We Don't Have a Surgeon General Because Democrats Made a Losing Bet on Gun Politics
A shell casing is ejected from a MMC Armory MA-15 Standard rifle as David Mennie Jr. fires three .223 bullets during testing at MMC Armory, a division of Mennie Machine Co., in Mark, Illinois
Photograph by Daniel Acker/BloombergThere have been no new Ebola cases in the United States for 11 days. That has not halted the outbreak of Maple Street-style panics in small towns; it has certainly not unjangled the nerves of Democrats, who'd prefer not to lose too many Senate races this year. As Republicans hit "play" on Ebola-themed ads, some Democrats have challenged the Right over the fact that there's no confirmed Surgeon General in office right now. Byron York reminds readers that Democrats could have confirmed Obama's nominee, Vivek Murthy, with just 51 votes, but chose not to.
"In 2012, Murthy got a lot of attention when he expressed frustration with opponents of his preferred gun control policies," writes York. "The National Rifle Association took a strong stand against Murthy, a position that caught the attention not only of Republicans but of red-state Democrats seeking re-election."