Jump to content

Ebola!!


77

Recommended Posts

that's not it at all, it's his conflict of interest with his black voting base, his Hispanic voting base and his extreme social liberal base. You can not allow all of the illegals to become legal, and take all the low paying jobs...yet lower the unemployment rate among his largest voting block....they are competing for the same thing....low income jobs and welfare...then offend the blacks and Mexicans (which are typically very religious) by pandering to the social liberals by supporting LGBT, Abortion, etc

He is a terrible leader...period! and you just admitted that by stating you would stick with your decision...and I agree with that stance. I may not agree with his decision....but I would have alot more respect for him if he did just that...and even more if he would just tell the entire truth.

how did you feel about Romney who changed his stance every 30 minutes?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Patient's that are not high risk are welcome at my house.


Do you have reading comprehension problems? I said nothing about low risk patients. You say we should not restrict flights from west Africa. I say let the passengers on the next flight stay at your house. Some might be infected but that's ok with you? If not, then why expect the rest of us to let them fly here? You tend to play both sides of the fence.

You completely dodged my hand washing question.....typical.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A patient is low risk until they exhibit symptoms. The problem is that tests can read negative even is the virus is present but still only present in low amounts at the time. The doctor who frolicked around New York, going to the grocery store, riding in cabs, and having fun at the bowling alley didn't think he had it. Until he did. What happens when he starts running a fever while he's out playing around, and then exposes others before he realizes he's sick? What if he becomes ill and has to use a public toilet? Or take a cab home? It's simply irresponsible. I don't see why this chick has no problem living in squalid conditions in Africa, crapping in a hole in the ground and probably sleeping in a tent. But now that she's home, it's too hard on her to stay in the comfort of her own home for three weeks to avoid possibly spreading the virus? She's more about attention and maybe a lawsuit than actually caring about people and their health.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one has symptoms...... until they have symptoms. 

 

While that seems ridiculously obvious, the CDC has said that you might show symptoms up to 21 days after exposure. I can only think that means that you might be symptom free at 19 days and still come down with the disease. 

 

There is likely about a 99.8% chance that she does not have Ebola. In fact I would probably wager a fairly large sum of money that she doesn't. With that, the idea that "she can't have it" seems stupid while looking at the CDC guidelines. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

etch-a-sketch comment by someone on his staff says it all.

I got in trouble once for calling you an IDIOT...so I can't do it again....you didn't say staff...You said Bush...If you want to include staffs....well your boy and his staff still win the blue ribbon....

 

Big Girl is the most uneducated educated person (so she says) I've ever encountered....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I didnt say bush, I said Romney. Where did a member of his staff get that info? Was he/she fired? There is no one in the US that has the Ebola virus now. You guys panicked for nothing, and to think you guys didnt want anyone from west africa here. Smh


I'd still rather not have anyone from infected areas here until either the outbreak dies out, or if they're willing to submit a voluntary quarantine.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didnt say bush, I said Romney. Where did a member of his staff get that info? Was he/she fired? There is no one in the US that has the Ebola virus now. You guys panicked for nothing, and to think you guys didnt want anyone from west africa here. Smh


Who the heck panicked? You are confusing panic with precaution. Always the extremes for you huh? Don't doctors and nurses wash their hands as a precaution to spreading germs/diseases? Are they considered panicking when doing so?

Here comes another one......http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/13/health/nebraska-ebola-patient/index.html?iphoneemail
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont get on this blog everyday. Trying to prohibit a n entire portion of a continent from flying into the US Is a bit extreme.You call it precaution, I call it panic. The airlines wouldve lost a lot of money for nothing. Smh

The airlines are spending serious money flying to the places right now with all the extra pay for workers and extra measures they have to take. They wouldn't have lost that much.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,977
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    cfbswami
    Newest Member
    cfbswami
    Joined



  • Posts

    • We'll see. I don't trust us. 
    • Starting pitching has been shaky the last few weeks due to some injuries outside of Hagen Smith.  He goes tomorrow, so y’all should be fine 
    • Manchin may get it but any mention of the radical left that wanted to get rid of the filibuster and end almost 220 years of history because the Democrats are mad?  The House and Senate are obviously different legislative bodies with entirely different election processes and rules for a reason. The House can vote on laws with a simple majority vote. The Senate put rules in place that it would make it much tougher to pass laws. Laws should be difficult to pass. The Senate is often the holdup of the right and left. It takes 60 votes to break the filibuster so any law will almost certainly require agreement at least in part, from opposing sides of an issue. Because they can’t get laws passed, the radical left is like a baby having a tantrum and wants to change over 200 years of history and make it potentially ridiculously easy to pass laws. I have seen current poll maps and it is possible for the Republicans to sweep into complete power in November but by the tiniest margin. That would possibly mean that a single vote margin in both houses could enact what you might call the radical right laws. There would be nothing that the Democrats could do to stop any legislation whatsoever if the left (they are all radical, minus Manchin) got their filibuster rule changed.  That is where the current filibuster comes into play as any new law would require several Democrats to agree with the majority Republicans and vice versa.  Do you want the potential for your radical right to have free rein as the radical left wants by killing the filibuster or is the radical left just as (if not more) dangerous? Let’s see if we have a history in this area? Oh yeah, the Democrats changed the rules in the Senate to allow federal judges to not have to overcome the filibuster. Obama was not getting his federal judge nominations passed and being angry, they changed the rules instead of nominating more moderate justices. They were warned that it would come back to bite them. They didn’t care and chose the nuclear option to change the rules. Oops! Any guess how Trump got all of his Supreme Court nominees passed against strong Democrat opposition? The Democrats got rid of the filibuster for federal judges after another tantrum   So when you are so worried about the radical right, are you equally concerned in what the radical left is always doing by changing rules and history which were put into place just for situations like we are in? So while Manchin gets it, what about his other 50 colleagues (49 + Harris)?  What concerns you more, Abbott and Paxton or the Democrats who want to make it to where if the Republicans do take over, they can go wild… at least in your mind? 
    • MODS please remove that ISD twitter link! I had no idea it would copy the whole posting. I only highlighted the portion about the venue change. Sorry about that!
    • See why I don't trust my Hogs?
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...