if the military only offered services that were life saving, that would suck! They also don't NEED to perform knee surgery, but it makes life a whole lot better for those who were injured and got it. If we only got medical treatment when it was life-threatening, we'd have a pretty piss-poor military all around. My allergies aren't life-threatening, but you can pry my Flonase from my cold dead fingers!<img src=icon_smile_angry.gif border=0 align=middle> Arrrrrgggggg!

LOL.

My ex used to use flo-nase. I often contemplated inserting a small coral snake into the inhaler.

"I came here to kick ass and chew bubblegum...and i'm all out of bubblegum".

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>You made that outrage up on your own. It's also only in your imagination that anyone would be pressured to receive one of these surgeries. Who would be applying the pressure? Not your boss! As for sending said doctors to breast cancer or trauma wards, is that then the correct way to spend National Defense money? Who is liable should one of the patients decide to sue? Who pays for the supplies, and will the military pay for use of the hospital or the hospital pay for use of the doctor? It's a whole can of worms.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>


Nope, the outrage comes from a number of people of I've spoken with over the years that haven't been too impressed with what military medicine did to them. Not my imgagination, either, again, from several sources. Who applies the pressure? Well, anyone that might be short a patient that sees an opportunity to "maintain currency," and I'm not saying it's intense or ordered. "Gee, having difficulty keeping your weight to requirements, how 'bout a fast lipposuction? Won't cost you much, and the schedule is open!"

Breast cancer and trauma wards...the mil-docs are paid by the military at a going rate, correct? Why should it matter if it's a civilian or mil/dependent if the purpose is to maintain currency? Now they have patients that really need the ops., and I'd rather see defense money going into patients that need it, and the excuse is so the docs can get the experience they need, anyway, and it's not going into unecessary vanity surgery that may take personel out of service. If the doc screws up, he should be liable for malpractice, like all physicians should be. I'm surprised you'd want a misfit to not be held liable. Obviously, supplies come from the hospital and is paid for however they'd usually be in terms of operating on the patient. No can of worms, not that complicated, simply a mil-doc doing work in a civilian hospital, except his paycheck comes from the military.

Livin' life in the fast lane and just passed a blur reading "BRIDGE OUT!"

How is that doctor who is short a patient going to apply pressure? Find my name on the global email list and start harrassing me to get a nose job? Riiiiiiiight. No, speaking as someone who has a bit of military experience, no doctor at Brooks AFB can randomly pressure me to get any procedure done unless it's for a really, really good reason. Let me re-explain my explanation. It takes 6 months to a year of paperwork to get it approved, as well as your chain of command's approval. And by chain, I mean it starts with your immediate supervisor and goes up to the wing level (ie, the General.) It is not nearly as simple as "I've got space, how about you!" If in the bizarre situation one of the medical personnel DID try to throw a casual liposuction at someone, they've got 50 other people saying NO!

As for money, it matters an incredibly great deal to those who dole out the money which dollars are applied to which project. Case in point: my squadron has X dollars to apply to Y number of hours of our own flying, and all our receivers have their own pots of money, some dedicated to their own flying and some dedicated to getting our gas. If we refuel receivers from the 67th, and that's the only thing we do, we charge them for all our gas (what we pass AND what we burn). If we refuel some receivers from the 67th, and some from the 44th, the cost is split between the two. If we recover to a base other than Kadena, the cost is pro-rated for the flying hours it takes to get to the outbase. If the reason for the TDY is squadron-generated (ie an airshow or a typhoon evac) the per diem AND the billeting costs come out of the squadron pot. If, while at our outbase, our mission also includes air refueling receivers from another unit, our per diem and lodging is prorated with the receiver(s)' unit. Last week I typhoon evac'ed to Yokota. On the way we went to Korea and refueled a 12-ship of A-10s and 8 F-16's (2 from one unit, 6 from another.) The cost of our gas (burned) was prorated per receiver through the fir between Korea and Japan, and the 909th payed for burned gas between the fir and landing. Each receiver payed for gas passed. First night in Yokota was payed for by the squadron out of non-mission TDY funds, however on the second day we refueled an aircraft out of mainland Japan. Their unit was then responsible for 28% of our crew's per diem, as well as 18% of our lodging that night. (I have no clue where those percentages come from, just that they exist.) Because we were lodged off base, we got full per diem rates, but because we were flying out of a military base we did not get OCONUS. Because we had to go to the base to fly the mission, transpo at Yokota charged the receiver's unit for the cost of the crew bus (gas, and the driver's prorated salary.) And that was just the first 24 hours of a six day TDY.

The point is, you ask what it matters who pays for what? Well, it matters greatly. Who pays for supplies? Is it military contracted cleaners who clean the operating room after it's finished, or the hospital's? Will the hospital pay it's own cleaners to clean up after a military operation where it's own doctors did not get paid? Can the patient sue the doctor? The hospital? The DoD? Your congressman? Because as it is right now, military members or their dependants may NOT sue a military doctor for malpractice. This is how we control our medical costs, because the doctors then do not need exhorbitant insurance. Did you get that? Military doctors do not carry the standard malpractice insurance. So, who is responsible for what in this situation? Who will the patient sue if it doesn't go perfectly? Who pays for that? It is indeed a can of worms, and the bottom line is that defense money is for defense. Not for "people who really need it." It is cheeper and more efficient to "keep it in the family" than to try to set up a system for military doctors treating civilians, as Blessed and Good as that might be in utopia.

Anyway, I thought you asked questions when you came upon something you don't know about.

one military doctors already treat civilian in trauma centers on a rotation basis in some cities. Because quite frankly if there is no war your guys are not seeing enough gun shot wounds, knifing, car wrecks, and crush injuries to sustain good skills. So working in the civilian arena can be done. Beyond trauma military doctors also rotate through aids wards and other areas because you don't have aids patients in the military, but you might be required to treat them in africa or other places.

While I am against large malpractic suites, the threat of lawsuits is one threat that discourages poor judgement. This is why there has been a move to allow some sort of lawsuites against military doctors in congress in the past. Quite frankly military doctors as a sterio type do not inspire confidence in the real world. So even claim that these guys goto the military because that is what is left for them. I am sure there are great military doctors, but as a whole no one is jumping up and down to go to them.

As a paramedic I will tell you this just because you were a military medic does not qualify you for civilian medicine, why because in general the diseases the debilitate most american are not present in your population. The problem here is any one in the medical field civilian or military must be qualified to treat anyone. We should be sending doctors to overseas who can treat the civilian population of Iraq and Afganistan to the best standards, why because this helps win the hearts and minds. Rather than having people butchered by lack of real world training. Poke I am sorry but this is where I trained and have first hand experience about. We had PJs come train in our city they did wonderful in trauma. You throw a diabetic, congestive heart failure, asthmatic, chain smoker who weights 300+ plus at them they are at a loss. Not because they can not be trained but because they are not being exposed enough to real world civilians. These guys are the cream of the cropp but they must work on civilians to get the exposure needed.

In closing if you go to any inner city hospital in American these surgeons would be welcomed with open arms by women with double mastectomys, and other traumatic injures. How about taking this a little further where are these doctors going to get a chance to work on cleft pallets, routine facial reconstruction from trauma (car wrecks, domestic violence, cancer removal). Cancer provides great opportunities for plastic surgeons to do good work. People are loosing cheeks, noses, eye socks everyday in civilian hospitals--the plastic surgeons make them look human again. This is the experience military surgeon should have inorder to reconstruct some 20 your privates face after being hit by a bullet.

In the end the military is about service, as a tax payer I want that service to be a credit to my coutry not its vanity. Just think about all the possibilities for sexual harrassment with this policy as a female soldier tryies to explain to a male superior why she needs bigger tits. I am waiting for the first complaint about a commander asking to see the tits before approval of the surgery.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
one military doctors already treat civilian in trauma centers on a rotation basis in some cities. Because quite frankly if there is no war your guys are not seeing enough gun shot wounds, knifing, car wrecks, and crush injuries to sustain good skills. So working in the civilian arena can be done. Beyond trauma military doctors also rotate through aids wards and other areas because you don't have aids patients in the military, but you might be required to treat them in africa or other places.

While I am against large malpractic suites, the threat of lawsuits is one threat that discourages poor judgement. This is why there has been a move to allow some sort of lawsuites against military doctors in congress in the past. Quite frankly military doctors as a sterio type do not inspire confidence in the real world. Some even claim that these guys goto the military because that is what is left for them. I am sure there are great military doctors, but as a whole no one is jumping up and down to go to them.

As a paramedic I will tell you this just because you were a military medic does not qualify you for civilian medicine, why because in general the diseases the debilitate most american are not present in your population. The problem here is any one in the medical field civilian or military must be qualified to treat anyone. We should be sending doctors to overseas who can treat the civilian population of Iraq and Afganistan to the best standards, why because this helps win the hearts and minds. Rather than having people butchered by lack of real world training. Poke I am sorry but this is where I trained and have first hand experience about. We had PJs come train in our city they did wonderful in trauma. You throw a diabetic, congestive heart failure, asthmatic, chain smoker who weights 300+ plus at them they are at a loss. Not because they can not be trained but because they are not being exposed enough to real world civilians. These guys are the cream of the cropp but they must work on civilians to get the exposure needed.

In closing if you go to any inner city hospital in American these surgeons would be welcomed with open arms by women with double mastectomys, and other traumatic injures. How about taking this a little further where are these doctors going to get a chance to work on cleft pallets, routine facial reconstruction from trauma (car wrecks, domestic violence, cancer removal). Cancer provides great opportunities for plastic surgeons to do good work. People are loosing cheeks, noses, eye socks everyday in civilian hospitals--the plastic surgeons make them look human again. This is the experience military surgeon should have inorder to reconstruct some 20 your privates face after being hit by a bullet.

In the end the military is about service, as a tax payer I want that service to be a credit to my coutry not its vanity. Just think about all the possibilities for sexual harrassment with this policy as a female soldier tryies to explain to a male superior why she needs bigger tits. I am waiting for the first complaint about a commander asking to see the tits before approval of the surgery.


<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

IT WAS THE PROBLEM WE HAD CIVILIAN DR'S IN MILITARY HOSPITALS DUE TO MILITARY DR'S SHORTAGES.

I DONT SEE A PROBLEM WITH MILITARY DR'S WORKING TEMP IN CANCER CENTERS,JUST LIKE CIVILIAN DR'S HELPING IN A STATESIDE WOUNDED TRAUMA CENTER.
ALOT OF TRICARE AND CHAMPVA NEED DIFFERANT CARE SO IT NEEDS TO BE ALL OVER I GUESS IN TRAINING.
BUT UNLESS ITS A DISFIGURING SCAR OR RECONSTRUCTION OR PREVENTIVE SURGERY THEN ABOVE THAT IS ASKING A LITTLE TOO MUCH.

I COULD UNDERSTAND BREAST IMPLANTS AFTER A PATIENT FIGHTS BREAST CANCER,JUST LIKE IF THEY NEED BREAST REDUCTION DUE TO LOWER BACK PAIN.
GASTRIC BY-PASS IS PREVENTIVE SURGERY BUT LIPOSUCTION AINT,
YOUR NOSE WAS BROKEN,I COULD SEE YOU WANT IT FIXED BUT IF YOU JUST DONT LIKE YOUR NOSE TOO BAD IT AINT BROKE
BURNS NEED RECONSTRUCTION,BIRTHDEFECTS NEED IT TOO

BUT THE MILITARY HAS SOME OF THE BEST BURN AND PRE-NATAL UNITS IN THE WORLD.
ITS A REAL TOSS UP IN THE END.

BUT MALPRACTICE SHOULD BE LIMITED TO COST OF TREATMENT AND UP KEEP OF THE MEDICAL CONDITIONS.
I'M SORRY 250,000 AINT ENOUGH TO TAKE CARE OF A CHILD WHO IS SICK FROM MALPRACTICE BUT 25,000,000 IS WAY TO F-ING MUCH FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING
FOR A SCAR.
BUT THEN IF A DR HAS 200 CASES SETTLED OR PENDING IN 5 YRS YOU HAVE TO START WONDERING IF HE SHOULD BE A DR.

MONEY TALKS,B.S. JUST PILES UP.

_________________
\"Live Free Or Die\"

Poke, while that was a very nice description of your typhoon-evac, please go back and read my previous posts, since you seemed to have glossed-over the points I made:

After accusing me of making up outrages and imagining things from actual events that harmed REAL PEOPLE (otherwise, I couldn't have cared other than the expense for vanity surgery, and even not cared at that cost so long as it was done right and the training was useful), you seem certain I don't know anything about it, in the meantime going beyond reason, yourself, in your examples. That's inappropriate, unwarranted, and incorrect. While I'm certainly limited in military beauracracy, and haven't stated a knowledge of such, I have enough contact with both the medical and military communities, both literary and personal, to have a sense of what's good and what's bad with the system, from their own experiences. When it comes to medicine, you don't only just hear about the BAD experiences, people praise the successes, too, because the patients are very thankful for the work performed, and this praise is frustratingly lacking from the military.

Now, since you wanted a question, here it is: Do dependents also have to go through the same paperwork system, and is it as extensive and time-consuming as their active duty counterparts? If it IS easier and faster for a dependent, we all know how important appearance and vanity can become to some people, or through insult or social pressure. Like I said, it's subtle pressures by the physician,"Well, we should do this, or I'd really recommend that, etc." basically leading the patient to take up their offer for something unecessary. You don't have to go global e-mail, it's right there in front of them in the office. I've actually seen this happen to me and to other friends in different areas, so I know it DOES happen. Again, in the military, if you lose currency (which doesn't mean you're skilled at it, and "qualified" is just piece of paper) it's a bad thing, so if you need ex-number of bodies, and you can't get sued for it, why the hell not get'em on the table? It's a case where even if it ain't broke, why not try to fix it? But, hey, if they've got 50 other people saying "No," they're probably protecting the patient, if nothing else.

Back to your can of worms, Mattlott indicated mil-docs already work at civilian hospitals, and visa-versa, and I've already stated my belief is to have the surgeon's paycheck come from the military (which it does anyway, so no greater expense to take away from 'phoon-evac. As for materials, cleaning personel, etc, I don't know, perhaps Mattlott does, but I'm sure that's been taken care of, as well. It brings the question of what's less expensive, too, the supplies brought by the civilian hospital or from the military one? If the civilian hospital is less expensive, then it obviously behooves the military to go that route). Obviously, somebody's worked it out, and it inspires me to know we're closer to Utopia than originally suspected. As to malpractice, I'll ask another question, this one aimed at Mattlott, aren't the hospitals the entities that are covered by insurance, rather than the docs individually, or is it a combination of both? If this is the case, wouldn't the mil-docs maintaining currency most likely be covered by the hospital and under HEAVY oversight by the civilian hospital, to do things right the first time? If they are given better oversight, they will learn more, and do a better job. Now, Poke, you may be willing to roll-over for the the current system, however flawed it may be or who it may harm, but I'm just not comfortable sticking people with questionable physicians who aren't accountable, and offering "free" vanity services as an incentive for people to try them. That's just not taking care of your people, and I'm sorry if the fact my concern offends you. If the mil-docs have obviously failed, maybe the military should have the decency to ship the patient out to a civilian hospital to repair the damage, rather than having a military one compound it, further costing more money and time lost on paperwork? I just don't believe beauracracy and money should outweigh the Hippocratic Oath. And, going back to the origins of this thread, if "Defense money is for defense," then they should be using it for defense, and not vanity.

The bottom line for me, is I just want to see a trustworthy, accountable system that inspires confidence in the people that have no real choice but to use it. Our service people have earned and deserve that, without question, and obviously aren't receiving it. You don't get that by staying silent and keeping things the way they are, you get that by exploring alternatives, and keeping the ones that work. I also know that a LOT of very good docs either go through or come out of the military, and that my grandfather says his service helped him save MANY lives he probably couldn't have, otherwise. I honestly hope if you, or anyone for that matter, are ever found in need, that you're pleased to enjoy the best possible service and can taunt me about my made up outrage and imagination backed by your good experiences. I'd more than welcome it.

Livin' life in the fast lane and just passed a blur reading "BRIDGE OUT!"

if you watch MASH or are history buff the system worked better when they could draft or have heavy reserve physicians from civillian life. This is because the doctors got heavy experience in the real world and oh by the way the best and britest could dodge serving.

One laughs but there were civilian doctors of the caliber of a Hawkeye or a Winchest in days gone by because they were draft. Since we can not draft we should be sending the military doctors to civilian hospitals for training. If you structure the deal correctly the civilian hospitals would be happy to pay the malpractic for tax break and military picking up the salary.

Not at home. I`ll reply more when I get back, but it may be awhile. In the meantime, I think y`all are getting your panties in a wad over something insignificant on the grand scheme of things.