• 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

A

Anonymous

Guest
Andy Borowitz
On Meet the Press today, Republican National Committee chair Reince Priebus blamed Ebola on President Obama. I think it's outrageous that it took him this long.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Uppity Doctor Is Having None of Hasselbeck's Ebola Border Lunacy

"Why not just shut down the flights and secure the borders?" Elisabeth Hasselbeck asks about Our Ebola Nightmare on Fox & Friends today. Unfortunately, she asks not a fellow anchor but Dr. Anthony Fauci, Director of the National Institiute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases at the NIH.


Fauci: From a public health standpoint, that really doesn't make any sense...

The best way to protect America is to suppress the epidemic in West Africa. And if we completely isolate them, don't let anything in don't let anything out, we know from experience with public health, that marginalizes them, and you could have civil unrest, the governments could fall. And then you could wind up having the spread the virus to other countries in west Africa, which would only compound the problem.

Hasselbeck: What about something perhaps less extreme…

Fauci: Like what?

Hasselbeck: …Not a complete closing. I don't think anyone who has a heart wants some—a group of people to just suffer alone in the world, and there are those that want to go and help, and my heart is with them. But what about a partial ban? A closing of our borders of travel?

Fauci: A closing of our borders? I'm sorry, I don't know what you mean by that…

I'm sorry, but that doesn't work. If you look at the newspapers, if you look at the TV coverage, you think that West Africa is this nation of the people that you see on the front page of the New York Times sick in Ebola treatment units.

It's a much much larger—this is a nation of millions and millions of people—multiple nations, not one. You have Americans there, you have businesspeople there, people of dual citizenship, who have to go back and forth. It's completely impractical, and from a public health standpoint, not helpful, to [shut down borders]. And I think every public health official feels that way.

Yeah, but what do public health officials know about keeping us safe from infectious disease?

Full article and video: http://fortressamerica.gawker.com/uppity-doctor-is-having-none-of-hasselbecks-ebola-borde-1642976766?utm_campaign=socialflow_gawker_facebook&utm_source=gawker_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Uppity Doctor Is Having None of Hasselbeck's Ebola Border Lunacy

"Why not just shut down the flights and secure the borders?" Elisabeth Hasselbeck asks about Our Ebola Nightmare on Fox & Friends today. Unfortunately, she asks not a fellow anchor but Dr. Anthony Fauci, Director of the National Institiute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases at the NIH.


Fauci: From a public health standpoint, that really doesn't make any sense...

The best way to protect America is to suppress the epidemic in West Africa. And if we completely isolate them, don't let anything in don't let anything out, we know from experience with public health, that marginalizes them, and you could have civil unrest, the governments could fall. And then you could wind up having the spread the virus to other countries in west Africa, which would only compound the problem.

Hasselbeck: What about something perhaps less extreme…

Fauci: Like what?

Hasselbeck: …Not a complete closing. I don't think anyone who has a heart wants some—a group of people to just suffer alone in the world, and there are those that want to go and help, and my heart is with them. But what about a partial ban? A closing of our borders of travel?

Fauci: A closing of our borders? I'm sorry, I don't know what you mean by that…

I'm sorry, but that doesn't work. If you look at the newspapers, if you look at the TV coverage, you think that West Africa is this nation of the people that you see on the front page of the New York Times sick in Ebola treatment units.

It's a much much larger—this is a nation of millions and millions of people—multiple nations, not one. You have Americans there, you have businesspeople there, people of dual citizenship, who have to go back and forth. It's completely impractical, and from a public health standpoint, not helpful, to [shut down borders]. And I think every public health official feels that way.

Yeah, but what do public health officials know about keeping us safe from infectious disease?

Full article and video: http://fortressamerica.gawker.com/uppity-doctor-is-having-none-of-hasselbecks-ebola-borde-1642976766?utm_campaign=socialflow_gawker_facebook&utm_source=gawker_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow

Perhaps using the good doctor's logic, the US should just move everyone from West Africa who has been diagnosed with the disease (and their closest relatives) to the States where the disease can be totally eraticated? And, of course,using America's state-of-the-art tracking system for undocumented democrats who have been granted entrance into the country, it woud be a piece of cake to monitor where all those folks were at any one time. What could go wrong?

Oh, and while they're at it, have them all sign up for citizenship, welfare, and, of course, register to vote as democrats.

Problem solved.
 

Steve

Well-known member
Perhaps using the good doctor's logic, the US should just move everyone from West Africa who has been diagnosed with the disease (and their closest relatives) to the States where the disease can be totally eraticated? And, of course,using America's state-of-the-art tracking system for undocumented democrats who have been granted entrance into the country, it woud be a piece of cake to monitor where all those folks were at any one time. What could go wrong?

Oh, and while they're at it, have them all sign up for citizenship, welfare, and, of course, register to vote as democrats.

Problem solved.

there is just a small problem with your theory..
West Africa is having trouble containing it because of African superstitions.. the folk get sick,.. spread it to their family and friends and either die or when they get to sick are taken to a center..

I could go into detail but for fear of modern medicine and authorities motives.. the ebola is not getting contained...


now... if you bring it over here,... the folk will be taken to cities with hospitals first...

even if they are in a tyvek suit more cases will happen... and those cases will end up in the minority neighborhoods.. neighborhoods of people who often openly question the motives of the authorities..

take this schmuck..
Re: My #Dallas trip to ensure #ThomasEricDuncan receives best medical care. Kill disease not person.#Ebola.
Rev Jesse Jackson Sr (@RevJJackson) October 7, 2014

what a twit...


so WW How many democrats do you get if they kill off the minorities?

statistics would indicate that only the conservative minorities would obey the authorities and end up getting fast effective treatment..

my bet is the minorities would loot riot,.. burn down a few hospitals.... and then claim discrimination until this plague dies out..

schools would teach how the great ebola plague was started with a few army blankets donated by an evil corporation and distributed by the evil military ,..
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Politics Affects the Response to Ebola

With many people worried about Ebola, one might think that the Senate would hurry up and confirm President Obama's nomination for the vacant surgeon general position, the nation's top doc. One would be wrong. The NRA has condemned the nominee, Vivek Murthy, because he said gun violence is a public health issue, and many senators are scared of voting to confirm him, Ebola or no Ebola.

The surgeon general doesn't actually have much day-to-day authority in responding to epidemics, but he or she is the one who gives press conferences on health matters and tries to explain the issues to the public. There is so much misinformation about Ebola floating around (in reality it is far less of a problem than the flu), that having someone in a position of authority get out there and talk about it would be a valuable thing to have, but it is not to be for the moment.

In principle, majority leader Harry Reid can ram Murthy's nomination through since the filibuster has been abolished for cabinet and subcabinet appointments as well as for appellate judges. Reid won't do this because Democrats are as scared of the NRA as Republicans are. If the Republicans take control of the Senate, then the new majority leader will be able to stymie all appointments by simply not bringing them up for a vote. He might well follow this strategy to cripple the government and in 2016 campaign on the slogan "government doesn't work."
 

Mike

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Politics Affects the Response to Ebola

With many people worried about Ebola, one might think that the Senate would hurry up and confirm President Obama's nomination for the vacant surgeon general position, the nation's top doc. One would be wrong. The NRA has condemned the nominee, Vivek Murthy, because he said gun violence is a public health issue, and many senators are scared of voting to confirm him, Ebola or no Ebola.

The surgeon general doesn't actually have much day-to-day authority in responding to epidemics, but he or she is the one who gives press conferences on health matters and tries to explain the issues to the public. There is so much misinformation about Ebola floating around (in reality it is far less of a problem than the flu), that having someone in a position of authority get out there and talk about it would be a valuable thing to have, but it is not to be for the moment.

In principle, majority leader Harry Reid can ram Murthy's nomination through since the filibuster has been abolished for cabinet and subcabinet appointments as well as for appellate judges. Reid won't do this because Democrats are as scared of the NRA as Republicans are. If the Republicans take control of the Senate, then the new majority leader will be able to stymie all appointments by simply not bringing them up for a vote. He might well follow this strategy to cripple the government and in 2016 campaign on the slogan "government doesn't work."

If Buckwheat sincerely wanted a Surgeon General that would be bi-partisan and do his job in U.S. HEALTH, he should have nominated one. :roll:

On Thursday, the anti-gun American College of Physicians (ACP) came out for the entire gun control agenda being pushed at the national level, adding to the suspicion that Dr. Vivek Murthy, President Obama’s nominee for Surgeon General, would do the same if confirmed to the post. To the many newspaper editors who have suggested medicine has nothing to do with gun control, and NRA has no place opining on who gets named as America’s “Top Doc,” we say: “We told you so.”

Declaring that a majority of its members “favor mandatory background checks, mandatory registration of all firearms, and bans on assault weapons, high-capacity magazines, and armor-piercing bullets,” the ACP basically regurgitated the administration’s gun control wish list. Putting yet another spin on the ever-expanding universe of “assault weapons,” the group called for “banning the sale and manufacture for civilian use of firearms that have features designed to increase their rapid killing capacity (often called ‘assault weapons’ or semi-automatic weapons) and large capacity ammunition (sic) and retaining the current ban on automatic weapons for civilian use.”

Further, the group called for guns to be subject to consumer products regulations, which gun control supporters have long envisioned as a means to prohibit handguns entirely. For example, in 2000, the Violence Policy Center, led by former National Coalition to Ban Handguns staffer Josh Sugarmann, published Unsafe in Any Hands: Why America Needs to Ban Handguns. Sugarmann’s article argued that “a handgun is a consumer product” and that when evaluated as such, “the case for banning handguns becomes self-evident.”

Previously, the ACP endorsed the same restrictions, plus mandatory safety training to purchase a gun, waiting periods, and the use of “tracer elements or taggants on firearms and ammunition.”

Murthy has claimed that he would not campaign for gun control if confirmed as Surgeon General (assurances that will sound familiar to anybody who followed Obama’s presidential campaigns). However, like the ACP, Murthy thinks that firearm-related violence is a “public health crisis,” even though the firearm murder rate has been cut in half since the early 1990s, and firearm murders account for only 0.4 percent of all deaths in the United States annually. With things moving in such a positive direction on firearm-related fatalities, you would think America’s medical establishment would have bigger public health “crises” to tackle.

Also, the group that Murthy co-founded, Doctors for Obama (now called Doctors for America), specifically advocates for gun control by touting its medical credentials. Furthermore, as investigative reporter Emily Miller detailed in the Washington Times, “Murthy’s Twitter timeline is chock full of his anti-firearm screed,” and includes a boast about a “doctor-nurse campaign demanding gun safety legislation from Congress.”
 

Latest posts

Top