• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

More ebola fearmongering, from rightwingernuts

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
This lady sounds like those Republican fearmongers that OT brought to our attention...

The executive director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons states that restricted entry to the United States will be necessary to stop the spread of the deadly Ebola virus.

“The potential for devastating loss of life is real,” wrote Dr. Jane M. Orient on the website of AAPS. “The disease must be stopped before there are millions of persons exposed instead of 100.”

Orient said that restricting entry to the United States means that travelers from areas affected by Ebola must be “carefully screened and quarantined when indicated.”

Additionally, she warned that to contain the spread of Ebola, the United States must observe a high degree of suspicion, including a “travel and exposure history” for patients with fever and other symptoms, precautionary isolation, and careful contact tracing so that at-risk individuals are “identified, notified, monitored, and isolated as needed.”

Orient said that hospital personnel must all be trained with adequate supplies of protective gear and have a high degree of alertness for signs of the deadly disease.

“We need hard-headed realism, not complacent reassurance,” Orient wrote.

“President Obama said: ‘It will require an air bridge to get health workers and medical supplies to areas that are affected,’” she noted. “Meanwhile, the virus has used the air bridge of a commercial flight to reach Dallas. So far, only the index patient is ill, but 100 contacts are being observed.”

Orient questioned how so many experts can say that the chance of a widespread outbreak is “vanishingly small” due to our “highly sophisticated public health system,” when the U.S. has already experienced a number of breaches in our stronghold, first and foremost the fact that the hospital treating the symptomatic patient from Liberia failed to follow federal guidelines. Rather than being placed in isolation, the patient was sent home with antibiotics which, Orient says, “are useless for viral infections.”

The patient then vomited outside his apartment before being returned to the hospital by ambulance, but no precautions were taken in cleaning up the vomit, and no special care was taken in transporting him in the ambulance, she said.

“Even now, the patient is being treated under BSL-2 (biosafety level 2) conditions, although the World Health Organization states that BSL-4 precautions are needed for working with Ebola virus,” Orient continued. “Rules requiring international passengers to fill out a detailed health questionnaire have not been implemented, although the CDC called them ‘critical to protecting Americans from dangerous diseases spread by travelers’—in 2006.”

Observing the inconsistency in reports from U.S. officials, Orient points out that while some are “frequently reassuring people that the virus is not ‘airborne’" and that “it is not possible, we are told, to get Ebola from a person who does not have symptoms,” CDC officials are meanwhile appearing in full hazmat gear, giving the impression that “a tiny pinprick through your glove, and you’ve got Ebola.”

“And how can one be sure that an asymptomatic patient cannot transmit disease?” she asks. “The virus is multiplying in his body—what is to prevent it from being shed before he notices fever or headache? It’s a matter of 1 degree. Corpses are teeming with virus, but it only takes a very few particles to infect someone.”

Though Orient understands the need to contain public panic, at the same time she believes absolute statements that later prove to be false will “destroy the credibility of the authorities.”

“We should be taking aggressive measures to stop this disease now,” Orient said, “instead of congratulating ourselves on our sophisticated system.”

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/10/04/National-Physician-Organization-Director-on-Ebola-Restricted-Entry-To-U-S-Necessary-To-Stop-Spread-of-Disease
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
The President of the Private Practice Doctors organization has charged that the U.S. government’s lack of urgency in border and flight security, coupled with West Africa’s inability to properly screen people with fevers, undermines protocols and puts Americans in danger of contracting Ebola.

Dr. Reed Wilson, a renowned cardiologist and long time member of the Cedars Sinai Bioethics Committee, reacted to the reality that the Ebola virus has spread rapidly across Guinea, Liberia, Nigeria, and Sierra Leone since March, killing more than 3,000 people.

“We are relying on the failed governments of West African nations to do the screening of their citizens and travelers,” Wilson said. “We are depending on Third World, untrained individuals to be the bulwark for the U.S.A. to prevent mass death. This should not bring comfort to the ears of American citizens.”

http://www.dailynews.com/health/20141003/california-senators-urge-hospital-preparedness-for-ebola
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Gov. Perry wasn't responsible for letting it in, in the first place.

I'm sure if he was President, he would have had the sense to close the borders to those ebola Countries, unlike the fool you voted for.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
GOP lawmaker: Obama needs Ebola 'czar'

By Cameron Joseph - 10/04/14 05:27 PM EDT

President Obama should appoint a "czar" to help combat Ebola, according to Rep. Jack Kingston (R-Ga.).


Kingston told the Washington Examiner that while he hates "to invoke the term "czar,'" President Obama should add one.
"One of the big backdrops of this is a national defense issue of germ pandemic and drone warfare," he said, calling for a "George Mitchell type character" to lead "one central office that's a clearinghouse" to unify the disparate government agencies focused on tackling the problem.

"Individually they're doing a good job, but they're in their own silo," Kingston said.

The congressman is retiring at the end of the year after losing a GOP Senate primary.

This one made me chuckle after all the crying, whining, b*tching and moaning R's did about all the Obama "Czars"....... :wink: :lol:

Maybe if they had confirmed the Surgeon General of the United States when he was nominated he would be in a the position today to do what the office is supposed to do....

The Surgeon General of the United States is the operational head of the U.S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps (PHSCC) and thus the leading spokesperson on matters of public health in the federal government of the United States. The Surgeon General's office and staff are known as the Office of the Surgeon General (OSG).
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Isn't it Immigrations job to restrict entry at the borders?

Congress is not there to just rubberstamp every nomination the President makes. That's how you end up with people like the Secret Service gal that just resigned.

And there's a reason that Republican you quoted lost his primary, can you think of one?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Lots of differing opinions on what is and what isn't Constitutional... That's up to the courts to decide...

That's why I've long supported giving Congress 60 days to check out a nominee- and then take it to a vote... If no vote in 60 days- automatic confirmation...
No more holding the country hostage by one Senator ( I think this time it was Paul) putting a hold on the nominees confirmation- sometime for years... Often these holds are used just as blackmail to get pork for a Senator's home state approved...

As shown now in this situation- and previously with the ATF problems- there is a need to get these people into place so they can become aware of and get a handle on their offices/Departments...
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
How many agencies could have stopped this ebola patient from entering the US...and you blame the Republicans because they did not confirm a surgeon general :lol:

You're grasping at straws, OT.

When Political Correctness is more important than the safety and lives of the Whole of the US...you got a problem.

Even to the obamacare EHR's, that are PC....

...you're not even intelligent enough to understand, or recognize, what is going on. You just blame it on the Republicans, blaming them for the politics that are being played by your "messiah"

I don't think millions will die, in the US, because of ebola, but it sure does bring to light many problems with the leftist ideology that you voted for.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hypocritexposer said:
How many agencies could have stopped this ebola patient from entering the US...and you blame the Republicans because they did not confirm a surgeon general :lol:

You're grasping at straws, OT.

When Political Correctness is more important than the safety and lives of the Whole of the US...you got a problem.

Even to the obamacare EHR's, that are PC....

...you're not even intelligent enough to understand, or recognize, what is going on. You just blame it on the Republicans, blaming them for the politics that are being played by your "messiah"

I don't think millions will die, in the US, because of ebola, but it sure does bring to light many problems with the leftist ideology that you voted for.

GOP lawmaker: Obama needs Ebola 'czar'

By Cameron Joseph - 10/04/14 05:27 PM EDT

President Obama should appoint a "czar" to help combat Ebola, according to Rep. Jack Kingston (R-Ga.).


Kingston told the Washington Examiner that while he hates "to invoke the term "czar,'" President Obama should add one.
"One of the big backdrops of this is a national defense issue of germ pandemic and drone warfare," he said, calling for a "George Mitchell type character" to lead "one central office that's a clearinghouse" to unify the disparate government agencies focused on tackling the problem.

No its Rep Jack Kingston (R-Ga.) that says they need one person in charge of the ebola situation...
All I'm saying is that is already the job of the Surgeon General which still has not been filled...
But if you think we should make another bureaucrat a job :???: :roll:
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
You clearly do not understand the mandate of a surgeon general.

The position is a glorified spokesperson...

...and besides, obama already said he has it all under control.

How much have we heard from the acting Surgeon General, Boris Lushniak, on ebola? What policy decisions has he implemented.

I would think a Surgeon General that had spent over 15 years with the CDC would have some relevant thoughts on the matter.
 

iwannabeacowboy

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Lots of differing opinions on what is and what isn't Constitutional... That's up to the courts to decide...

That's why I've long supported giving Congress 60 days to check out a nominee- and then take it to a vote... If no vote in 60 days- automatic confirmation...
No more holding the country hostage by one Senator ( I think this time it was Paul) putting a hold on the nominees confirmation- sometime for years... Often these holds are used just as blackmail to get pork for a Senator's home state approved...

As shown now in this situation- and previously with the ATF problems- there is a need to get these people into place so they can become aware of and get a handle on their offices/Departments...

What you consider a great idea lacks the great. Automatic confirmation for not having a vote? You can't see the problem with that?

It's obvious you don't understand the basic principles of a republic government built on checks and balances.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
iwannabeacowboy said:
Oldtimer said:
Lots of differing opinions on what is and what isn't Constitutional... That's up to the courts to decide...

That's why I've long supported giving Congress 60 days to check out a nominee- and then take it to a vote... If no vote in 60 days- automatic confirmation...
No more holding the country hostage by one Senator ( I think this time it was Paul) putting a hold on the nominees confirmation- sometime for years... Often these holds are used just as blackmail to get pork for a Senator's home state approved...

As shown now in this situation- and previously with the ATF problems- there is a need to get these people into place so they can become aware of and get a handle on their offices/Departments...

What you consider a great idea lacks the great. Automatic confirmation for not having a vote? You can't see the problem with that?

It's obvious you don't understand the basic principles of a republic government built on checks and balances.

Actually this would force the checks and balances to come into play- require the Senate to give an up or down vote... If no good- then the majority should vote him out... Much more Democratic then having the ability for one person to hold the country hostage for one of his pet projects...
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
iwannabeacowboy said:
Oldtimer said:
Lots of differing opinions on what is and what isn't Constitutional... That's up to the courts to decide...

That's why I've long supported giving Congress 60 days to check out a nominee- and then take it to a vote... If no vote in 60 days- automatic confirmation...
No more holding the country hostage by one Senator ( I think this time it was Paul) putting a hold on the nominees confirmation- sometime for years... Often these holds are used just as blackmail to get pork for a Senator's home state approved...

As shown now in this situation- and previously with the ATF problems- there is a need to get these people into place so they can become aware of and get a handle on their offices/Departments...

What you consider a great idea lacks the great. Automatic confirmation for not having a vote? You can't see the problem with that?

It's obvious you don't understand the basic principles of a republic government built on checks and balances.

Actually this would force the checks and balances to come into play- require the Senate to give an up or down vote... If no good- then the majority should vote him out... Much more Democratic then having the ability for one person to hold the country hostage for one of his pet projects...


That is exactly what you are promoting and advocating for, by having the Congress rubberstamp the President's nominee...
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hypocritexposer said:
Oldtimer said:
iwannabeacowboy said:
What you consider a great idea lacks the great. Automatic confirmation for not having a vote? You can't see the problem with that?

It's obvious you don't understand the basic principles of a republic government built on checks and balances.

Actually this would force the checks and balances to come into play- require the Senate to give an up or down vote... If no good- then the majority should vote him out... Much more Democratic then having the ability for one person to hold the country hostage for one of his pet projects...


That is exactly what you are promoting and advocating for, by having the Congress rubberstamp the President's nominee...

No rubberstamp- if you didn't want the person vote NO- and if a majority voted no- he's out and the President needs to nominate somebody else... Cut out these year(s) long nomination process's.... Help fill all these judicial nominees that have caused a many year backlog in the courts- and many people never even getting their cases to court....

Works either way- Repub or Dem President... I first saw the idea proposed by a Republican (Gingrich ?)
 

Steve

Well-known member
No rubberstamp- if you didn't want the person vote NO- and if a majority voted no- he's out and the President needs to nominate somebody else... Cut out these year(s) long nomination process's.... Help fill all these judicial nominees that have caused a many year backlog in the courts- and many people never even getting their cases to court....

Works either way- Repub or Dem President... I first saw the idea proposed by a Republican (Gingrich ?)

so basically you trust two people to represent the entire country...

all that needs to be done under your "rule' is for obama to nominate and for harry reid to not bring the vote to the floor...

An analysis of votes held this year shows the Senate is doing very little legislative work, and on average is holding a major vote on a bill every nine days.

It also shows that Senate Democratic leaders don’t get anywhere on legislation when they choose to ignore.

Aside from the several resolutions and less-critical bills that the Senate passes by unanimous consent at the end of the day, the Senate has held roll call votes to advance or pass legislation just 21 times in 27 weeks — less than one a week. And a full one-third of those votes have failed

The New York Times reported last week on Reid’s “brutish style” and “uncompromising control” over the amendments process in the Senate. Why are more people finally catching on to Reid’s flagrant disregard for Senate customs? In part because conservatives aren’t the only ones complaining.

Democrats such as Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota — who wants to repeal Obamacare’s medical-device tax — and Kirsten Gillibrand of New York — who has waged a highly publicized campaign to reform the way the military handles sexual-assault cases — have been denied votes on their proposed amendments to various bills.

"352 bills are sitting on Harry Reid’s desk, awaiting action.

"98 percent of them passed with bipartisan support -- Republicans and Democrats working together to pass legislation.

"50 percent of the bills passed unanimously, with no opposition.

"70 percent of the bills passed with two-thirds support in the House.

"And over 55 bills were introduced by Democrats.

yep.. just automatically confirm them without a vote.. that aught to work fine..
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Steve said:
No rubberstamp- if you didn't want the person vote NO- and if a majority voted no- he's out and the President needs to nominate somebody else... Cut out these year(s) long nomination process's.... Help fill all these judicial nominees that have caused a many year backlog in the courts- and many people never even getting their cases to court....

Works either way- Repub or Dem President... I first saw the idea proposed by a Republican (Gingrich ?)

so basically you trust two people to represent the entire country...

all that needs to be done under your "rule' is for obama to nominate and for harry reid to not bring the vote to the floor...

An analysis of votes held this year shows the Senate is doing very little legislative work, and on average is holding a major vote on a bill every nine days.

It also shows that Senate Democratic leaders don’t get anywhere on legislation when they choose to ignore.

Aside from the several resolutions and less-critical bills that the Senate passes by unanimous consent at the end of the day, the Senate has held roll call votes to advance or pass legislation just 21 times in 27 weeks — less than one a week. And a full one-third of those votes have failed

The New York Times reported last week on Reid’s “brutish style” and “uncompromising control” over the amendments process in the Senate. Why are more people finally catching on to Reid’s flagrant disregard for Senate customs? In part because conservatives aren’t the only ones complaining.

Democrats such as Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota — who wants to repeal Obamacare’s medical-device tax — and Kirsten Gillibrand of New York — who has waged a highly publicized campaign to reform the way the military handles sexual-assault cases — have been denied votes on their proposed amendments to various bills.

"352 bills are sitting on Harry Reid’s desk, awaiting action.

"98 percent of them passed with bipartisan support -- Republicans and Democrats working together to pass legislation.

"50 percent of the bills passed unanimously, with no opposition.

"70 percent of the bills passed with two-thirds support in the House.

"And over 55 bills were introduced by Democrats.

yep.. just automatically confirm them without a vote.. that aught to work fine..

No- when the original idea was brought up that was covered also... No one person could put a hold on the confirmation hearing... I posted the whole proposal and who posted it- but don't remember where...
 

hopalong

Well-known member
Perhaps you should POST thing that can be believed,,, usually your posts are not really believable,,(((kinda like you))))) :roll: :roll:
 
Top