Obama: Ebola point person 'may be appropriate'

[candelista]

Source: AP

WASHINGTON (AP) — Under pressure to select an Ebola "czar" to lead the U.S. response against the disease, President Barack Obama conceded Thursday it "may be appropriate" to designate a single individual to head the administration effort.

Obama also said he is "not philosophically opposed" to a travel ban from the Ebola-afflicted region of West Africa "if that is the thing that is going to keep the American people safe." But he said such a measure could be counterproductive.

for Obama to institute a temporary travel ban grew Thursday, mainly from Republicans who said the growing outbreak in Sierra Leone, Guinea and Liberia is creating a greater traveling threat.

But Obama said a ban could increase the instance of travelers avoiding detection. They are less likely to get screened and we may have more cases of Ebola rather than less," he said.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/obama-calls-lawmakers-foreign-leaders-ebola-173832315.html

---

It looks like it may soon be okay for Obamaphiles on DU to support a travel ban from Ebola-affected regions, since their guy is considering implementing one.

I'm glad the President has at least opened the door to such a ban. I don't understand his argument against it, seeing as how the "screening" alternative consists of taking people's temperatures and then letting them go. We could, of course, do both.

[customerserviceguy]

1. He hurts himself by sounding so wishy-washy

"May be appropriate" "Not philosophically opposed". Those don't sound like Churchillian phrases.

[kestrel91316]

17. So shocked to hear you say this.

NOT.

[customerserviceguy]

43. I just wish the President looked more like a leader

and less like a bystander, or worse, an enabler (in the minds of people who watch Faux Snooze).

[kestrel91316]

45. There is absolutely nothing he can do, say, or look like

that will have any impact on what the RWers think of him.

He's a Democrat, he's black, to boot. And he's in the White House.

[customerserviceguy]

47. I don't care what impression he makes on the reich-wingers

I care about the impression being made on the mushy middle that decides the weekend before the election who to vote for. These are people who choose to keep their heads in the sand about anything political, or they'd be part of the base of either side. They listen to the fearmongering on both sides, and vote for the side that scares them the least.

I want our President to look like a leader on this for them, and appointing what the RW'ers are calling a political hack to be Ebola czar (what a quaint word from the Carter Administration) isn't helping.

[Journeyman]

2. Can't he at least draw attention to the absence of a Surgeon General?. . .

Perhaps by conceding that an "Ebola czar" may be appropriate, but he wants to leave the choice to the Surgeon General, and once his candidate is approved by the Republicans (and the NRA) we can move forward with protecting the public?

I wish he wouldn't play so much basketball but would instead spend more time playing "hard ball."

[samplegirl]

4. I just read that we

do have an acting Surgeon General.

[Journeyman]

6. Bully. Maybe someone can start acting like they're in charge. . .

[cstanleytech]

9. Ya but I would rather he use this to force the republicans to approve the guy Obama nominated

and if they dont then we can see how the republicans will enjoy having their noses rubbed in the fact that they are stonewalling the nomination of an Surgeon General for the country while there is fear of Ebola in the country right before an election.

[branford]

26. The Democrats in the Senate can approve Murthy today.

The simple fact is that he doesn't have enough Democratic votes for confirmation. More importantly, many of the Democratic senators who will not vote for him (or don't want to have to cast a vote) are facing tough elections a few weeks.

Most of the Republicans are more than happy to discuss their opposition to Murthy, as their constituents prioritize firearms over Ebola as a political issue, particularly over the long-term. The alleged need for a new figurehead in a Surgeon General to fight Ebola also gives the Republicans a talking point to discuss the current and purported "failure" of the Obama administration to adequately deal with the crisis.

I also don't think the Democratic leadership, including Obama, has articulated how the lack of permanent Surgeon General has negatively impacted the Ebola issue, particularly when the focus is on the CDC, which has not distinguished itself thus far. Additionally, if Ebola is the reason we immediately need a confirmed Surgeon General, what makes Murthy uniquely qualified for that specific task?

Simply, most Americans view the Surgeon General as a non-partisan figurehead that warns of the hazards of smoking, reminds people to practice safe sex, and tell kids not to do drugs. We expect the CDC to fight virulent, infectious disease. Pushing Murthy with Democratic opposition risks embarrassment for the administration, weakens the chances of the Democrats retaining the Senate, and does nothing substantive to fight Ebola domestically that could not be accomplished by other competent administrators.

If Obama wants to gain politically from the Surgeon General position, he should nominate a totally non-partisan infectious disease expert, possibly someone with a military background, to help his polling numbers that indicate doubts about his management skills.

[Major Hogwash]

28. There's not enough votes in the Senate to confirm the Surgeon General.

And the Republicans in the Senate do NOT want ANYONE to be confirmed.
That is their final position, screwing up anything they can, just to get back at the President.
President Obama could nominate a Mother Teresa figure, the Republican would still block the appointment.

You just don't get what obstruction really means to the Republican party these days.

[branford]

31. There are sufficient Democrats in the Senate to confirm Murthy.

After Reid's "nuclear option," executive appointments only need 50+1 votes to close debate. There are 55 Democrats in the Senate, and Murthy hasn't received a vote because Reid refuses to schedule a vote.

The Republicans would love for Reid to put Murthy's nomination to a vote. Democrats would either sink the nominee and embarrass the White House, or vote for him, and virtually ensure a defeat in either their upcoming election or soon thereafter. A vote against Murthy and for 2A rights would be a positive for virtually all Republicans in their home states.

If Obama nominated someone totally non-controversial and non-partisan, particularly during the Ebola crisis, he or she would likely receive a swift and bipartisan confirmation, just like the recently nominated new VA Secretary after the recent scandals.

Republicans have certainly tried to block the president on multiple occasions, but the failure to confirm Murthy is the result of raw Democratic political calculus in an election year, and to some, cowardice.

[Major Hogwash]

32. No, you are wrong.

You just don't get it!!!!!!!!!!

[branford]

34. Wrong about what?

Murthy's nomination could be voted on today if Harry Reid allowed it, and confirmed without a single Republican vote. Since the nuclear option, the Republicans are unable to mount a filibuster on executive nominees.

The level of Republican obstructionism or vitriol it entirely immaterial in this instance. Vivek Murthy is not the Surgeon General because Democrats lack the determination and actual votes to confirm him.

I also get that a Murthy confirmation fight would involve the firearm rights issue and be deadly to many Democratic senators, particularly those in red and purple states who are fighting this November for their political lives.

The Republicans would love for Reid to bring Murthy's nomination to the floor and see key Democrats forced to cast politically impossible votes.

[Major Hogwash]

35. Branford!! The Senate is NOT even in session!!!

Good gawd, man, use your head!!!!

[branford]

36. I'm well aware of that fact.

However, if it was truly an emergency situation the Senate could easily reconvene for a quick vote, and that is most certainly not the reason why Murthy has failed to be confirmed for the many months his nomination has languished.

Simply, Murthy's nomination is so radioactive to Democrats in battleground states that he politically cannot be confirmed, nor really used to gain political leverage in the Ebola leverage. Blaming Republicans for lack of an Surgeon General, to extent that much of the population cares or believes it would have an effect on our Ebola response, would force these Democrats to answer some very uncomfortable questions from their more conservative electorate.

[whereisjustice]

3. Meanwhile, NSA is hard at work shoveling people onto the no-fly list eom

[uppityperson]

5. I still oppose a ban, according to the experts it is counter productive and useless. To say I oppose

because Obama does is insulting.

[arcane1]

8. Yep.

Hence the term "Obamaphiles". Lots of people are trying to link the two today.

[candelista]

10. When Obama supports a travel ban, you will support it, too.

[uppityperson]

21. Nope. What are you going to do, use your mind control powers on me?

Nope, even if Obama says do it. I have read a lot of what the experts say and disagree with a ban as it will do nothing positive except be window dressing.

[Cha]

7. "looks like it may soon be okay for Obamaphiles on DU to support a travel ban from Ebola-affected

regions, since their guy is considering implementing one."

You can Can it with your attempt at trying to insult those who support President Obama.. no one has to agree with everything he does.

It says more about you than Obama supporters.

[candelista]

12. I've just read too many non sequitur reasons against a travel ban, on DU.

The only explanation I can think of is loyalty to the President, who opposed a travel ban until recently.

[leftynyc]

38. How about that every single expert is

against the ban? Could that be why people here are against it? Do you really consider your fellow DUers so empty headed that the only reason we do anything is because of the President? That's pretty fucking insulting.

[Major Hogwash]

18. At least my guy is the one working in the White House conducting the business of the presidency.

Not the one trying to figure out which switch makes the car elevator go up and which switch makes the car elevator go down!!!!

[Cha]

20. Our guy is that and so much more, Major.. regardless of those on the internet who spew cheap pot

at him & and his brilliant supporters.

[Major Hogwash]

23. Anne said they can't afford to run for President again yesterday.

Hell, I knew that!!!!!

[Cha]

24. Goin' broke are they? Today in History, Major

President Obama with Romney's grandkids after debate..


Nerdy Wonka @NerdyWonka
Follow
Today In 2012: That moment President Obama said, "Please Proceed, Governor" and Romney did.
2:18 AM - 16 Oct 2014
119 Retweets 99 favorites Nerdy Wonka @NerdyWonka

[Major Hogwash]

29. Yeah, and it was all downhill from then on.

Poor Mitt, he didn't like the 47% that wanted free stuff.
Too bad for him.

He probably doesn't believe in Santa Claus either!!!!!

[Major Hogwash]

30. John McCain wants an Ebola Czar!

"Jesus Christ, did I actually say that?"




[img][/img]

[liberal N proud]

44. +100

[blue neen]

11. "since their guy is considering implementing one"

Do you have a different President than the rest of us?

[candelista]

13. I might have a different one in my heart.

But that's a personal matter.

[KittyWampus]

14. yes, but your insulting, divisive posts on DU are public. At least I'm not the only one to notice.

[candelista]

15. I think you misread criticism for insult, and discussion for divisiveness.

And your ad populum argument doesn't work.

[kestrel91316]

19. You sure haven't fooled me of late.

[leftynyc]

39. Because using Obamaphiles

is showing such respect for your fellow posters. It's an insulting post and whatever grief you're getting, you deserve.

[arcane1]

16. I've seen lots of attempts at scoring points this week regarding Ebola

This is the latest.

[Cha]

25. You didn't "misread" anything, Kitty.

[Cha]

27. It couldn't be Putin could it?! Just because he sticks up for Putin and disparages Pres Obama and

his supporters?! Nah..

And, by Putin.. I don't mean his "president".. just his favorite guy.

[leftynyc]

40. Ah - that makes sense

Thanks for paying closer attention to those kinds of posters than I do. A fascist supporter - that makes sense.

[That Guy 888]

22. Why doesn't Obama push for a Surgeon General as a "point person"?

Rethuglicons never have good ideas and are never helpful.

[branford]

33. Because we have a "point person," he's the Director of the CDC,

or even the HHS Secretary, or any other of a number of White House advisers that have relevant public health and national security portfolios.

That's one of the reasons that Obama is hesitant to select an "Ebola Czar," it's an admission that the people who are actually responsible for dealing with the crisis have utterly failed in the jobs. Given Obama's terrible polling about management competence, I, too, would not be eager to make such an implicit admission right before a tough election.

Also, if the Surgeon General appointment is to act as a point person for Ebola, what makes Vivek Murthy uniquely or specially qualified for such a task, particularly when so many civilian and military doctors and public health experts have much greater qualifications, and do not have the controversial gun baggage?

[KeepItReal]

37. I'm sorry, this issue calls for a Surgeon General.

Who was point person for AIDS education and educating us on perils caused by smoking?

Here's a hint: It wasn't the head of the CDC.

It was C. Everett Koop - Surgeon General of the USA

[sybylla]

41. He should appoint his Surgeon General candidate.

It would be the perfect statement and would piss off the GOP tools.

[BumRushDaShow]

42. He can't.

He just lost a Supreme Court ruling this year (June) regarding his attempts at "Recess Appointments" (NRLB members last year), where the Supreme Court established that the Senate was not "in recess" due to their gaveling in every 3 days to technically remain "in session, subject to the call of the Chair".

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-rebukes-obama-on-recess-appointments/2014/06/26/e5e4fefa-e831-11e3-a86b-362fd5443d19_story.html

And right now, the Senate is still NOT "in recess" nor have they adjourned, as they continue to gavel in every 3 days.

[JoePhilly]

46. It'll give the right wing a person to scream at.

Meanwhile, the rest if the administration and the CDC will focus on real work.

[Bragi]

48. Yes, and a White House backroom lawyer would be perfect for the job

I hope he takes up this suggestion and doesn't appoint some high-ranking doctor with decades of public health experience for the job. What's needed here is a political operative with a law degree, for sure.