- Joined
- Jul 21, 2005
- Messages
- 51,433
- Reaction score
- 35,283
- Location
- Washington, DC
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Re: Obama will name Ron Klain as Ebola Czar
Actually, the current acting Surgeon General was approved by the Senate to be the Deputy Surgeon General; a position where one of it's primary duties is to be the Surgeon General in the event the position is vacated without a designated replacement.
Yes, bringing that up as some kind of counter to my point that we currently do have someone serving as Surgeon General is a strawman. What McConnell did or didn't do with Bush Appointments has nothing to do with my argument and is a strawman.
Yes, bringing that up as some kind of counter to my point that we currently do have someone serving as Surgeon General is a strawman. What McConnell did or didn't threaten has nothing to do with my argument and is a strawman.
Yes, bringing that up as some kind of counter to my point that we currently do have someone serving as Surgeon General is a strawman. What the NRA is doing regarding the Surgeon General vote has nothing to do with my argument and is a strawman.
All those things are, in reference to you attempting to respond to my assertion that there is currently someone serving as Surgeon General, are strawmen. They are you putting forth arguments and points to counter an argument I never made.
If I had claimed the Republicans weren't blocking an appointment of a new Surgeon General your ramblings would be a legitimaet response. However, I've not claimed that. I simply claimed we have someone serving as a Surgeon General and attempting to claim we don't have one is incorrect. I've claimed that acting like the position is vacant and the government is bereft of anyone performing those duties is a dishonest one. Your prattling on about McConnnel or the Senate doesn't counter that, it just is erecting a strawman to make it look like you're saying something worth while in counter to my point...but in reality you're just beating up a dummy of your own creation.
So then we don't have a Senate approved Surgeon General due to the filibustering of
Minority Leader Sen. McConnell .
Actually, the current acting Surgeon General was approved by the Senate to be the Deputy Surgeon General; a position where one of it's primary duties is to be the Surgeon General in the event the position is vacated without a designated replacement.
Was it a strawman last decade when Sen. McConnell continued to whine for straight-up-and-down votes on Bush appointments then?
Yes, bringing that up as some kind of counter to my point that we currently do have someone serving as Surgeon General is a strawman. What McConnell did or didn't do with Bush Appointments has nothing to do with my argument and is a strawman.
Or threatened to go nuclear last decade, forcing Dems to give what McConnell won't give now?
Yes, bringing that up as some kind of counter to my point that we currently do have someone serving as Surgeon General is a strawman. What McConnell did or didn't threaten has nothing to do with my argument and is a strawman.
I know you are aware that the NRA is preventing a vote on the Surgeon General--not a strawman .
Yes, bringing that up as some kind of counter to my point that we currently do have someone serving as Surgeon General is a strawman. What the NRA is doing regarding the Surgeon General vote has nothing to do with my argument and is a strawman.
All those things are, in reference to you attempting to respond to my assertion that there is currently someone serving as Surgeon General, are strawmen. They are you putting forth arguments and points to counter an argument I never made.
If I had claimed the Republicans weren't blocking an appointment of a new Surgeon General your ramblings would be a legitimaet response. However, I've not claimed that. I simply claimed we have someone serving as a Surgeon General and attempting to claim we don't have one is incorrect. I've claimed that acting like the position is vacant and the government is bereft of anyone performing those duties is a dishonest one. Your prattling on about McConnnel or the Senate doesn't counter that, it just is erecting a strawman to make it look like you're saying something worth while in counter to my point...but in reality you're just beating up a dummy of your own creation.