No surgeon general
Oct 14, 2014 16:22:36 #
One more screw up with this administration. :twisted:
http://www.businessinsider.com/no-surgeon-general-during-ebola-in-us-2014-10
http://www.businessinsider.com/no-surgeon-general-during-ebola-in-us-2014-10
Oct 14, 2014 16:28:49 #
pounder35 wrote:
One more screw up with this administration. :twisted:
http://www.businessinsider.com/no-surgeon-general-during-ebola-in-us-2014-10
http://www.businessinsider.com/no-surgeon-general-during-ebola-in-us-2014-10
It never ends and won't until we get rid of Obummer and his cohorts. :hunf: :XD: :XD:
Oct 14, 2014 18:18:02 #
pounder35 wrote:
One more screw up with this administration. :twisted:
So, the Republican right stonewalls the President's nominee for Surgeon General on ideological grounds having nothing to do with the job of Surgeon General, and it is the President's fault? Interesting...but stooopid.
Oct 14, 2014 18:22:48 #
OldDoc wrote:
So, the Republican right stonewalls the President's nominee for Surgeon General on ideological grounds having nothing to do with the job of Surgeon General, and it is the President's fault? Interesting...but stooopid.
Agree completely!
Oct 14, 2014 18:23:51 #
OldDoc wrote:
So, the Republican right stonewalls the President's nominee for Surgeon General on ideological grounds having nothing to do with the job of Surgeon General, and it is the President's fault? Interesting...but stooopid.
That guy is a shill for the democRats and seems to be more involved with politics than medicine. More power to the Repubs to keep his sorry ass out of office. We have enough Obummerites. Only a libertard would think that it is "stooopid". :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:
Oct 14, 2014 19:23:43 #
OldDoc wrote:
So, the Republican right stonewalls the President's nominee for Surgeon General on ideological grounds having nothing to do with the job of Surgeon General, and it is the President's fault? Interesting...but stooopid.
The people nominated by the I***t-in-Chief and have been confirmed have a real good track record don't they? :roll:
Oct 14, 2014 20:25:41 #
Confirmations are by the Senate, I thought the Democrats controled that. Or did some of them join the Republicans in opposing the nomination?
OldDoc wrote:
So, the Republican right stonewalls the President's nominee for Surgeon General on ideological grounds having nothing to do with the job of Surgeon General, and it is the President's fault? Interesting...but stooopid.
Oct 14, 2014 20:41:18 #
pounder35 wrote:
One more screw up with this administration. :twisted:
http://www.businessinsider.com/no-surgeon-general-during-ebola-in-us-2014-10
http://www.businessinsider.com/no-surgeon-general-during-ebola-in-us-2014-10
I'm hear to teach sarge how to jack off!
Oct 14, 2014 20:54:29 #
I think him and his "circle" of friends have that covered. :shock: :roll: :lol: :lol:
Oct 14, 2014 21:27:44 #
pounder35 wrote:
I think him and his "circle" of friends have that covered. :shock: :roll: :lol: :lol:
:thumbup:
I'm signing out!
Oct 16, 2014 12:54:55 #
pounder35 wrote:
The people nominated by the I***t-in-Chief and have been confirmed have a real good track record don't they? :roll:
ah...they run track too? ;) Must be how they get those lies to spread so quickly! :lol:
Oct 16, 2014 12:59:21 #
Penny MG wrote:
ah...they run track too? ;) Must be how they get those lies to spread so quickly! :lol:
That is funny Penny. :lol: :lol: :thumbup: :thumbup:
Oct 16, 2014 13:55:16 #
Oct 16, 2014 14:03:52 #
bvm
Loc: Glendale, Arizona
dljen wrote:
^^^^These lunatics think surgeon generals can make public policy. LOL!
They do try, Look what the AG tries and in many cases gets away with.
Oct 16, 2014 14:05:51 #
bvm
Loc: Glendale, Arizona
Remember how many of BO choices had to disqualify themselves in the beginning because they owed back taxes.
THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN A WARNING!
THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN A WARNING!
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.