Why haven't we heard from the surgeon general about the Ebola crisis?

You must have a strange dictionary. Your definition for "qualified" is different from everyone else's. Same thing with that word "credential".

Here is your problem Timmie. The democrats control the Senate, The nomination will be confirmed in the Senate. It only takes a majority to confirm. At anytime the democrats could confirm this joke of a nominee but THEY won't. Why not? I guess some of them are afraid of how it will look back home or maybe they don't like the views of the nominee. This is a democratic problem from top to bottom. Obama picked a loser (show me one nominee that was a winner) and the senate is afraid to confirm.

You must have a strange dictionary. Your definition for "qualified" is different from everyone else's. Same thing with that word "credential".

Here is your problem Timmie. The democrats control the Senate, The nomination will be confirmed in the Senate. It only takes a majority to confirm. At anytime the democrats could confirm this joke of a nominee but THEY won't. Why not? I guess some of them are afraid of how it will look back home or maybe they don't like the views of the nominee. This is a democratic problem from top to bottom. Obama picked a loser (show me one nominee that was a winner) and the senate is afraid to confirm. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Thanks admiral, I understand how the process works. And, I understand why there are members of the senate who are reluctant to vote to confirm someone who has come out against the right to own assault rifles.....it could cause them to lose their job. None of that changes the fact that Murthy is eminently qualified to be the surgeon general of the United States. Look up his credentials, I am certain you neglected to do that before you came on here and started shooting your mouth off. There was one ideologically driven fact that you disagreed with and your entire decision is based on that.....not on his qualifications to do the job he has been nominated to do.

By the way, it's not the senate that is "afraid to confirm".....it's the White House that is afraid to bring it up on a vote because he might not be confirmed. If you need some more help deciphering what is actually going on, you let me know pin-head.

Murthy's long documented advocacy for stricter gun control is a clear marker for what is wrong with our esteemed and dear leader, the honorable Barack Hussein Obama. The Surgeon Generals office is largely one of advocacy and public relations campaigns to promote health in the general population. The current democratic/progressive regime has sought to warp this noble responsibility for the most crass of political reasons, akin to adjusting one's thermostat while the house burns down, all for selfish political gain and power. There are roughly 19,000 gun suicides per year in the U.S. There are roughly 11,100 gun homicides. If you were the Surgeon General and had only a glimmer of rational and proportionate outlook for health issues, how could you make gun control your priority? What about the 18,000 DUI deaths and 275,000 DUI injuries in the U.S.? Why make gun control advocacy an issue? Simple. It does not make sense to sensible people, would never pass cursory oversight scrutiny from Congress, and make you a laughing stock while drawing a Federal salary and earning a juicy retirement package. Maybe Harry Reid is wiser than credit him for not bringing this partisan fool into the white light of objective scrutiny that any nominee must withstand. It spares the few sensible Democrats that survive in the Senate from another embarrassing vote to buck their horrible pick for a leader.

Is it administratively more challenging to control guns than Ebola?

Is it administratively more challenging to control guns than Ebola? Originally Posted by LexusLover

Of course it's more challenging. Not everyone has Ebola but everyone has guns. An ill population is less of a threat to Government than armed one.

Jim

Murthy's long documented advocacy for stricter gun control is a clear marker for what is wrong with our esteemed and dear leader, the honorable Barack Hussein Obama. The Surgeon Generals office is largely one of advocacy and public relations campaigns to promote health in the general population. The current democratic/progressive regime has sought to warp this noble responsibility for the most crass of political reasons, akin to adjusting one's thermostat while the house burns down, all for selfish political gain and power. There are roughly 19,000 gun suicides per year in the U.S. There are roughly 11,100 gun homicides. If you were the Surgeon General and had only a glimmer of rational and proportionate outlook for health issues, how could you make gun control your priority? What about the 18,000 DUI deaths and 275,000 DUI injuries in the U.S.? Why make gun control advocacy an issue? Simple. It does not make sense to sensible people, would never pass cursory oversight scrutiny from Congress, and make you a laughing stock while drawing a Federal salary and earning a juicy retirement package. Maybe Harry Reid is wiser than credit him for not bringing this partisan fool into the white light of objective scrutiny that any nominee must withstand. It spares the few sensible Democrats that survive in the Senate from another embarrassing vote to buck their horrible pick for a leader. Originally Posted by trident60

Murthy's position is the position adopted, implemented and enforced by virtually every western democracy and pretty much every other country, civilized and uncivilized, in the world. You know..... countries like Japan where, for instance, in 2008, there were 11 deaths as a result of firearms. Half of the number of dead 6 year olds that took probably less than 5 minutes for a crazy to kill with an AR15 assault rifle in Newtown, CT. of the US of A last year. That might make sense to you but it doesn't to a lot of other people.

Why would any quality doctor want to Surgeon General? Remember, the female Surgeon General, I thinck her name was Elder, that recommended masturbating and the uproar it caused.

Murthy's position is the position adopted, implemented and enforced by virtually every western democracy and pretty much every other country, civilized and uncivilized, in the world. You know..... countries like Japan where, for instance, in 2008, there were 11 deaths as a result of firearms. Half of the number of dead 6 year olds that took probably less than 5 minutes for a crazy to kill with an AR15 assault rifle in Newtown, CT. of the US of A last year. That might make sense to you but it doesn't to a lot of other people. Originally Posted by timpage

What does not make sense is to politicize and twist the mission of an appointed official to one granted by rule of law. The worst example is the poor administrator of NASA who made highlighting Muslim achievements in space exploration NASA's first priority, trading this ridiculous goal to get appointed. Similarly, a Surgeon General has little business injecting himself into an issue that is not in the purview of the office. This is our constitutional rule of law, and when followed distinguishes us from pretty much every other country, to borrow your phrase. Rule of law builds civilization, well being, private wealth, etc., all that good stuff that corrupt political rule confiscates for the rulers.

At the risk of diving into the gun control debate, those who are more comfortable with a less democratic and law driven democracy could retire to Japan or Germany and hope they do not revert to their pre-WWII practices of civil disarmament. Forget Switzerland where the populace is conscripted to be armed to the teeth for national defense. We pay an awful price for our freedoms including tolerance for free speech practiced on these pages.

Why would any quality doctor want to Surgeon General? Remember, the female Surgeon General, I thinck her name was Elder, that recommended masturbating and the uproar it caused. Originally Posted by pyramider

Yeah but you took her advice didn't ya, lol.


Jim

What does the Surgeon General do? I think it is an unnecessary position anyway.

Reality check Timmie.... the AR 15 is NOT an assault rifle. The M16 is an assault rifle. The AR15 looks like a M16 but it does not fire the same way.

What does a Surgeon General have to do with gun control anyway?

Remember, the female Surgeon General, I thinck her name was Elder, that recommended masturbating and the uproar it caused. Originally Posted by pyramider

Wasn't the "uproar" over her insisting on "COVERED MASTURBATION"?

What does a Surgeon General have to do with gun control anyway? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Reduce civilian inflicted gunshot wounds?

More shit from the White House:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/15/us...eral.html?_r=0

Why would any quality doctor want to Surgeon General? Remember, the female Surgeon General, I thinck her name was Elder, that recommended masturbating and the uproar it caused. Originally Posted by pyramider

Clinton should have taken her advice.

Reality check Timmie.... the AR 15 is NOT an assault rifle. The M16 is an assault rifle. The AR15 looks like a M16 but it does not fire the same way.

What does a Surgeon General have to do with gun control anyway? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

What we really need is asshole control and the AR-15 is just one of the tools to accomplish that.


Jim