The NRA has opposed Obama's nominee for surgeon general, do you support or oppose that nominee?

[CreekDog]

Do you support or oppose Obama's nominee for surgeon general?

Vivek Murthy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vivek_Murthy

20 votes, 2 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	I support the nomination and think the Senate should confirm the nominee
	9 (45%)
	I oppose the nomination and think the Senate should reject the nominee
	11 (55%)
	2 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[monmouth3]

1. Second poll on this? Do you think these results might be different? I'm confused..n/t

[CreekDog]

2. i don't know and i won't know if i don't ask.

[monmouth3]

4. Bwahahaha, alrighty then..n/t

[Starboard Tack]

38. Got a link to the other poll?

[Electric Monk]

54. This poll is currently 74% support, 26% oppose, while the poll in GD is 96% support, 4% oppose

but it doesn't come down to gun lovers opposing him simply because guns. Yeah, riiiight.

[spin]

146. The same poll on a conservative site would have opposite results at best. (n/t)

[clffrdjk]

3. I have asked this elsewhere but haven't gotten an answer.

Why him? What makes him better than every other doctor in the US?

[CreekDog]

5. and yet despite not knowing who he is, you automatically oppose him

[clffrdjk]

6. I oppose him because I do not feel he is qualified.

Do you have an answer to my question?
Can you give a reason to support him?

[CreekDog]

10. you've barely posted outside this group in over a month

what's the point of even discussing it with you?

[friendly_iconoclast]

11. So what? The two questions asked are eminently reasonable

[clffrdjk]

14. So no.

You couldn't think of a reason and decided to look me up and try to use my lack of posts against me.
I am not even looking to debate your reasons. I just want to know why I should support him.

[CreekDog]

16. you didn't even need a reason to oppose him

what's the point?

[CreekDog]

21. but it's not about guns, right?

uh huh. cut the nonsense. at least own your position. have the courage to state it.

[clffrdjk]

26. Very simply I don't support anyone

Until I have valid reasons to support them. You haven't posted a single reason to support him. You have spent more time looking into me then you have looking into the guy you are supporting.

[pipoman]

79. The obvious answer is to trust your president

My or your support is meaningless unless you are actively lobbying opposition to the nominee to the Senate.

[clffrdjk]

83. I do trust him for the most part.

But I am an odd duck in that I like to think for myself, rather than blindly follow someone else's decisions. This is not a state secret there is no good reason that someone can not articulate why the person was chosen over everyone else.

[pipoman]

88. Know the serenity prayer?

"Accept the things I cannot change" is key...

[clffrdjk]

89. I don't really know it, but I understand what you are getting at.

I just find it very odd how I was immediately jumped on for not supporting this guy, when no one can seem to give me a reason to support him.

[pipoman]

93. Your posting history has more to do with it

Than anything imo. Not that it's right, just the way it is. Spending time speaking to your other, more liberal beliefs in other forums adds credibility to your positions. The gungeon is inhabited by good liberal gun owners. ..it is also bait for posers. ..lots of posers over the years have come and gone through the gungeon.

[spin]

112. I don't automatically trust any President or any politician. ...

I'm an American and we are known as a nation populated with citizens who have a high level of distrust of our government and those we elect.

The only two Presidents I trusted in my lifetime were "Ike" Eisenhower and JFK. JFK was assassinated while I was in high school. I was young, inexperienced and immature and far more gullible in those years.

I will also point out that there are surely many highly qualified doctors who could be nominated to serve as the Surgeon General and would have no problem being confirmed by the Senate.

edited to add that when I posted this I didn't look at that date of your post. Someone dug this thread up from the grave.

[LanternWaste]

95. What then, are the objective qualifications, and which of these qualifications does the current cand

"I do not feel he is qualified..."

What then are the precise and objective qualifications, and which of these qualifications does the current candidate not meet?

[ManiacJoe]

96. You are aware that you zombied a 6-month old thread, right?

[clffrdjk]

100. By replying to an 8 month old post

[CreekDog]

104. Republicans still haven't confirmed Obama's nominee for Surgeon General, so it's still relevant

If you have some reason for not wanting it discussed at DU, you just let us know.

[ManiacJoe]

106. If you have new info to discuss, please do so.

I was just pointing out that the thread was old and no new data was added when it was brought back from the dead. Thus, expecting a response might be a long shot.

[Eleanors38]

115. "I Walked With a Zombie."

[clffrdjk]

101. How about years of experience leading other doctors.

[CreekDog]

105. actually you're standard was that he had to be the #1 doctor in the USA

and you'll keep adding reasons why he can't be #1 and why he's not good enough for you.

pretty obvious what's up.

[clffrdjk]

108. Sorry refresh my memory where did I say that?

I noticed how you couldn't show how he met the years of service in a leadership role qualification. Is that one set unreasonably high?

[CreekDog]

109. if you can't remember the first reason you opposed him then you obviously didn't think about it

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=140462

you wrote it in this thread and if you can't be bothered to either remember or even look at what you've posted here, you aren't serious enough to bother discussing this with.

[clffrdjk]

113. Wow talk about being intentionally obtuse

Last edited Wed Oct 15, 2014, 10:59 PM - Edit history (1)

3. I have asked this elsewhere but haven't gotten an answer.
Why him? What makes him better than every other doctor in the US?

And no I tend not to remember everything I said 8 months ago.

[Starboard Tack]

7. You know how these "anti's" are

[clffrdjk]

8. How about you?

Why do you think he is the best choice for the job?

[friendly_iconoclast]

13. Since they won't admit it, I'll tell you -his position guns trumps all other considerations

If you are a True Believer, a certificate from the local Reiki academy
is qualification enough to be Surgeon General of the United States so long as
they say the right things about guns.

[CreekDog]

22. you won't admit guns is the reason you oppose him

why is that?

i didn't suddenly start supporting the Democratic nominee for surgeon general with this candidate.

i've supported pretty much all of them.

you on the other hand had some sort of issue with this one in particular and it's not guns, not it's not guns you say, it's ummm, not enough executive experience.

i get that we won't agree very often on DU.

but if you won't even be honest about what you think, then i don't think you're posting out of honest conviction, but instead you're just playing a dishonest game with me.

[Starboard Tack]

28. I think he is an excellent choice

Look at his credentials. I see nothing to object to. How about you? Am I missing something?

[clffrdjk]

42. I see nothing in his credentials

That separates him from the pack. I am still wondering why he is the best choice for the job.

[Starboard Tack]

47. Pack, what pack?

Who else is/was a contender?

[clffrdjk]

49. Oh, I don't know, every doctor in the U.S.

I don't have an alternative candidate that I am supporting. Just plainly asking why him over any other doctor, why is he the best person for the job?

[Starboard Tack]

50. Why? Do you think we always find the "best" person for any job?

You have no alternative besides "every doctor in the US"
Looks to me like you are flying your true colors on this one. Why don't you ask some of those doctors if they support his nomination?
Or is the opinion of Dr Rand Paul more to your liking? Maybe you'd prefer him for the job.

[clffrdjk]

52. Jesus you guys will do anything

To avoid answering the simple question of, why him? Is it really that hard? Do you not know why you think he is the right person for the job?

[CreekDog]

61. "You guys" = Democrats

[clffrdjk]

62. Stretch........oh just a little more .... Maybe.

Just maybe we can discredit the question by insinuating that he is a right winger. And then we don't have to answer it. Or even wonder why we support that man in the first place.

[etherealtruth]

12. He has an astonishing resume

His education and public service experience is astounding.

A quick google search indicates that this man is head and shoulders above most physicians. The only folk that seem to question his qualifications are the NRA (and those politicans "afraid" of the NRA and their money) and right wingers. This is a truly impressive man.

Dr. Vivek Hallegere Murthy is the Co-Founder and President of Doctors for America, a position he has held since 2009. Dr. Murthy is also a Hospitalist Attending Physician and Instructor in Medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital at Harvard Medical School, a position he has held since 2006. In 2011, Dr. Murthy was appointed to serve as a Member of the Advisory Group on Prevention, Health Promotion, and Integrative and Public Health. Dr. Murthy has been the Co-Founder and Chairman of the Board of TrialNetworks, formerly known as Epernicus, since 2007. Dr. Murthy co-founded VISIONS Worldwide in 1995, a non-profit organization focused on HIV/AIDS education in India and the United States, where he served as President from 1995 to 2000 and Chairman of the Board from 2000 to 2003. Dr. Murthy received a B.A. from Harvard University, an M.B.A. from Yale School of Management, and an M.D. from Yale School of Medicine.

http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/health/blogs/white-coat-notes/2013/11/14/obama-nominating-vivek-murthy-harvard-and-brigham-and-women-surgeon-general/eo6mit1nNtLpUxE6VrizLJ/blog.html

[friendly_iconoclast]

15. He's not even qualified to run the School of Public Health where he works

He's not head of his department. He also lacks sufficient management experience.
What makes him qualified to run the vastly larger United States Public Health Service
Comissioned Corps?

I don't doubt that he's a fine physician and excellent professor, but he's not yet ready for the
job he's being touted for.

[CreekDog]

17. ah, so you opposed Obama and voted against him too?

on the same basis? no executive experience?

[friendly_iconoclast]

23. I voted twice for Obama, who was far more qualified than Murthy

Obama was a member of the Senate, so he had knowledge of how the Federal government
runs things. Murthy doesn't even run a department where he works. He's not even
on the faculty at his universities' School of Public Health:

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/faculty/#M

[CreekDog]

25. so you support Murthy's statements on guns

correct?

[friendly_iconoclast]

27. No more than I'd credit Gary Kleck's opinion on public health issues

Which is to say, not at all...

[Mojorabbit]

44. I would have to agree that he does not seem to have the best qualifications for the job

though what he does have is impressive. There have to be tons of docs who have long time experience in public health that may have been a better choice.

[CTyankee]

137. bu that wouldn't work, you see. Every one of those tons of docs with public health experience will

be OPPOSED vehemently by the 2A folks. They will inevitably come down on the side of more sensible gun laws in this country. It is the only intelligent and informed way to come down. Public health docs see the ravages of our insane gun culture every day in EDs across this country.

[Mojorabbit]

143. He still is not the most qualified person for the job

I personally know several docs that have the experience. Moot point now. I hope he can get spun up quickly and I hope he does well.

[CTyankee]

144. Me, too.

I'm sure he will have lots of good folks working for him that can help.

[Starboard Tack]

33. So, why not vote in this poll? Too many dinos for you?

Or do you no longer support Obama and his choices?

[friendly_iconoclast]

34. An 'all or nothing' type, eh? In *this* case, Obama is wrong...

...other times, I'm down with the POTUS.

[Starboard Tack]

37. Wrong? But not because of his gun views?

So, why not vote?

[friendly_iconoclast]

39. Both his gun views and lack of experience, as explained in post #32

Besides that, are you really sure you want to tout DU polls,
given the results of another one we both voted in?:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024662934

"Should America work towards becoming a gun-free Country?"

[Starboard Tack]

51. Tout polls? No

I see you decided to be a fence sitter on this, even though you say you oppose him. Interesting.
I considered voting "neither" in the other poll, because the question is loaded. Gun free is not my ideal, but gun sane is and the way the NRA and gun industry is peddling it's junk and fear, maybe gun free is the only way.

[friendly_iconoclast]

53. We both know that gun free is not going to happen

[Starboard Tack]

55. Agreed

[CreekDog]

19. so you'd support a cadidate just like him with management experience

taking all the same positions.

thank you for taking that position.

[etherealtruth]

20. FOX news has a blog post saying exactly that ...

I think the reasons are far more nefarious

Gun Laws: A New Litmus Test For Surgeon General?

“You said, in your advocacy for passage of gun control, last year, that you’re ‘tired of politicians playing politics with guns, putting lives at risk because they’re scared of the NRA,’ ” Alexander said and then continued with a question: “To what extent do you intend to use the surgeon general’s office as a bully pulpit for gun control?”

http://commonhealth.wbur.org/2014/03/nra-surgeon-general-vivek-murthy

[CreekDog]

24. right, your opposition has nothing to do with guns

why is this a game to you? your opposition is about guns and for some reason you are afraid to say that.

why?

[Starboard Tack]

30. You are talking to people who don't see gun violence as a public health issue.

Of course, when they shoot each other, they still expect EMTs to roll out for them on the public dime.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

97. Cardiac disease is many times "self-inflicted."

Maybe a food registry, 10-day waiting period and a cholesterol check before purchasing high-capacity fatty foods would be in order.

[Starboard Tack]

99. You may have a point there

Personally, I'd prefer to stay away from the fatty foods as much as possible.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

102. But if you ever tried to take deep fried foods away from Southerners

you'd need a gun.

[Starboard Tack]

110. Why would I want to take anything away from anyone?

People should decide these things for themselves.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

111. It was an effort, however weak, to inject some levity. nt

[friendly_iconoclast]

32. Both guns AND lack of experience. Would you support Murthy if you didn't share his opinion...

...on guns? There are some major issues in the field of public health that are going to
come to the fore in major ways soon, and the Feds really need someone with experience
and political/organizational nous to navigate them:

*Climate change, and the effects on health (the current spread of infectious diseases
such as dengue fever, West Nile virus, Valley fever and Eastern Equine Encephalitis.

*the aging population, in common with other industrialized countries

*the effects of pollutants (got coal sludge?)

*Maybe this isn't quite as urgent as the above, but sleep deprivation
will only get worse in the future- and it's damn sure widespread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/114210992

Even if Murthy had said nothing at all about guns, he'd still be unqualified...

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

48. He doesn't seem that 'unqualified' to me.

Ignoring the 'gun' issue, I don't see why the surgeon general has to be an expert on any specific field of medicine, and even if he was, that would rule out his being an expert in pretty much every other field. Specialization sucks a lot of time; it's hard to be an expert in all sorts of subfields of healthcare at the same time. Besides, he's got an MBA in healthcare management in addition to his MD, so he probably has the 'political/organizational nous' you claim he needs.

[clffrdjk]

76. By your reasoning my cousin is just as qualified

So why is he a better choice than she is?

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

81. Well, first,

I haven't seen your cousin's CV, but if it's as wide as his, congrats, your cousin has an impressive resume.

Second, amazing as this might be, the 'best' person for any given job rarely gets that job, or is even considered for that job. What happens is that someone, usually some low level grunt, is tasked with finding a 'field' of suitable applicants. People who have input can suggest others who are left out. But here's the fun part. Probably hundreds of other qualified applicants are never considered, simply because they didn't turn up because of whatever original search parameters were used. The field is then winnowed down to what whoever gets to make the final decision considers 'best' from among those still in the running.

And this happens every day, for all sorts of jobs, not just 'surgeon general'. I'm having a tough time finding a hospital nursing job locally, even though I've seen all sorts of nurses I wouldn't trust to be my own nurse who got hired on just fine somehow.

[clffrdjk]

82. Next you are going to tell me the sky is blue.

What you have failed to mention is what set him apart from the crowd? You are absolutely right they did not just draw his name out of a hat, there was a process.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

84. I don't know, and neither does anyone here.

The only people who know specifically what set him apart from the others under consideration are those involved in the selection process, since they didn't make their process notes public.

Maybe he's spent time in Chicago (I didn't look back over his CV to find out) since so many of the Presidential picks for all sorts of posts tend to be Chicago people.

But because we don't and can't know, there's no real point in complaining about him being chosen as opposed to anyone else, unless you actually have someone you think is far more qualified who was actually interested in the job and who was even considered.

Are there better qualified people out there? Probably. What were the qualifications being looked for beyond a certain minimum competence as a physician? None of us know.

[Duckhunter935]

9. Too young

just finished residency a few years ago, I would like someone with more experience.

[CreekDog]

18. ok you'd support the exact same positions from a candidate 20 years older

thank you.

[Duckhunter935]

29. very possible

Have to see what the candidates overall experience is, the issue with guns makes no difference to me. The Surgeon General does not make laws.

[CreekDog]

31. except the gun position does make a difference to you

what's fascinating are all the acrobatics to make it sound like it doesn't.

not even the courage to post your actual reasoning on the matter. wow.

[Token Republican]

35. Would you support

a candidate with the exact same qualifications who was 150% behind the NRA's position?

Odds are no you wouldn't, since he's under qualified and is hostile to your views.

Would you it be a factor if he had 30 more years experience.

Odds are you might support him then, but with reservations.

[CreekDog]

41. It depends, but one thing is for sure...

if i did oppose him on the basis of his position on guns.

i sure as hell wouldn't try to blame my opposition on some other reason.

[Duckhunter935]

36. no

please do not tell me what my position is.

I answered your question and you do not seem to comprehend my answer, I thought I was quite clear, He is to young and inexperienced to lead the entire US health system, I would like to see a nominee with more experience.


The gun issue is a non-issue to me

CAN YOU READ THAT LAST PART AND UNDERSTAND IT

[Boom Sound 416]

46. No

[CreekDog]

91. what a difference a week makes

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024633146

[Boom Sound 416]

92. Coy much? You knew first!

Shall we have it out in the open or you wanna just keep walkin down the block.

You're call caller

[ManiacJoe]

40. I will ask the obvious question.

For the folks who think his positions on gun control are relevant to the post of Surgeon General, what are Murthy's actual positions on gun control?

[clffrdjk]

43. The most interesting part about your question

Is that the only people in this thread who bring up his stance on guns are the ones who support him. And that all but one of them have refused to even try and give a reason for their support.

[hack89]

56. Young, inexperienced and lacks gravitas

I support him for surgeon general regardless of his view on guns. However, it is hard to imagine him having any impact on the gun debate even if he wanted to.

[CreekDog]

85. what is "lacks gravitas"?

is that supposed to mean.

[hack89]

86. He is a political and professional lightweight

that will be ignored by Congress if he tries to do an end run around them in regards to gun control.

[beevul]

57. "Are you, or have you ever been, a communist". N/T

[CreekDog]

59. Asking your opinion is Mcarthyesqe...

Whatever...

[beevul]

63. My Dear Creekdog...

My Dear Creekdog,

It wasn't what you asked, it was why you asked it.


But then, you knew that, didn't you.


What point is there trying to be cute about it, when everyone here knows its the truth.

[Eleanors38]

70. Hee-hee...

Didn't you know he/she has exquisite and perfect-pitch leftist & activist credentials? Thus, no moral qualms when he/she says: "It depends..."

[spin]

58. I'm not opposed to a well qualified physician who supports strong gun control ...

as an nominee for Surgeon General.

Our nation is currently going through a major overhaul of our healthcare system. The voice of a respected and well qualified physician might help the reform progress and help insure that eventually our nation has a world class healthcare system that we can all be proud of.

While important, the gun control issue is far from the most critical medical issue in our nation. One example ...

Many states are allowing the medical use of marijuiana and some have even legalized the recreational use of this drug. For decades our nation has been told by our government that marijuiana has absolutely no medical value. It now appears that this was most likely propaganda.

The strong voice of a very experienced and well respected Surgeon General on this subject might help form opinions and policy in this debate.

I fear that any advice from a Surgeon General with little experience will be discounted and ignored as foolish by many, especially those with vested interests to protect.

If it is extremely important to Obama to nominate a Surgeon General who supports strong gun control, I'm sure he can easily find one with considerable experience.

[CTyankee]

138. Yes, probably you can. But then you will always have a "reason" to oppose them...esp. if the doc

has LOTS of public health expertise. Too many sights seen in EDs all over this country...

[spin]

140. I know a number of health care professionals, some who have worked in ...

emergency rooms in large cities who own firearms for self defense.

My son in law is one. He worked as a emergency tech in a level II trauma center and he has a concealed weapons permit and carries either a Glock 27 or a Ruger LCP.

[CTyankee]

141. And in what lovely community is this?

[spin]

142. South Florida. Ft Myers area. ...

Fort Myers, FL, violent crime, on a scale from 1 (low crime) to 100, is 82. Violent crime is composed of four offenses: murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. The US average is 41.4.

Fort Myers, FL, property crime, on a scale from 1 (low) to 100, is 57. Property crime includes the offenses of burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson. The object of the theft-type offenses is the taking of money or property, but there is no force or threat of force against the victims. The US average is 43.5.
http://www.bestplaces.net/crime/city/florida/fort_myers

To be fair that is the current crime rate in Ft. Myers and my son in law worked in the emergency room years ago. He is currently a truck driver but regrets not staying in the medical field. He left his job in the emergency room because at the time a job as a long haul truck driver paid far more money. Unfortunately working as a truck driver is far more boring than working in an emergency room. He is considering going back to get the training to update his license.

[clffrdjk]

60. 37 votes.

Last edited Mon Mar 24, 2014, 02:24 AM - Edit history (1)

And still not one person can answer the question of why him? I hate being on the outside can some one please tell me what makes him the right choice?

[Eleanors38]

64. What? Asking for reason at a tent revival?

[clffrdjk]

67. Lol, you wouldn't think it would be that hard.

[CreekDog]

69. why can't he answer it himself?

is this the best you guys can do?

[clffrdjk]

74. Because I don't care enough to.

I am not lobbying against the guy I am just wondering why you feel the need to support him to the point of ridiculing me for not supporting him.

[CreekDog]

65. answer it yourself, do you own research

you want an answer? go find it. then make your decision.

oh wait, you already made your decision even though you don't know anything about the man.

maybe you would actually know something about the man if you didn't spend all your time here on guns.

except for sidling up to George Zimmerman last year, you haven't posted on a non-gun topic in ages.

[clffrdjk]

66. Another post attacking me rather than answering what should be a very easy question.

I don't have very much on the line here all I am asking is why should I support him.
At the very least you could point me in the right direction, what tipped you over the edge?

[CreekDog]

68. telling you to do your own research isn't attacking you

especially after you demanded that we do it for you.

[Eleanors38]

71. Too much of...

?

[CreekDog]

75. I understand. You're saying the problem with DU is...

most of us aren't like the few in the gungeon.

who barely post on a non-gun related topic and if so, generally to the right of most people.

so the solution is for the rest of us to be more like you all in here.

because that would make this place much better.

[clffrdjk]

77. Very strange post for the person who started the thread/poll here.

Why is it so hard to answer such a simple question?

[CreekDog]

87. it's not hard to answer

but i don 't play games with one issue gungeon posters.

[clffrdjk]

90. You would have saved yourself a lot of time if you would just answer that easy question.

Rather than play this game that you say you don't want to play.

[Eleanors38]

80. I see that this is your favorite group, fellow DUer.

[clffrdjk]

72. Sure

"oh wait, you already made your decision even though you don't know anything about the man.
maybe you would actually know something about the man if you didn't spend all your time here on guns.
except for sidling up to George Zimmerman last year, you haven't posted on a non-gun topic in ages."
Yep that was totally not an attempt to discredit me.

I am not asking you to research it for me, just a few short points on why you made your decision.

[CTyankee]

139. I think you have their answers. Look at them.

[NancyDL]

78. To the many who asked, "Why does the NRA oppose him?"

He called gunshot injuries a public health problem.

[pablo_marmol]

94. Bingo!

One of the many deceitful strategies of the anti-gunners is to frame the debate as a "public health crisis" - even though gun violence has been declining steadily.

http://www.guncite.com/journals/tennmed.html

Edited to quote:

"And there is a sense in which violence is a public health problem. So let me illustrate the limitations of this line of reasoning with a public-health analogy. After research disclosed that mosquitos were the vector for transmission of yellow fever, the disease was not controlled by sending men in white coats to the swamps to remove the mouth parts from all the insects they could find. The only sensible, efficient way to stop the biting was to attack the environment where the mosquitos bred. Guns are the mouth parts of the violence epidemic. The contemporary urban environment breeds violence no less than swamps breed mosquitos. Attempting to control the problem of violence by trying to disarm the perpetrators is as hopeless as trying to contain yellow fever through mandible control."

James Wright

[ileus]

98. I don't know anything about him/her, is she/he a 2A denier?

[Laffy Kat]

103. Looks good to me.

It didn't say in wikipedia, but I'm taking it for granted that he supports Choice.

[branford]

107. The position of Surgeon General is generally considered non-controversial.

Murthy's stance on guns, whether you agree or disagree, makes him extremely, and unnecessarily, controversial to sizable portion of the electorate. His lack of long-established credentials does not help matters. He no doubt has an impressive resume, but you could easily find a number of other loyal Democratic doctors with better credentials and without the baggage.

In fact, the only thing that makes Murthy really stand-out is his position on guns, and it's the very reason why some here and elsewhere are defending a minor and relatively powerless appointee with such passion. The basis for the opposition is also likely the same reason why he was originally selected.

Regardless, the question is not why the NRA or anyone here does or does not support him, but why sufficient number of Democrats in the Senate believe he is problematic enough that they will not vote for him.

If Murthy is as good as some claim, why can't these Democratic Senator's be convinced?

The NRA has stated a position, as is their right. MDA, Bloomberg and anyone who's interested has had more than enough time to reach the electorate. The people who now matter are the voters in swing states generally represented by these vulnerable Senators.

I'll pose more relevant questions: Is Vivek Murthy so important that it could be worth the loss of the Senate? Is it in overall political interests of the Democratic Party to even raise the gun issue at all?

[NYC_SKP]

114. I rather doubt that Obama made this selection based on the gun comments.

He's smarter than that.

Guns aren't a public health problem, the public health problems are violent behaviors and self destructive behaviors.

[Eleanors38]

116. "Let's do the time warp again!"

[friendly_iconoclast]

117. "It's just a jump to the left..."

[CreekDog]

122. when did the deadline for talking about Obama's nominee for Surgeon General expire?

why do you want us to stop talking about that nominee so badly?

[friendly_iconoclast]

125. What makes you think I want us to stop talking about that nominee?

[friendly_iconoclast]

129. "Help, help, I'm being repressed!"

[CreekDog]

121. so you'd like us to stop talking about Obama's nominee for Surgeon General?

[Eleanors38]

123. Frankly, I'd back the nom in return for progressive measures; ain't that big.

[friendly_iconoclast]

126. When will you *start* talking about his qualifications for the job?

It's a subject you've been avoiding for months now...

[DonP]

118. Frankly I'm more of a fan of Rear Admiral (RADM) Boris D. Lushniak, M.D., M.P.H

The current acting SG. Great professional resume, proven leadership, more than 6 years of medical experience.

He's already in place and probably an easy confirmation.

While you're trying to stir the shit, why don't you list all those feckless Dem Senators that refused to support Vivek Murthy with a vote, so we can campaign against their re-election, since they must not be real Dems?

http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/about/biographies/biosg.html

[CreekDog]

119. it's a liberal board, if you oppose the President's nominee from the right, you are stirring it

not me.

[DonP]

120. Who do you think named the acting SG?

Or do you just have a hate on for successful doctors from Ukraine?

Sorry you're not getting the response you hoped for ... again.

Maybe you should try the other gun forum.

That's a real hotbed of discussion.

[Eleanors38]

124. You take the drama outta everything.

[friendly_iconoclast]

127. I oppose the President's nominee because he's less qualified than the Acting SG,...

...so kindly spare us the 'self-appointed zampolit' schtick.

[CreekDog]

128. you posted a half dozen other reasons before saying this was your reason for opposition

if you want to be taken seriously, pick a position and think about sticking with it.

[friendly_iconoclast]

130. All variants of "He's not the most qualified person for the job"- and he isn't

[friendly_iconoclast]

131. You're also studiously avoiding discussing Murthy's CV, aside from "Obama nominated him...

...so y'all need to just shut up and drink the Kool-aid."

[CreekDog]

132. correction: all variants in the "throw as many NRA talking points against him as you can"

and while denying that the primary reason for your opposition is his position on gun injuries and deaths as a public health issue.

this is why your position is bankrupt. it is your position but you pretend it's something else.

i'm not ashamed of my position, why are you and others here ashamed of yours?

[friendly_iconoclast]

133. Chanting "NRA talking point(s)" is not a saving throw- and even if they were, I've used none

For example, pointing out that Murthy isn't even a department head
where he works isn't an "NRA talking point", it's an inconvenient (for you) truth

this is why your position is bankrupt. it is your position but you pretend it's something else.

Kindly inform us when and how you 'discerned' that my position isn't the one I've stated.

You are merely the latest in a line of gun control advocates claiming the ability
to read minds at a distance.

Do you also practice phrenology and read auras?

[beevul]

134. Thats what you say about anything that isn't in lockstep with anti-gun dogma.

Ever heard of the boy who cried wolf?

Now its the guy who cried nra.

Off topic but, I have a couple questions for you:

You anti-gun folk have been ridiculing pro-gun folk, playing guilt by association games, and generally being nasty to people who believe differently than you do on the gun issue, for a couple decades now, and what has it gained you?

Extrapolating from what its gained you to this point, what do you expect it to gain you in the future?

[CreekDog]

135. Looks like he's getting a vote from the Senate this week!

[geek tragedy]

136. The good guys won this one. nt

[oneshooter]

145. Only time will tell. n/t