It’s not about “the science”.

According to (suprisingly) the NY Times, The former, and I stress former, Surgeon General is claiming censorship.

Interesting, that a position that traditionally has been bi-partisan if not politically neutral has all of the sudden cried foul play, and just short of a year later. He complains that officials had him come to meetings to explain “the science” of things like global warming but wasn’t heard. He also claims he was pressured to not release reports about the dangers of even brief contact with second hand smoke. I would love to ask him a few questions of my own.

1) Why now? Why did you wait for over a year to even bring this up?

2) You were elected to a position that is meant to safeguard the American people, why did you allow politics to interfere with that end?

There are more, but they are all inter-related with the above. Here’s what I got from the article. There is a former surgeon general that was not asked for another term, even though his adminstration was, now he’s upset because he didn’t take advantage of his time in office. Here’s why, when he consulted the Surgeon Generals that were appointed by the Reagan and Clinton administrations, both stated they felt political pressure to either release, or not release certain findings or theories from the administrations. Yet, both of them had the fortitude to release them anyway. Dr. Carmona, unfortunately was not as strong. He didn’t have the spine to stand up for science, now he’s stating that people didn’t respect his scientific opinion. I don’t respect his opinion now either, he has shown that scientific finding and reason are not his number one priorities, even while sitting as Surgeon General of the United States.

He can complain all he wants, but this isn’t about “the science”. This is about a doctor that did not live up to his appointment, and is now trying to blame someone else for his own folly. I’m not buying it. Did he honestly believe that the American people wouldn’t support him if he released a report about the dangers of second hand smoke? If he were to release such a report, what president would dismiss the man that reported on an issue that is very important to the people? The answer is none. It’s not about censorship or “the science”, this doctor is just feeling remorse for not doing what he was appointed to do.

~ RationalZen


Filed under American History, Climate, Congress, Conservative, Earth, Environment, Global Warming, History, Liberal, Media, Politics, Republicans, Science

4 responses to “It’s not about “the science”.

  1. I do agree that he should have done something. He should have just released the report or openly told the public how he felt.

    However, that is more difficult than people think it is, I know (to some extend, I never served as the SG though) how he felt. I am sure the thought of resigning crossed his mind but he most likely realized that the next person might be even more afraid of speaking out and he could do a better job treading the line than a successor could.

    I think it also important to realize that the big problem here is not that the SG did not do his job, it’s was the President of the United States that was an impediment in the SG in doing that job. The very fact there was pressure to “water down” reports of issues that went against the interests of Mr. Bush and his party. That is what the outrage should be about.

    To “smack around” the intimidated party is pointless when it is the bully that needs to be taught the lesson.

  2. rationalzen


    My problem with it, is that he admits fault but won’t take accountability.

    What he was dealing with was easier to deal with than most average citizens would deal with in the same scenario. I design computer systems for people, if my boss pressures me to tell our customers some watered down information, and I choose not to, I will likely be let go. That’s pressure.

    If the surgeon general releases a report about second hand smoke, regardless of his administration’s party affiliation, he can always fall back on public opinion to pressure his boss right back. He has something that we as average citizens don’t have.

    The way you teach the bully the lesson is to stand up to them. He should have released the report, what’s the worst that would happen? He doesn’t get appointed for a second time?

    That’s my beef, I personally wouldn’t lie to my clients about a system I design, I just expect the SG to do the same.

  3. naomi

    My issue is that there is so much political pressure everywhere. Isn’t it about time someone stood up to it and just did what was right and not what was considered acceptable to those above them. I have a feeling that if it were Mitt in charge there would be a lot less pressure and more freedom to act as we feel is morally right-just look at his record!!!

    I heard a song by a guy named eric proffitt ( that states “my vote is on the man of integrity” (the song is called Raise the Bar and you can listen to it on his website). I really like the lyrics-they made me realize how disappointed our founding fathers would be if they could see how far we have strayed from our foundation.

    Let’s hope that our country will in the future cultivate more freedom than less.

  4. btw, the surgeon general is not an elected office- he was appointed. Regardless of the nobility of his calling or whatever, when it comes down to it, he’s a political appointee which means he’s answerable to his boss, the President. That’s the reality of the situation.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s