Why are so many here freaking out about Gupta as SG?

[Avalux]

He will be perfect for the job, which is a PR position. He will work for the Obama Administration.

There was some controversy w/Michael Moore but that shouldn't be a disqualifier. Did you know he worked as an advisor to Hillary Clinton? He is a practicing neurosurgeon who performed surgeries on Iraqis and American soldiers, is a professor at Emory University and is published in medical journals.

The ability to convey complex medical policy/information to the American public in easy to understand terms is essential as SG and Gupta will be able to do this. He's also attractive, which doesn't hurt.

[wyldwolf]

1. DU is in perpetual "freak out" mode.

[gblady]

79. BINGO!

[Window]

87. It certainly seems that way lately.

[Joe the Revelator]

115. Isn't that truth...

[Thrill]

2. More fake Outrage.

I bet most can't even name the last Surgeon General's under Bush and Clinton without Google

[yardwork]

8. Joycelyn Elders was the last good SG we had.

[calimary]

36. She was indeed quite terrific. I liked her honesty and candor - a LOT.

The knuckledraggers damn near lynched her because she spoke some truth about sex education in schools. We actually had a Surgeon General who was a human being with a brain - a brain willing and ready to tackle contemporary REALITIES and problems, especially among sexually-active youth, and not a 13th-Century ostrich.

Sanjay Gupta? Hey, harmless, really. What's the big deal anyway?

Besides, in this superficial world, somebody who looks as good and photographs as well, who has the resume AND the media savvy and connections, I'd think this'd be a great choice. He'll get a lot of mileage out of camera time.

[moc]

61. Gupta's media skills could be a definite plus, I think. It's only a benefit to public health,

though, if Gupta truly understands what public health is all about and is committed to advancing the cause of public health in this country. If he is, great. If not...

[jesus_of_suburbia]

74. She was so good. I miss her.

[rurallib]

15. I remember one Bush apointee was strongly against birth control

but also had some freaky sex practices. Didn't Bush also try to nominate a vet as SG? That sticks in my memory for some reason.

[ColbertWatcher]

17. All I know is ...

... Dumbya wanted this guy:

to have the job.

Here is some of the things he believed: http://www.pamspaulding.com/docs/holsingerpaper.pdf

[Skittles]

76. WRONG AND WRONG

not a big surprise

[Bluebear]

99. No, indeed.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[FrenchieCat]

4. Although a small issue, the fact that he is of Indian Descent

also provides some additional diversity to the Obama administration. I personally like this fact as well.

No one even knows who the current SG is, so the commotion is a bit out of proportion, IMO.

I'm tired of the overwrought drama, here on the news and elsewhere.

[Cha]

23. I thought of that

too. It'd be interesting to know what Obama had in mind when he decided on Dr Sanjay Gupta? It wouldn't have anything to do with taking one of corporatemedia into his fold would it?

[Barack_America]

31. Yes, and how has public health been run in this country the past 8 years?

Pretty poorly.

I haven't been disappointed in many of Obama's picks, but I am with this one. I just figured that Obama would've gone with more substance than name recognition and identity politics. This just doesn't seem to jibe with Obama's picks thus far.

[hlthe2b]

5. He'll be fine as an advocate at the bully pullpit...

It is the head of HHS as well as the Directors of all the agencies, e.g., NIH, CDC, FDA, CMS-- that really set policy.

[KoKo]

102. You mean "fine in the bully-pulpit" of "Big Pharma?"

Yeah...Gupta musted have just mist by a scootch being in that top 1%...but he figures he's golden now. :shrug:

[yardwork]

6. "Some controversy w/Michael Moore?" Nice spin. Gupta lied.

I think that lying about a documentary and never correcting the record should disqualify a person from serving in Obama's administration, especially as the spokesperson for public health care to the nation, yes.

[mvd]

24. My concern is that the people around Obama shape Obama's image

He might be a good communicator, but if he communicates how good certain pharma. drugs are for you, then that's a negative. I'm not anti-medication (for me, Ativan at times of anxiety can help,) but the way pharma. companies push so many expensive, often questionable drugs is bad for the system.

[Avalux]

25. Gupta will not be a spokesman for Pharma Cos.

I expect he will not communicate the benefits of any drugs as SG. I want to see Pharma Co. ads removed from TV, but it won't be his job to advocate that either.

[mvd]

29. Hi, sparosnare

Unfortnately, I don't think there's any guarantee he won't try to push some drugs and twist the public debate. As if the drug companies need more help - really. It's hard to make a complete transition from such a position.

I think better of Obama than this pick.

[Avalux]

32. Hi there -

I hope you're wrong about that. I've heard Obama state his dislike of pharma co. commercials and I'd hope he'd make it clear to the SG (whomever it is) that promotion of any one drug is unacceptable. Recommending individuals begin a statin when their cholesterol is too high and diet/exercise hasn't worked is acceptable, IMHO.

Of course, my hope is he focuses on preventative medicine, which is always preferrable when possible before taking medication.

[mvd]

34. That's good about what Obama said at least

:hi:

I also hope he is quick to move to take out that "prexisting condition" nonsense.

[Telly Savalas]

113. In what ways has the current Surgeon General twisted the public debate?

How many folks here can even name the current Surgeon General without using Google?

[mvd]

118. They give reports on physical and mental health

Surgeon Generals have shaped the debate on smoking and AIDS. They are not do-nothings when it comes to public policy, though HHS would have more impact on universal health care.

[wolfgangmo]

38. Of course he will shill for big pharma

They paid his bills. And he will want a job after the SG job.

Gupta is resume fluffing. I don't know WTF Obama is doing.

[yardwork]

26. Yes, and I'm even more concerned about what Gupta won't communicate.

Gupta is opposed to universal health care and doesn't like Medicare. Unless he makes a remarkable 180, he won't be advocating for any serious health care reform. Even if he does, his previous statements will be trophies to anti-reform Republicans in Congress.

Nor will Gupta take on any controversial issue that would upset pharmaceutical companies, medical device manufacturers, or health insurance companies. That's the health care system, right there.

Combined with the appointment of Daschle to HHS, this selection is a clear signal from Obama that he doesn't intend to make any significant changes to our health care system, at least not in the next four years. It's a reassuring signal to the corporations that they can trust Obama to maintain the status quo, more or less.

[mvd]

33. I didn't mind Daschle all that much

Wasn't my #1 choice, but I gave Obama the benefit of the doubt as he has good qualifications. This pick falls below what I expected from Obama.

[yardwork]

37. I'm ok with Daschle. HHS is a mess and requires heroic measures, though.

I didn't like the way that Daschle sort of folded in 2004, but maybe he has the organizational skills and motivation required to save HHS from the freaks that now "run" it. It's in bad shape, top to bottom. Career people have been replaced by ideologues, and there's a lot of corruption there as well.

But when this latest selection of Gupta is combined with Daschle....

[uponit7771]

63. any links and quotes on Guptas opossition to medicare?

[tinrobot]

49. Did Gupta lie for himself or for CNN?

[yardwork]

70. What possible difference would that make?

[truedelphi]

77. Now there's a question right up there

With "which came first: the chicken or the egg?"

[Name removed]

7. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[monmouth]

9. Wonder how Blitzer will react to this one?....Hahaha, oh it's just glorious..n/t

[Barack_America]

10. Because he has no experience in public health.

He will speak well, but will he know what he's talking about?

Experience in neurosurgery and experience in public health are two completely different things.

[EFerrari]

16. That's why Dean was disqualified, wasn't it? n/t

[moc]

58. Yes, imo. nt

[KoKo]

105. Dr. Dean didn't have the opportunities to put "Body Models" up on Screen to explain

to folks how the drugs he pushes or the diseases that require drugs he promotes work in our body. :eyes: Dr. Dean just gave us a Dem President...but CNN didn't provide him with medical grade skeletons to prove who he was and what he was about that he might just be qualified for more even than DNC Chair.

[dave29]

20. read.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2009/01/06/obama_wants_journalist_for_sur.html?hpid=topnews

The Michigan-born son of Indian and Pakistani parents, Gupta has always been drawn to health policy. He was a White House fellow in the late 1990s, writing speeches and crafting policy for Hillary Clinton. His appointment would give the administration a prominent official of Southwest Asian descent and a skilled television spokesman.

[Barack_America]

27. And?

I'm also interested in public health, but that doesn't mean I'm experienced in it. And we have absolutely no idea what topics he covered in Clinton's office. "Crafting policy" sounds good, but what policy and what was his role?

I'm mostly critical of him because, as a medical student, I'm familiar with his career track and I don't see how his training path could have provided him with substantive public health experience.

[EFerrari]

39. I got to meet David Satcher. When I think of him, who he was and his resume

and when I compare this medical stand up for CNN, it's just nauseating.

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

[Barack_America]

92. Now that is what a credible public health resume looks like.

:thumbsup:

[kstewart33]

11. He's a great pick.

Not only is he a noted physician who actually practices medicine, he's a talented communicator.

Among the many things that WDC lacks is the ability to communicate to the American people in a way that's not condescending, patronizing or inarticulate.

He knows medicine, he can communicate, and he'll work hard.

[Phoonzang]

12. I don't know.....isn't there already enough drama going on?

For those who are all "OMG CORPORATE MONEY SHILL EVIL CORPO-NAZI!!!"...it's a PR position...Gupta's a good spokesman and wont' be making policy. Just let it go. People here freak out and swoon at every turn of events.

[smalll]

13. I'm withholding judgment until we get some kind of idea how Gupta looks in epaulets.

[Uzybone]

14. Because to some Obama has already failed

So nothing he does will be right. We have too many damn trolls on this board. Every step our new democratic administration makes will be picked apart and slimed. I saw one post attacking Panetta because his institute has honored republicans.

[Lisa0825]

22. This is actually the first pick I have publicly complained about.

I just don't think Gupta is nearly the best candidate. He's more spokesmodel and less "best and brightest." Still, just like I have said to others worried about other picks, I'll just wait and see how government works under Obama. Just because I can't stand the pick doesn't mean I'm right. I'm open to that.

[Uzybone]

28. Very well said about wait and see

and as for Gupta too me he seems like a good fit. Ive been looking at wiki and all the SGs Ive seen have not been "best and brightest" types because the SG seems to be a public shill position. The SG's main role is to be the spokesperson for public health. I think Gupta has the credibility with the public at large to fulfil his duties.

Lets not also forget the added bonus of diversity as well.

[tigereye]

40. I love how he's already failed and hasn't even taken office yet!

:rofl: It's so ridiculous, isn't it?


There was a very interesting article in the NYT about the new Congress and it's more moderate stance. One of those interviewed ( a prof. from a uni in Calif) said, “You’re not going to see any wild, left-wing policymaking,” he added. “You’re not going to get the Berkeley wish-list out of this crowd.”


It will be interesting to see how left and center are able to work all of this out.

[dcindian]

18. He is a demostrated liar

And 100% corporate shill.

[yardwork]

41. I can't believe the number of DUers defending a proven liar.

[Ilsa]

19. I'm fine with Gupta. Some DUers are hard to please. nt

[KoKo]

107. "some people" out here on DU actually have medical experience

that can call out Gupta for the SHILL he is, though...

[Ilsa]

116. What is he shilling?

I haven't watched him in awhile. Something political that requires a medical degree to understand?

My commment about "some people" was meant to reflect that DU has all kinds of Democrats with a variety of experience, not to dis any one.

[ColbertWatcher]

21. I'm disappointed he didn't pick an unknown for the part. n/t

[bigwillq]

30. I guess disagreeing=flipping out nowadays.

Yes, the SG position is more of a PR role nowadays. And tomorrow, I will probably not give a crap about who the SG is. But I am sure there are better picks out there then Mr. Gupta, who is a corporate shrill, a big Pharma lover and against universal health care.

Being attractive shouldn't qualify anyone for any position.
And to me his controversy with Moore is a big deal. Gupta reported incorrectly and tried to play it off like he didn't.

[HelenWheels]

35. I don't like him

Because he's too attached to big pharma and because he's not Howard Dean.

[flpoljunkie]

42. He was White House fellow in late 1990s, writing speeches and crafting policy for Hillary Clinton

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2009/01/06/obama_wants_journalist_for_sur.html?hpid=topnews

[Barack_America]

47. That doesn't really mean much.

[flpoljunkie]

52. I agree.

[rvablue]

54. Same goes for me...........and I love Hillary......Gupta, not so much! n/t

[KoKo]

108. Good Connections and a flair with an inside connection. So what?

What about many other qualified med professionals who aren't Shills on the CNN DOLE for Misinformation paid for by Big Pharmaceutical Companies? What about them?

[Jennicut]

43. the SG doesn't do anything anyways

Name me one thing they do that is important besides say stuff on a cigarette package.

[Political Tiger]

44. It's the primary wars redux

Some people are just determined to slam Obama no matter what, because their candidate did not win.

The same people that slammed him during the primaries are predominantly the ones slamming him now.

[FrenchieCat]

45. Do we have any documented statement of his on being against

Universal Health Care? I don't seem to be able to find any.

[Avalux]

46. me neither. n/t

[yardwork]

50. A five second google brought this up as the first hit.

Does it sound like he's in favor of universal health care to you?

http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/blogs/paging.dr.gupta/2008/02/learning-from-universal-healthcare.html

[Avalux]

53. I can't make a determination from that blog entry.

He is asking if universal healthcare can be achieved on a national level or a state level based on what states have already done.

[yardwork]

65. The info he presents is all about how it has failed in the two states.

His general, overall, long-standing argument is opposed to it.

[truedelphi]

78. Someone recently posted a discussion plus quotes. n/t

[FrenchieCat]

48. We ain't got shit else to do!

I mean, if we weren't picking apart the President Elect and what he says and doesn't say and who he picks and doesn't pick, what else could we be busy doing?

Not a motherf*cking thing....that's what! :shrug:

[EFerrari]

51. Do you only ever do one thing at a time?

I wish I had that kind of leisure.

[GentryDixon]

55. I monitored this site about two years

before I finally made the plunge to register. It seems there is a great deal of dissension and carping from some of the members lately. It is almost like there are some out there just waiting to disagree, regardless of the topic.

I still enjoy the site, I just bypass the negativity. Yes, we need to understand both sides, but it sometimes gets overwhelming.

I believe Dr. Gupta is an excellent choice.

[cottonseed]

66. If you're not outraged then your're not working hard enough!

:)

[KoKo]

109. Well if you are into "bypassing negativity" then "Ignore Button" is your friend.

Just "Walk on By" and ignore what you don't like? :shrug:

[moc]

56. I'm not "freaking out", but I'm not convinced he's perfect either.

What most people in these threads are missing is that the SG is a PUBLIC HEALTH position. The SG is the face of public health for this country and can be instrumental in advancing it. Public health is qualitatively different from medicine. Just because someone is an MD does not mean s/he is qualified to direct public health. In my experience, MDs fall into one of three categories:

(1) MDs with public health training

(2) MDs without public health training but with an appreciation for the role that public health plays in ensuring the health of our population and open to learning about and supporting public health approaches

(3) MDs who believe that health begins and ends with clinical medicine. Such physicians have no interest in learning about public health and merely tolerate our presence most of the time if not outrightly dismiss us.

In my 15 years of experience, I've known MDs in all three categories. Before I judge Gupta as "perfect" for the job of Surgeon General, I want to know that he at least falls in category 2, since I don't think he falls in 1. If he falls in category 3, however, we've got a problem. His dismissal of the potential benefits of single payer health care is concerning, imo, and may indicate he's a category 3 type. If so, that would be a problem.

[SpartanDem]

62. who cares

All this crying and teeth gnashing over a position that no real power over policy setting. When is the last time that any one can remember the SG saying remotely notable? Jocelyn Elders?

[moc]

64. Did you really sign up just to post that? I care for one.

Lots of public health professionals in this country care about who represents them. Yes, the SG is important in setting the agenda for public health and advancing our stature. I couldn't give a shit whether you care or not.

[Two Americas]

57. you have to be kidding

Gupta is the man who did a vicious lying hatchet job on Moore.

I can't believe that anyone here is defending him.

[cottonseed]

59. The Gupta report was weak, but I wouldn't call it a "vicious lying hatchet job".

Maybe a pathetic hatchet job.

[Two Americas]

67. the two words you object to

"Lying" and "vicious."

I say lying because the outright misrepresentations from him have been well documented, as has the evidence that he knew he was lying. "Vicious" is how I describe the assault by the right wing and corporate interests on the people.

If you would like, much evidence can be provided in support of my use of both words. It is surprising to me that it would be required here.

If that was not a classic example of a pre-meditated propaganda hit job, I don't know what would be. We are not talking about someone who merely "had a different opinion" from Moore, although that would be bad enough. The network wanted to do a hit job on Moore, and on all of us, and found a willing flack to accomplish the job for them.

I am going to side with Moore on this, and I see no middle ground.



.

[MelissaB]

80. Paul Krugman seems to disagree with you.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/06/the-trouble-with-sanjay-gupta/

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4779242

[Two Americas]

83. oops

I screwed up.

[cottonseed]

110. I see that. He wrote a nice blog post on Sanjay.

He should stick to economics though.

[JayMusgrove]

69. So you would rather see Michael Moore as SG?

I'm sorry, but some of you people make the people you love look like gods, and when anyone more informed demystifies their godlike status, and makes them look like fallible human beings, you freak out, as if the devil himself had just stuck a spear in Christ.

I am all for rational informed discussion, both of universal health care plans and of the fact that Michael Moore might hold some views not backed up by all the facts.

Care to join me back on planet Earth and rational discussion?

[Two Americas]

72. welcome aboard

The more the merrier.

I did not and would not promote Moore for SG.

Presenting this as an all-or-nothing either-or proposition is dishonest, and your remarks could have come right out of the mouth of Sean Hannity or any other right wing flack.

Your insulting smears, insinuations and character assassination of hundreds of DUers is noted.

[JayMusgrove]

84. Thanks for the welcome! Warm or hot as it was! Union YES!

I think sometimes we get too involved to see the whole picture. Nothing personal.

[Sebastian Doyle]

81. There are a lot of corporate shills on this board

Just read any thread discussing health care reform or the fact that big pharma has way too much influence, and watch them come out of the woodwork.

And I'm sickened by Gupta for the same exact reasons. His lying and shilling against "Sicko" was inexcuzable and the man has no business whatsoever being the Surgeon General.

This is worse than putting the Monsanto blowing Vilsuck at Agriculture. :puke:

[rasputin1952]

60. I don't have a problem w/Gupta...

I have yet to see where he stands on some of the more contentious issues, but he's bright, knows his way around the cameras....and he won't diagnose people from his position w/o having the sense to find out what's going on w/a patient...like one somewhat famous Dr/(former)Sen seems capable of doing.

[EFerrari]

71. The same could be said for most late night talk show hosts.

[rasputin1952]

114. Yep, if they had MD after their name...

Other than Koop, who even really knows who these people are? Unless they do something remarkably stupid like get politically conservative and think the only way to combat std's is abstinance.

Thing is, this has become more of an "honorary" position than anything else.

[TheKentuckian]

68. Because its something to come unhinged about

Come on its fun!!!

[TwilightGardener]

73. I have no idea. He seems actually pretty qualified for this post--it's

unique, to say the least.

[Skittles]

75. the man is a fucking HACK

he's as disgusting as Warren

[polichick]

85. Both seem like popularity choices - weird.

[pipi_k]

82. I don't know if he's "perfect" or what, but

people freaking out over it...

meh.

I mean, it's not like he's going to be doing brain surgery or anything.

(ha ha, a little pun)



Anyway, he knows a hell of a lot more about medicine than I do...he's intelligent, well-spoken, and yes, very attractive to boot...


bring him on!

:)

[incapsulated]

86. Because they are nuts

NUTS.

:D

[Two Americas]

88. could you slow down a little?

You folks are debunking so fast that we aren't even getting a chance to bunk.

Could we at least be given an opportunity to freak out before we get attacked for freaking out?

[Two Americas]

89. Krugman "freaking out"

So apparently Obama plans to appoint CNN’s Sanjay Gupta as Surgeon General. I don’t have a problem with Gupta’s qualifications. But I do remember his mugging of Michael Moore over Sicko. You don’t have to like Moore or his film; but Gupta specifically claimed that Moore “fudged his facts”, when the truth was that on every one of the allegedly fudged facts, Moore was actually right and CNN was wrong.

What bothered me about the incident was that it was what Digby would call Village behavior: Moore is an outsider, he’s uncouth, so he gets smeared as unreliable even though he actually got it right. It’s sort of a minor-league version of the way people who pointed out in real time that Bush was misleading us into war are to this day considered less “serious” than people who waited until it was fashionable to reach that conclusion. And appointing Gupta now, although it’s a small thing, is just another example of the lack of accountability that always seems to be the rule when you get things wrong in a socially acceptable way.

[Avalux]

90. I always pay attention to Krugman and usually always agree with him.

I agree the dust-up with Moore was messy and unfortunate, but if you listen to the tape, Gupta did end up agreeing with Moore on most issues. I refuse to hold that incident against him though.

I still think Gupta is a good pick and will watch his actions with interest. If I turn out to be wrong after he's been in the position and had a chance, I'll be the first to admit it.

[Two Americas]

93. Krugman is making a broader point

Apparently Gupta was affiliated with a right wing think tank, and his "comments" about Moore most definitely had the feel of a prepared hatchet job, the hallmark of those think tanks. The MSM outlets use those paid, prepared propaganda tools and present them as "independent experts" in a deceptive way. That is not a matter of "different opinions" any more than some leader of the religious right is merely expressing a different opinion or "belief." This is politics, not a debating society. We have enemies and they are doing whatever they can to destroy us. "Listening" to their "ideas" is letting the fox into the hen house. Anyone who has prostituted themselves on behalf of corporate interests so blatantly has disqualified themselves from being seen as an ally by any of us.

But Krugman alludes to something else that bears on how this battle within the party is shaping up - the haves versus the have-nots, the somebodies against the nobodies, the connected and wealthy and powerful against the rest of us, the insiders versus the outsiders. That is something that should set off alarm bells for all of us, because that is what the battle is about out here on the ground.

The people just voted for a break for the nobodies, the have-nots, the outsiders - we should make no mistake about that.

[Avalux]

94. Yes, I know. Krugman's underlying theme; one of the reason's I love him.

I guess maybe I don't want to believe Obama would pick someone so entrenched in "the haves" or that he himself duped us all and it'll just be business as usual. If I start to think that, then I will fall into despair. Have to give him a chance, as well as his picks.

[Two Americas]

117. no need for despair

No need to feel like you have to "give him a chance" either. He gets a chance, no matter what any of us "give" him. But a chance to do what? A chance to listen and respond to us about what is happening out here - that is what he has a chance to do, and that is the only thing that matters.

The pressure on any politician to "pick someone so entrenched in 'the haves' that it'll just be business as usual" is very intense. Obama could be the smartest politician in the world and that would still be true. The critics of his appointments here are not tearing him down, nor are they hurting him or the administration.

Politicians are always driven, and they must cooperate with the wealthy and powerful and move in those circles. They must hear from us, for their own good - if they have any serious commitment to the welfare of the people rather than just their own career - as well as ours.

People are living in a fantasy world right now - they want to place all of their hope in this one politician, and anyone who says anything that conflicts with that is accused of tearing him down or not giving him a chance - those are the mildest things p0eople are saying to critics. That is a very weak and irresponsible position for people to take and does Obama no good. But 8 years of being traumatized and people are not thinking clearly.

In a representative democracy, the way you support a politician to do what needs to be done is to speak out. The wealthy and powerful people have his ear. They don't need to yell to be heard. We do. And we must be heard. Obama cannot succeed on passive hero worship alone.

FDR welcomed pressure. He told people "if you want me to do something, force me to do it." Building public pressure is the way to accomplish that, and speaking out is the way to build public pressure.

[gravity]

91. Gupta doesn't conform to their agenda's

[EFerrari]

95. Agendas is the plural.

And that's right. Nowhere on my agenda is placing talking heads in positions that require expertise. Dumbing down American government is not on my top ten. You couldn't be more right.

[Common Sense Party]

96. Because we're burned out on Warren, and Bristol had her baby.

We have to bitch and moan and hyperventilate about SOMETHING.

This is the outrage du jour.

[Catherine Vincent]

97. I'm cool with Gupta as Surgeon General.

It's not like Obama selected Wolf Blitzer. LOL.

[Bluebear]

100. What's the difference other than the MD? They're both owned.

[glitch]

98. From a public health stand point he is yet another mediocre (at best) pick for what is supposed to

be a brilliant team.
It's disheartening to think this is the best Obama can find, and it should be. All the positions in the Administration should be the best available, not the safest, which more often than not turns out to be the lowest common denominator.
And Surgeon General is not just PR, the position also directs focus on very important health issues.

You asked.

[KoKo]

101. Is the "check in the mail" to you? Why are you covering his ass?

:shrug:

[Avalux]

103. No check in the mail.

I think he will be an effective spokesman for the Obama Administration's public health policy. And what if.....

this perceived corporate shill actually advocates and speaks out for universal healthcare? How many will be persuaded who wouldn't be from someone perceived as liberal?

[KoKo]

104. Because if we have to resort to "Media Whores" to give Americans a "Message"

that they can understand then Obama shouldn't have even been elected...because he was the candidate for CHANGE. Sanjay Gupta is NOT CHANGE...it's Media Whoredom Forever!

[Thrill]

106. Because its the standard procedure for some on DU

Must react to Obama's selections as if its the end of the world.

Followed by the at the ready phrases "This isn't the change, I expected" "This is change?"

Same shit, just a different day.

[Medusa]

111. I check in daily

to see what I'm supposed to be pissed off at today. It's really becoming a joke in my household. My hubby will ask me "What's the outrage for today"? when he sees me head for my laptop.

[Sparkly]

112. I'd prefer someone who's scrupulously honest.

:shrug: