Excerpts from recent editorials in newspapers in the United States and abroad:
Reading (Pa.) Eagle, on the NRA and Obama’s surgeon general nominee:
Though the designee supports increased gun regulations, he’d play no role in forming policy.
The National Rifle Association’s attack on President Barack Obama’s surgeon general nominee is a too-common tale of corrupted power and political cowardice. It’s also, apparently, on the verge of derailing Dr. Vivek H. Murthy’s candidacy.
No doubt many NRA backers will blindly rejoice, but we caution that this story should dismay both guns-rights advocates and gun-control proponents.
Because the crux of the NRA’s smear campaign simply bears no relevance to Murthy’s would-be role as the country’s top doctor. Murthy is Yale- and Harvard-educated … But the NRA began aiming its political guns at Murthy in a bullying February letter to Senate leaders, writing, “(There is a) likelihood he would use the office of surgeon general to further his pre-existing campaign against gun ownership.” …
It’s true that Murthy advocates an assault-weapons ban and mandatory training. Patching gunshot victims’ gaping wounds when he was an emergency-room doctor likely helped shape Murthy’s position that gun ownership is more a harmful than a helpful right.
Still, the NRA’s arguments are specious.
Forget that at his confirmation hearing Murthy testified he had no intention of using the surgeon general’s post to advance a gun-control platform, because Murthy’s intent has little to do with the fact that a surgeon general has no role in gun-regulation formation.
It’s also a rich irony that the NRA would concern itself with accurate public-health information, given its open role as lobbyist …
Despite this nonconnection between Murthy’s guns stance and a surgeon general’s role, the White House is reportedly recalibrating its strategy on Murthy, and 10 Democrats from heavily pro-gun states have hinted they’d vote against him.
Shame on the NRA for exerting its alarmist might against a qualified candidate not in lockstep with its one-way agenda. Shame on Obama for not having Murthy’s back. And shame on those Democrats for their me-first approach to politics.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less