E-Bola

[cranberry]

Is there really anyone who cares what Peggy Noonan has to say about anything?

 

[YankeeFan]

Vibrations are telling Peggy Noonan that this is a huge threat.

Is there really anyone who cares what Peggy Noonan has to say about anything?

Honestly, the main reason I quoted her was because I knew I would get a laugh from ****'s response.

And, it didn't take long.

 

[YankeeFan]

The cartoon was pretty sweet too.

 

[Morris816]

I think the question that needs to be asked is this: A travel ban, as I understand it, means not one person is allowed to travel in or out of the countries in question.

So what do we do about health care workers who are trying to go to the countries to help affected people? Are there other people who absolutely need to go to these countries to be part of the effort to stop the spread of the virus?

My biggest issue with a travel ban is that comes off as "see how easy that is" approach. But as we've learned many times over, the problem with "see how easy that is" approaches is that they seldom work the way they are supposed to.

With that said, if officials aren't doing enough to explain the issues with a travel ban, they need to be more direct. If, for example, a travel ban means that not one exception can ever be made, then we have to ask ourselves if it's worth it to tell health care workers that they can't go to these West African countries to help affected people and reduce the spread of the virus there.

 

[Neutral Corner]

Or come back if they find a way. Or seek treatment here if they become infected while trying to help.

I saw an article saying that African tourism is down in general, things like safari travel. Kinda like not going to California on that wine country vacation because Ebola was reported in Dallas.

 

[Dick Whitman]

This is Obama's Benghazi.

 

[poindexter]

I thought ISIS was his Benghazi.

 

[JayFarrar]

Hopefully, Jay Farrar is not scratching his head, wondering why I'm quoting the guy from Caddy Shack.

One can only hope that you have an espresso machine install at Emory or that Dallas hospital's isolation ward. A nice frothy cup of ebola would do you some good.

In other panic news: A small-town Arkansas hospital was locked down over an ebola scare.

Seems a person who had traveled to West Africa was concerned and went to be tested.

http://www.katv.com/story/26805335/ark-hospital-locked-down-due-to-potential-ebola-case

 

[Baron Scicluna]

I thought ISIS was his Benghazi.

No, ISIS is his Teapot Dome. Try to keep up.

 

[Songbird]

I thought ISIS was his Benghazi.

No, ISIS is going to suicide-Ebola us into submission.

 

[Boom_70]

The cartoon was pretty sweet too.

This was pretty sweet:

 

[SnarkShark]

Considering there has only been one death from Ebola on US soil, and he didn't get the disease here, the focus should still be on defeating the disease in Africa. The second focus should probably be to train the average hospital to be prepared for an Ebola case walking through its front door, so the Dallas **** up doesn't happen again.

I don't want to hear "we weren't prepared" again. That is bull****. Get prepared.

 

[Dick Whitman]

Considering there has only been one death from Ebola on US soil, and he didn't get the disease here, the focus should still be on defeating the disease in Africa. The second focus should probably be to train the average hospital to be prepared for an Ebola case walking through its front door, so the Dallas **** up doesn't happen again.

I don't want to hear "we weren't prepared" again. That is bull****. Get prepared.

It's ****ing Obama, man.

 

[Boom_70]

Considering there has only been one death from Ebola on US soil, and he didn't get the disease here, the focus should still be on defeating the disease in Africa. The second focus should probably be to train the average hospital to be prepared for an Ebola case walking through its front door, so the Dallas **** up doesn't happen again.

I don't want to hear "we weren't prepared" again. That is bull****. Get prepared.

It's ****ing Obama, man.

Starman did you steel ****'s access code?

 

[Baron Scicluna]

Considering there has only been one death from Ebola on US soil, and he didn't get the disease here, the focus should still be on defeating the disease in Africa. The second focus should probably be to train the average hospital to be prepared for an Ebola case walking through its front door, so the Dallas **** up doesn't happen again.

I don't want to hear "we weren't prepared" again. That is bull****. Get prepared.

It's ****ing Obama, man.

Starman did you steel ****'s access code?

No, if it was Starman, he'd be calling him an M.N.

 

[Boom_70]

I think the question that needs to be asked is this: A travel ban, as I understand it, means not one person is allowed to travel in or out of the countries in question.

So what do we do about health care workers who are trying to go to the countries to help affected people? Are there other people who absolutely need to go to these countries to be part of the effort to stop the spread of the virus?

My biggest issue with a travel ban is that comes off as "see how easy that is" approach. But as we've learned many times over, the problem with "see how easy that is" approaches is that they seldom work the way they are supposed to.

With that said, if officials aren't doing enough to explain the issues with a travel ban, they need to be more direct. If, for example, a travel ban means that not one exception can ever be made, then we have to ask ourselves if it's worth it to tell health care workers that they can't go to these West African countries to help affected people and reduce the spread of the virus there.

Do those health care workers have to fly commercial? Couldn't it be a controlled event. Workers fly on private or military plane and return on same with proper precautions and quarantines upon return.

I just don't buy the argument that it would make it more difficult to stop the spread.

It did not seem difficult for a travel ban to Israel to be instituted

 

[3_Octave_Fart]

Considering there has only been one death from Ebola on US soil, and he didn't get the disease here, the focus should still be on defeating the disease in Africa. The second focus should probably be to train the average hospital to be prepared for an Ebola case walking through its front door, so the Dallas **** up doesn't happen again.

I don't want to hear "we weren't prepared" again. That is bull****. Get prepared.

It's ****ing Obama, man.

****, if you're going to pursue this line of trolling, you need to be working golf in there.

 

[Morris816]

I think the question that needs to be asked is this: A travel ban, as I understand it, means not one person is allowed to travel in or out of the countries in question.

So what do we do about health care workers who are trying to go to the countries to help affected people? Are there other people who absolutely need to go to these countries to be part of the effort to stop the spread of the virus?

My biggest issue with a travel ban is that comes off as "see how easy that is" approach. But as we've learned many times over, the problem with "see how easy that is" approaches is that they seldom work the way they are supposed to.

With that said, if officials aren't doing enough to explain the issues with a travel ban, they need to be more direct. If, for example, a travel ban means that not one exception can ever be made, then we have to ask ourselves if it's worth it to tell health care workers that they can't go to these West African countries to help affected people and reduce the spread of the virus there.

Do those health care workers have to fly commercial? Couldn't it be a controlled event. Workers fly on private or military plane and return on same with proper precautions and quarantines upon return.

I just don't buy the argument that it would make it more difficult to stop the spread.

It did not seem difficult for a travel ban to Israel to be instituted

Flying a private plane costs more money, unless you find somebody who is willing to donate services or offer them at a reduced rate. Military flights might be an option, but there's only so much of those flights available, and you could have issues ranging from complaints about the military being utilized for this purpose, to distrust factors from the West African countries in question.

Briefly on that: The distrust factor that West Africans have for foreigners is a major issue to overcome. We both know the medical personnel going there just want to help, but the hard part is getting the person who doesn't trust a foreigner to understand that.

Back to the travel ban: The United States could do whatever it wants, but getting every other nation to follow suit is the hard part, and that's especially important when somebody who wants to get from West Africa to the United States will need to take a flight to a European nation, then board a connecting flight. Or more to the point: Just because you keep these people from coming to the United States, does not mean they won't try to go to another nation, and lead to the same things that happened with Eric Duncan.

That means your best approach is to stop these people from boarding a plane in the West African nations to begin with, which likely means shutting down the airport to nearly all traffic, and that's going to be a real challenge to get those West African nations to do that.

 

[3_Octave_Fart]

Great opening line:

Lockheed Martin thinks it may just about have a handle on this nuclear-fusion thing, but the U.S. government cannot manage to keep Ebola patients off a flight to Cleveland. Sometimes, you simply must hate the 21st century.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/390532/ebola-administration-kevin-d-williamson

 

[Boom_70]

I think the question that needs to be asked is this: A travel ban, as I understand it, means not one person is allowed to travel in or out of the countries in question.

So what do we do about health care workers who are trying to go to the countries to help affected people? Are there other people who absolutely need to go to these countries to be part of the effort to stop the spread of the virus?

My biggest issue with a travel ban is that comes off as "see how easy that is" approach. But as we've learned many times over, the problem with "see how easy that is" approaches is that they seldom work the way they are supposed to.

With that said, if officials aren't doing enough to explain the issues with a travel ban, they need to be more direct. If, for example, a travel ban means that not one exception can ever be made, then we have to ask ourselves if it's worth it to tell health care workers that they can't go to these West African countries to help affected people and reduce the spread of the virus there.

Do those health care workers have to fly commercial? Couldn't it be a controlled event. Workers fly on private or military plane and return on same with proper precautions and quarantines upon return.

I just don't buy the argument that it would make it more difficult to stop the spread.

It did not seem difficult for a travel ban to Israel to be instituted

Flying a private plane costs more money, unless you find somebody who is willing to donate services or offer them at a reduced rate. Military flights might be an option, but there's only so much of those flights available, and you could have issues ranging from complaints about the military being utilized for this purpose, to distrust factors from the West African countries in question.

Briefly on that: The distrust factor that West Africans have for foreigners is a major issue to overcome. We both know the medical personnel going there just want to help, but the hard part is getting the person who doesn't trust a foreigner to understand that.

Back to the travel ban: The United States could do whatever it wants, but getting every other nation to follow suit is the hard part, and that's especially important when somebody who wants to get from West Africa to the United States will need to take a flight to a European nation, then board a connecting flight. Or more to the point: Just because you keep these people from coming to the United States, does not mean they won't try to go to another nation, and lead to the same things that happened with Eric Duncan.

That means your best approach is to stop these people from boarding a plane in the West African nations to begin with, which likely means shutting down the airport to nearly all traffic, and that's going to be a real challenge to get those West African nations to do that.

If we can keep a head of lettuce or bird out of the country we should be able to
find a put in a travel ban on humans. Seems simple enough to look at the recent
stamps on a passport.