2007-07-17
More Bush Regret: Pol Control of Surgeon General
What a disgrace that a president would control the Surgeon General like this. In conferring with previous SG's Bush's recently departed one concludes that he suffered more than they did in this regard. Another reason I'll vote libertarian: maybe we need to just eliminate this office, and thus the temptation of presidents to abuse it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Eliminate the office of the Surgeon General so that the President will no longer be tempted to corrupt it.
Why not eliminate the Department of Justice as well for that reason.
This sounds like John McWhorters ridiculous suggestion to blacks at Harlem's Schomberg Center last year.
First off, the guy was a ball of nerves the whole time he appeared on a panel with other black authors like Paul Robeson Jr and Chideya Farai.
I guess his agent convinced him that it would wonders for his credibility if he appeared before a black audience at least ONCE.
My wife and I were in attendance and McWhorter's suggestion to combat the phenomenon of GOP suppressing black votes in elections and intimidation of black voters at the polls was for blacks to just "vote Republican voluntarily".
That way the Repubs won't have to suppress your vote.
Righties are amazing.
I think you guys misunderstood McWorter's position, which I have read, and listened to on CSPAN. He says that both political parties engage in some dirty tricks to lower the vote counts in areas that heavily vote for the other party. For example, Democrat officials frequently inspect all aspects of overseas military voting containers, looking for any reason to disqualify them, and Repo officials always try to get these containers approved. Why? Because Demos hate soldiers and Repos love them? No: because military votes tend to favor Repos.
McWorter believes, as do I, that Repo dirty tricks with black voting districts (1) have nothing to do with race or hating black people, reflecting instead the 95%+ Demo favor showed in these districts, and (2) are greatly exaggerated.
Black voting districts represent the easiest to identify and most heavily one-sided voting sources. McWorter believes that many problems arise from voting so heavily in favor of one party. One is that the dirty tricks of the other party -- some legal, like applying hyper scrutiny -- focus on such a source. Another is that the other party pays your group no attention, for example the Repos snubbing the NAACP debate.
It really doesn't make sense for Demos so scrutinize white subburban districts so much because those districts often vote demo, or only slightly repo.
McWarter might have expressed himself clumsily, but he certainly does not believe that one reason blacks should vote republican is to protect them from "intimidation."
Steve: I favor minimizing the government so that it focuses on jobs that only it can and should do, and to minimize the opportunities for corruption. Perhaps you can explain why our federal government should have a Surgeon General. If we can't justify this, we should eliminate it, just as I would eliminate the Homeland Security office.
As for the justice department, I think that one of the only reasons for having an executive branch is to ensure that the laws passed by congress get implemented. So I would surely not eliminate that job. By cutting away all the unnecessary govt depts (surgeon general, labor, education, welfare, energy), you and I can focus on scrutinizing the necessary ones. You might disagree with me on some of the areas I want to cut, and you might even change my mind. But McWorter and I would like to cut some of them.
"It really doesn't make sense for Demos so scrutinize white subburban districts so much because those districts often vote demo, or only slightly repo."
ARE YOU KIDDING HUE?
Right here in the state of Maryland outside of the Baltimore/Washington region every friggin county and 90% of the districts in those counties is solidly one-sidedly Republican.
"McWorter believes that many problems arise from voting so heavily in favor of one party."
So much for voting your interests, eh?
"One is that the dirty tricks of the other party -- some legal, like applying hyper scrutiny -- focus on such a source. Another is that the other party pays your group no attention, for example the Repos snubbing the NAACP debate."
The GOP has actively rejected the black vote for the last 40 years.
So snubbing the NAACP is no surprise.
Why does the every Republican POTUS nominee have to make a pilgramage to Bob Jones University, an instutition with a history of racial discrimination.
What people like you and McWhorter don't seem to get through your skulls is that if the GOP wants the black vote they are going to have to sell our community on the benfefits of their vision and programs.
Something they steadfastly refuse to do..
Instead they imply that blacks are too addicted to government programs and handouts from the Dems to see how wonderful the GOP is.
That's not going to get the GOP a lot of black support.
But like I said, they really don't want it.
I think that the GOP effort to attract black votes has been horrible, and a big mistake, including their refusal to take their case right to the NAACP before their ideological opponents.
I oppose the dirty tricks by both parties, though I think that oversight by each party can help keep each other honest. My proposal for voting reform would have reps from both parties each witnessing and scrutinizing all voting operations.
Post a Comment