With the new appointment of the Ebola Czar, it is now official that the concern for this President regarding the deadly virus is purely political. Ron Klain is a lawyer, a long-time lobbyist and former Chief of Staff to VPs Joe Biden and Al Gore. Klain has zero medical background/knowledge, and yet he is to be the spokesperson for calming the Ebola panic that's running through the country. When trust in the government is at an all time low, Obama brings in a political hack to ease our fears. Can the trust go even lower?
The government is still sticking to its plan not to enforce any travel bans from Ebola-stricken countries, even as 30 something countries around the world have done so (including countries in Africa - are they racist too?) And, more importantly, the majority of Americans want a travel ban. In fact, there are tens of thousands of signatures on a petition to the White House to do just that. All this is being ignored by this President.
Now, according to the Washington Examiner, Obama is working on plans to bring non-American Ebola infected persons HERE to treat them? This is incomprehensible. If that is true, what is his agenda?
Between the refusal to impose a travel ban and the plan to treat non-Americans here, this all begs the question: WHY DOES OBAMA WANT INFECTED AND VERY CONTAGIOUS PEOPLE TO COME TO THIS COUNTRY? There's no other way to look at this right now.
Saturday, October 18, 2014
Sunday, October 12, 2014
Say No To 'Fighting' Ebola
There are already about 350 American troops in west Africa, sent to help contain the Ebola outbreak there. More troops are getting ready to go. Funny. I don't recall learning that our military were to be used to stop the spread of disease in far off countries. I'm pretty sure our military is to be used to defend this country from its enemies, to fight wars, and to fend off threats to our national security. I thought the military were trained to be warriors.
Now one may argue that the deadly Ebola virus does threaten our national security by threatening our national health. However, an agency like the World Health Organization handles responsibilities like containing a virus in other parts of the world and they have already been on the scene there.
So I must take exception to this latest order from the Commander in Chief. Doesn't sending our troops to west Africa threaten our national security by exposing them to this virus? Doesn't it put them in harm's way of a very different nature? Will troops who go there contract the virus? Will it then spread to infect other troops and their families? Why is our President asking them to go and handle this? I think it's an extraordinarily inappropriate use of our troops and a sacrifice that no family should have to put up with. Ebola is not an American problem. It's a worldwide medical problem. Let the medical professionals from WHO and other agencies handle this. I don't think our military should abide by this order. Tell your Commander in Chief "hell no, we won't go."
Now one may argue that the deadly Ebola virus does threaten our national security by threatening our national health. However, an agency like the World Health Organization handles responsibilities like containing a virus in other parts of the world and they have already been on the scene there.
So I must take exception to this latest order from the Commander in Chief. Doesn't sending our troops to west Africa threaten our national security by exposing them to this virus? Doesn't it put them in harm's way of a very different nature? Will troops who go there contract the virus? Will it then spread to infect other troops and their families? Why is our President asking them to go and handle this? I think it's an extraordinarily inappropriate use of our troops and a sacrifice that no family should have to put up with. Ebola is not an American problem. It's a worldwide medical problem. Let the medical professionals from WHO and other agencies handle this. I don't think our military should abide by this order. Tell your Commander in Chief "hell no, we won't go."
Saturday, October 11, 2014
Deadly Virus Becomes Political
The insidious Ebola virus, once restricted to a few countries on another far away continent, has stepped foot into the United States. One traveller from Liberia, came here asymptomatic on the flight, but revealed symptoms shortly afterward. Released from a Dallas hospital when he went there with a high fever, Thomas Duncan evidently was misdiagnosed and sent home with an antibiotic. After coming in contact with approximately 100 people since his arrival, Duncan soon succumbed to the deadly virus. Many people are now claiming that it was due to racism that Duncan didn't get proper treatment. Jesse Jackson says it was due to his race and lack of privilege which kept him from receiving the proper care.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/oct/9/jesse-jackson-dallas-lawmaker-blame-racism-for-ebo/
We've heard time and time again over the last couple of weeks, by CDC Director Tom Friedan, that banning flights from west African countries would not only not make a difference in stopping Ebola from coming in, but may make it worse. That sealing the borders would not help because it would be harder to get medical supplies and personnel in to fight it. That isolating these countries would enable the virus to spread further over there, thereby making it tougher to get a handle on it. According to Anthony Fauci, head of another government agency, it would then cause those countries to panic and lead to unrest, possibly the fall of their governments. So now the concern shifts to the governments of these African countries and away from the safety of the American citizens?
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/10/06/CDC-Chief-Frieden-on-Ebola-Sealing-Borders-Increases-People-s-Distrust-of-Government
Here'a a little known fact about this administration - in 2010, after opposition by the ACLU and other groups, Obama very quietly scrapped proposals by the CDC to impose stricter regulations to detain sick travellers and to require more reporting from airlines to better track sick people. These new regulations were "critical" according to the Centers for Disease Control. Now the administration is silent on that decision, and naturally, so is the supportive liberal media. According to Media Research Center (MRC) most TV networks won't even inquire as to whether the government is doing enough to stop the disease from coming in.
http://www.mrc.org/bias-numbers/ebola-networks-91-confident-travel-screenings-are-sufficient
Anyone from the political Left, please explain. Our country, and the world, are facing the prospect of a pandemic from a deadly virus. Since we know from which countries the virus originates, the common sensical action would be first to ban flights from the Ebola stricken countries (notwithstanding the shipment of medical supplies and personnel). Banning passenger flights would be a good first step (despite what the government is trying to convince us of) and already a few European countries have done that. One liberal commentator even went so far as to suggest that we owe it to Liberia to keep travel open, since America, a few hundred years ago, imported slaves from there. How can we turn our backs on them now, he said? If this isn't completely warped, I don't know what is.
Secondly, close our borders. This seems too obvious to even mention, and yet, this administration refuses to do so. Why? And to add further injury, some are speculating that if Ebola enters into Central America, those citizens will be making their way into the United States, through our open borders, by the thousands, looking for treatment. The implications for keeping it under control then are frightening.
So, to those on the political Left: why is wanting to keep our own citizens safe, racist and incompassionate? Above all, why is this political?
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/oct/9/jesse-jackson-dallas-lawmaker-blame-racism-for-ebo/
We've heard time and time again over the last couple of weeks, by CDC Director Tom Friedan, that banning flights from west African countries would not only not make a difference in stopping Ebola from coming in, but may make it worse. That sealing the borders would not help because it would be harder to get medical supplies and personnel in to fight it. That isolating these countries would enable the virus to spread further over there, thereby making it tougher to get a handle on it. According to Anthony Fauci, head of another government agency, it would then cause those countries to panic and lead to unrest, possibly the fall of their governments. So now the concern shifts to the governments of these African countries and away from the safety of the American citizens?
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/10/06/CDC-Chief-Frieden-on-Ebola-Sealing-Borders-Increases-People-s-Distrust-of-Government
Here'a a little known fact about this administration - in 2010, after opposition by the ACLU and other groups, Obama very quietly scrapped proposals by the CDC to impose stricter regulations to detain sick travellers and to require more reporting from airlines to better track sick people. These new regulations were "critical" according to the Centers for Disease Control. Now the administration is silent on that decision, and naturally, so is the supportive liberal media. According to Media Research Center (MRC) most TV networks won't even inquire as to whether the government is doing enough to stop the disease from coming in.
http://www.mrc.org/bias-numbers/ebola-networks-91-confident-travel-screenings-are-sufficient
Anyone from the political Left, please explain. Our country, and the world, are facing the prospect of a pandemic from a deadly virus. Since we know from which countries the virus originates, the common sensical action would be first to ban flights from the Ebola stricken countries (notwithstanding the shipment of medical supplies and personnel). Banning passenger flights would be a good first step (despite what the government is trying to convince us of) and already a few European countries have done that. One liberal commentator even went so far as to suggest that we owe it to Liberia to keep travel open, since America, a few hundred years ago, imported slaves from there. How can we turn our backs on them now, he said? If this isn't completely warped, I don't know what is.
Secondly, close our borders. This seems too obvious to even mention, and yet, this administration refuses to do so. Why? And to add further injury, some are speculating that if Ebola enters into Central America, those citizens will be making their way into the United States, through our open borders, by the thousands, looking for treatment. The implications for keeping it under control then are frightening.
So, to those on the political Left: why is wanting to keep our own citizens safe, racist and incompassionate? Above all, why is this political?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)