Ebola in the U.S. — Page 3

It is interesting reading these posts from the beginning until now. Regardless of the contempt many of you may have for Rick Perry, this looming catastrophe can be laid at the feet of our government.

Any sensible government would send massive aid to the source of the problem in West Africa to try and stop the spread there. It needs to be an international effort. All sensible governments would stop ALL travel to countries outside that area. Our policy is nothing short of insane. Most people carrying the virus will not show symptoms at an airport.

It is clear from what happened in Texas that none of our hospitals have a clear knowledge of what the protocols are or should be. I doubt the CDC is 100% certain of all the parameters concerning this virus and it's ability to mutate.

The fact that the nurses' association says the protocols keep changing, that every hospital has a different protocol, and that the NBC news photographer got the disease even though he did not knowingly have direct contact with anyone with symptoms must lead one to conclude that no one knows the entire truth about the likelihood of infection.

In light of those facts, the statement by Friedkin of the CDC on Oct 5 that it is fine to let people from West Africa come here is absolutely moronic. Checking temperatures at our airports is beyond silly. Thousands of people with colds and flu travel every day. Our government response has not been about protecting the public, it has been about being politically correct.

We have the means to send unlimited personnel to those countries without using civilian aircraft. Once there it is just a matter of having everyone spend a few weeks in quarantine before returning.

I hope the number of cases are few and the US infection is small and contained but the more we let it spread in Africa the more at risk we all are. But to let people from that area, including Americans, just fill out a questionnaire and fly here is madness.

Just so that everyone is clear: The travel ban is being floated ONLY to politicize this issue and turn it into the October Surprise that will throw next month's congressional elections to the Republicans.

To repeat: There is absolutely NO reason for the travel ban EXCEPT to humiliate Barack Obama and demoralize Democratic voter and turn the Senate over to the Republicans.

Got it?

All public health experts--EVEN THOSE WHO ARE CRITICAL OF THE PRESIDENT AND THE CDC--all of them agree experts that a travel ban is unnecessary and could indeed be counterproductive.

To repeat: A travel ban will NOT SAVE A SINGLE LIFE.

All it will do is defeat Democratic candidates.

Okay, carry on with your hysteria.

---

There is not Ebola "outbreak" in the United States. And there won't be.

THIS IS WHAT PEOPLE SHOULD BE FREAKING OUT ABOUT

^To clarify, I don't think it's stupid that 35 years ago the situation was ignored. Of course not. It just doesn't have anything to do with the current Ebola situation or response.

That quote doesn't negate anything PJ said. The initial response WAS inadequate, but that quote doesn't advocate a travel ban.

---

Updated On: 10/16/14 at 04:42 PM

Two separate issues: One is the response of the Obama administration, which has been stupid, inept, badly handled and abominably communicated. I think everyone can see that, Republican and Democrat alike.

The second is the suggestion of a travel ban by Republican politicians to make the already frightened public think that because the administration bungled Ebola, congressional Democrats all over the country should be unseated.

The GOP is working very hard to use it as an unexpected October Surprise.

And if you don't think it's working, it is. It's already motivated the conservative base to get out and vote. If Fox News (and CNN, which always plays along in moments like this) can scare everyone just a little bit more, they'll demoralize Democratic voters into staying home and giving the Senate to the GOP.

---

Updated On: 10/16/14 at 05:35 PM

As I hit my head against the wall...my point is that BOTH parties are critical of the initial response. If the Democrats on the eve of an election were strategic, there would be messaging that supported both the POTUS and national party candidates.

It would be irresponsible for Republicans not to leverage this, but it's also irresponsible for Democrats to not contain it.

I know that I've been the brunt of jokes since my initial thread on Ebola a month ago.

It's fascinating that this miserable disease that's devastating Africa suddenly becomes serious on these boards simply because of its domestic political implications.

"Too bad everyone didn't freak the f*ck out 35 years ago when it was gays and drug addicts contracting the gay cancer."

I guess if we've learned anything from this it's that if Reagan had been a Democrat the Republicans might have taken action at the dawn of the AIDS epidemic and thousands and thousands of our friends and lovers might still be alive.

---

"How can anyone not see the simple truth that a few will arrive here if there is no travel ban."
Umm...maybe because it's not true?
If someone from West Africa has enough money to fly to the United States they most likely have enough money to travel to another country and fly from there.
And again, EVERY EXPERT in the field says a travel ban would be counter productive and would quite possibly make the situation in Africa even worse.

I repeat: The ONLY thing a travel ban will do is elect Republicans to Congress.

---

"Except for a handful of people, the CDC is just a group of government workers who know about as much about Ebola as you except they are being asked to sing the administrations tune. "


OK- thank you- I gave a big laugh when I read this. But fair is fair maybe u wuz referring to the custodial staff at the the CDC?
Or the coffee folks? Cuz the scientists well they really do "know" more than you.

PJ, Thomas Duncan got here because we don't have a travel ban.

You DO know that Thomas Duncan flew here from Belgium, don't you?

Or do you?

---