Skip to main content

Chuck Todd smokes (Roy) Blunt on "Meet the Press"

About a year ago, President Obama nominated Vivek Murthy to serve as the next Surgeon General. However, with the NRA leading the way, Congressional Republicans blocked the nomination and there's been little movement on the matter since then. Now with Ebola hysteria seemingly increasing by the day, this vacancy is becoming all the more noticeable.

On Sunday's Meet the Press, host Chuck Todd engaged in the following back-and-forth regarding the matter with Senator Roy Blunt (Republican - Missouri):

Todd: "The NRA said they were going to score the vote and suddenly everybody froze him. That seems a little petty in hindsight, does it not?"

Blunt: "Well, the president really ought to nominate people that can be confirmed to these jobs, and frankly then we should confirm them, there's no question about that."

The NRA led the charge to block Murthy's nomination because he stated that we should expand background checks on gun purchases and feels gun violence is a public health concern. Yes, his views are so radical, every major medical association agrees with him on the matter. After reading about this, I can just picture Vivek Murthy and the NRA engaging in the following discussion:

Vivek Murthy: "I, like every major medical association, feel that gun violence is a public health concern."

NRA: "Say what?!? Guns don't kill people; people kill people!"

Murthy: "Over 32,000 people died by way of guns last year."

NRA: "What's so concerning about that? What does that have to do with public health? Huh?"

Murthy: "You're joking, right? Death is pretty devastating to one's health, wouldn't you say?"

NRA: "What's your point?"

Murthy: "Over 32,000 people died last year because of guns. Don't you think guns were pretty devastating to those people's health, you know, since they died and all?"

NRA: "Guns don't kill people; people kill people!"

Murthy: "Jesus..."

NRA: "Jesus saves people!"

Murthy: :: sighs :: "Let me try this one last time... Over 32,000 people died last year when a person used a gun to shoot and kill another or themselves. That means we wouldn't have had this gun violence without A) the person or B) the gun. Do you get me so far?"

NRA: "I think so... What do you think, we're stupid or something?"

Murthy: "I won't comment on that. Anyway, so because of these people shooting guns and killing others or themselves, over 32,000 people died last year, which was devastating to their health, and is very concerning for the public at large moving forward. That's where I and every major medical association stand on the matter. Now do you understand where we're coming from?"

NRA: "Yeah, guns don't kill people; people kill people!"

Murthy: "But gun-violence wouldn't be 'gun-violence' without guns or people, correct?"

NRA: "Just the people!"

Murthy: "Do you understand what gun-violence is? A gun has to be used in order for gun-violence to occur..."

NRA: "A person has to be there too!"

Murthy: "That's correct. Now we're getting somewhere. In order for an act of gun-violence to occur, there needs to be a person and a firearm. So, now do you understand why I and every major medical association feel gun-violence is a public health concern?"

NRA: "Absolutely not, for guns don't kill people; people kill people!"

Murthy: "I give up. Hey, it's gotta be 5 'o'clock somewhere, right?" :: does a shot of tequila :: "A couple more of these and I may be able to start seeing your logic. Cheers!"


Going back to the interview, Senator Blunt then told Chuck Todd that we need a surgeon general. After Todd asked Blunt if the senator would vote for Murthy's confirmation, the Missouri senator decided to not answer the question and instead blame the Obama administration yet again. That's a special kind of logic right there:

1) President Obama nominates Vivek Murthy for Surgeon General

2) Republicans in Congress block the nomination

3) Multiple people get infected by Ebola in the U.S.

4) The cries get louder for a Surgeon General

5) Republicans blame President Obama for there not being a Surgeon General

That would be like the following scenario taking place:

Mr. Blunt: "Honey, I think I'd like to buy you a new car. What do you say?"

Mrs. Blunt: "No thanks"

Mr. Blunt: "Really? How come? We've got the money for it and everything. Come on - it'll be fun!"

Mrs. Blunt: "That's alright. Thanks anyway, though."

:: a few months later, Mrs. Blunt's old car breaks down and dies ::

Mrs. Blunt: "Why do I still have this old piece of crap anyway?!? Why?!? It's all your fault I don't have a new car! I hate you!"

...and they lived happily ever after, or something...

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/10/19/3581649/republican-blames-obama-for-surgeon-general-vacancy-after-republicans-blocked-surgeon-general-nominee/

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"