Former Bush surgeon general says he was muzzled
Rushlimbo
Posts: 832
Politicizing health issues, gotta love this bunch of bastardos.
================================
The first U.S. surgeon general appointed by President George W. Bush accused his administration on Tuesday of political interference and muzzling him on key issues like embryonic stem cell research.
"Anything that doesn't fit into the political appointees' ideological, theological or political agenda is ignored, marginalized or simply buried," Dr. Richard Carmona, who served as the nation's top doctor from 2002 until 2006, told a House of Representatives panel.
"The problem with this approach is that in public health, as in a democracy, there is nothing worse than ignoring science, or marginalizing the voice of science for reasons driven by changing political winds. The job of surgeon general is to be the doctor of the nation, not the doctor of a political party," Carmona added.
Carmona said Bush administration political appointees censored his speeches and kept him from talking out publicly about certain issues. He mentioned political interference preventing him from discussing the science on embryonic stem cell research, contraceptives and his misgivings about the administration's embrace of "abstinence-only" sex education.
Carmona's comments came two days before a Senate committee is due to hold a hearing on Bush's nomination of Dr. James Holsinger, who faces Democratic criticism, as his successor. The administration allowed Carmona to finish his term as surgeon general last year without a replacement in place.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/bush_surgeongeneral_dc;_ylt=AhBCcWuuAQLsNifLeZkyGvYDW7oF
================================
The first U.S. surgeon general appointed by President George W. Bush accused his administration on Tuesday of political interference and muzzling him on key issues like embryonic stem cell research.
"Anything that doesn't fit into the political appointees' ideological, theological or political agenda is ignored, marginalized or simply buried," Dr. Richard Carmona, who served as the nation's top doctor from 2002 until 2006, told a House of Representatives panel.
"The problem with this approach is that in public health, as in a democracy, there is nothing worse than ignoring science, or marginalizing the voice of science for reasons driven by changing political winds. The job of surgeon general is to be the doctor of the nation, not the doctor of a political party," Carmona added.
Carmona said Bush administration political appointees censored his speeches and kept him from talking out publicly about certain issues. He mentioned political interference preventing him from discussing the science on embryonic stem cell research, contraceptives and his misgivings about the administration's embrace of "abstinence-only" sex education.
Carmona's comments came two days before a Senate committee is due to hold a hearing on Bush's nomination of Dr. James Holsinger, who faces Democratic criticism, as his successor. The administration allowed Carmona to finish his term as surgeon general last year without a replacement in place.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/bush_surgeongeneral_dc;_ylt=AhBCcWuuAQLsNifLeZkyGvYDW7oF
War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Be the surgeon general for a conservative presidency and also spout off liberal views on medicine. Plenty of doctors have problems with embryonic stem cell research - he is by no means the authority because he is the surgeon general.
If anything, he was using his position as a way to influence people on hot button issues that are not supported by the majority of the nation.
Why accept the position for a conservative president if you have liberal views on those issues? He wanted recognition and status.
-Enoch Powell
do you think the Surgeon General should be non-partisan?
maybe he didn't know that he would be that restricted...
As far as polaris's question, I would like to think that the surgeon general of the united states (and other executive branch positions like the justice dept) should be non-partisan for the most part. Granted, there is always an underlying bias or political leaning in all of us, but when it comes to issues like health, energy, justice, etc., those things should take priority over politics.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
Do you think anyone in government is? Or even in the secular world? The only non-partisan people are those who don't care at all.
Should be non-partisan is a great idea.
Will it/could it happen?
Doubtful. Everyone has their own personal core beliefs. Humans dont generally have the ability to be able to make decisions without reffering back to those core values on some level.
www.myspace.com/jensvad
I agree but this admin has made it a policy, not human nature.
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength
aren't judges supposed to be non-partisan? ... police? ... mailmen? ... they are paid to do a job without prejudice ... i would think the surgeon general qualifies ...
it is wrong for political lacky's/groupies to censor or muzzle experts when they have different views and conclusions. the man was surgeon general for a reason, because he knows his shit.
there is no suck thing as conservative or liberal when it comes to medicine or science. this is half the problem is people pigeon holing everyhting into a neat little political box..."liberal or conservative"
everyone picks there side then blindly roots for them. do what is right. period. i could care less about your politcal leaning
What constitutes non-partisan? Pro-embryonic stem cell research or anti? Pro-abstinence only education or anti?
These hot button issues are by no means solved morally (whatever their scientific advances), but the surgeon general wants to spout off about them. The president (for all his ignorance) was making a moral judgment in not allowing him to speak on those matters - not a scientific judgment. This is what presidents deal in: morality.
Just because many of you may think abstinence only education is wrong, that doesn't mean it's the non-partisan choice or that the surgeon general should be pushing for it.
-Enoch Powell
But abstinence only education has been proven ineffective practically, medically, scientifically, etc.... Why should a doctor be forced to advocate that position when it has been proven wrong? Why should the surgeon general make moral judgments?
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
Well, there are many things that are okay in scientific sense but not in our moral sense. I can comprehend that living a nude lifestyle would be medically and scientifically fine but morally it would not be okay.
We do not need the surgeon general to make moral distinctions for us under the guise of science.
-Enoch Powell
so ... say a democrat wins the next presidency and he/she puts in a surgeon general that is allowed to speak on stem-cell research ...
would you be ok with that?
That's why the american people elected the democrat - to push that agenda.
-Enoch Powell
so ... say, there was a cure for cancer using stem-cells - wouldn't you want to know? ... whether you choose to follow that cure or not?
I think we would know about that whether the surgeon general bestowed it upon us or not...
-Enoch Powell
well ... this is one of this guy's chief complaints ... political interference on information ...
But we have a freeflow of information in this country. It's just: people don't choose to access that information, whether it be on the internet or in a library.
This points to the central problem with democracy: an uninformed electorate cannot make informed electoral decisions.
This is why I propose abolishing democracy and mandating myself as supreme dictator. I will force everyone to read highly informational news!
-Enoch Powell
yes, but there are numerous places to get medical information that are not from the surgeon general. But I think it is sad that the surgeon general is muzzled, esp in re: to public health since eduation of the public is a primary role.