No More Sanjay Gupta for Surgeon General?

That's the word on the street. The poor guy would have had to take a massive pay cut. folks think this is a good or a bad thing?

More like this

Robert Barro is interviewed in The Atlantic about his views of the stimulus plan (see also a recent WSJ piece here). All in all, he is not a fan: The Atlantic: And I take it from the Wall Street Journal piece you wrote last week... well, the piece is just specifically about measuring multipliers,…
"It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had…
In my earlier post, I mentioned Perry Friedman as a member of the infamous Tiltboys and it reminded me that I should write something about them and get the word out about some hilarious reading you can do. If you have any interest in poker at all, I guarantee that you will enjoy reading about this…
This should be the new Democratic talking point about tax cuts: We need to change the thinking. Taxes are not too high. Incomes are too low. If you are having problems paying your taxes then you need a raise, not a tax cut. Democrats need to practice this response to anyone talking about tax cuts.…

As much as I am not a fan of Michael Moore, Sanjay's intellectually dishonest take-down of him was beyond the pale. So I say, good thing.

I'm betting on irony.

One of the more ironic things I can think of is Gupta turning down Surgeon General because it would be a pay cut, followed by CNN laying him off as part of budget cutting.

I'm quoting here - "Sanjay Gupta for Surgeon General is like Judge Judy for the Supreme Court." And I agree. He didn't have the chops for the job.

There is something about this that just does not make sense.

Surely Gupta knew that he would have to take a pay cut when he was first offered the job.

So why didn't he decline then?

I don't believe this was Gupta's choice.

This sounds too much like the "I stepped down to spend more time with my family" excuse that people give when they are fired.

There are some senators who are opposed to Gupta as surgeon general.

finally, I'm not sure if Gupta appreciates it or not, but he just reinforced the stereotype of a doctor who is more concerned with his pay than his patients.

Any way you look at it, Gupta does not have what it takes to be Surgeon General.

By Dark Tent (not verified) on 05 Mar 2009 #permalink

I am fairly neutral. But they need to look for a candidate who has Gupta's PR credentials and has good communications skills.

Given the ongoing demonstration of stupidity exhibited by Dr. Guptas' fellow neurosurgeon, Dr. Egnor, maybe the choice of someone from that particular specialty was a bit unfortunate.

Almost everyone who accepts a cabinet position, senate seat, or some other public service leadership appointment takes an enormous pay cut. Note that the one spreading the rumor about his being concerned about the pay cut also has a horse in the race ("Farrell said he would prefer the eventual nominee come from within the ranks of the Commissioned Corps"). Maybe it had nothing to do with money. Maybe Dr. Gupta just realized that the Surgeon General position is a powerless position where the holder of the job resides in some back woods where nobody pays attention to them. Perhaps he concluded that he could have more influence if he continued as a media personality.

On the other hand, his name recognition and general popularity might have given him the chance to be the Carl Sagan of medicine, a good communicator who gets ink and respect.

By Hedley Lamarr (not verified) on 06 Mar 2009 #permalink