RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries?

RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

[Poll]

Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries?

US airports should have closed airports from Ebola ravaged countries.

29% (13)

The US should immediately close airports from Ebola ravished countries

38% (17)

We should never close airports from any country.

11% (5)

What the hell is going to happen next in this country?

4% (2)

I could care less, until the US has at least 100 cases of Ebola

6% (3)

I am not worried, I will never get Ebola.

4% (2)

I am worried, and I have no idea what I should do.

4% (2)

Total Votes : 44

(last vote on : 11/4/2014 8:15:41 AM)
(Poll will run till: -- )

Message

jlf1961 -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/19/2014 9:14:23 AM)
Obama care sucks donkey dicks, Obama is a blithering idiot who has ordered the murder of US citizens supporting terroris without benefit of a trial, and I am a or was a Democrat. Given the extreme views on both sides of the fence, I would love to see every political office filled with working class stiffs who never made more than 40K a year. A nice mix of rednecks, extreme religious nuts, tree huggers, feminists and conspiracy theorists. It sure wouldnt be any worse than what we got now. Of course Jerry Lewis clones on acid would be better than what we got now.

Marini -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/19/2014 1:26:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Obviously not, Marini. How can we put aside our differences and do "what's best for the country" when we don't agree on how to get there? I don't doubt we can agree on "what's best for the country." We don't all agree on how to get to that end, though. What is your opinion? Should the federal govt have the primary responsiblity or shoud it be the state or should it be private enterprise? That is actually a valid question these days, thompsonx. I was actually enjoying this thread, until the usual suspects turned it into the usual, partisan pissing match. Almost every single thread on these boards ends the same way. Thanks those who stayed on topic, it was interesting. Peace

TheHeretic -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/19/2014 2:03:06 PM)
It was hardly the participants on the board who turned the subject into a partisan pissing contest, Mari. Of course, the thread also could have been started up in the deserted room, too...

Sanity -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/19/2014 4:12:53 PM)
While its a bit odd to complain that a thread is a partisan pissing contest in the partisan pissing contest section, I understand how it can be seen as a bit unfortunate how certain individuals have trained themselves to immediately put a stench on every thread by piling on the cheap insults and personal attacks the second a thread begins

thompsonx -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/19/2014 4:14:00 PM)
ORIGINAL: Marini ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Obviously not, Marini. How can we put aside our differences and do "what's best for the country" when we don't agree on how to get there? I don't doubt we can agree on "what's best for the country." We don't all agree on how to get to that end, though. What is your opinion? Should the federal govt have the primary responsiblity or shoud it be the state or should it be private enterprise? That is actually a valid question these days, thompsonx. Thanks those who stayed on topic, it was interesting. None of the right wing assholes seem interested in answering the question what is your opinion? Whom do you feel should be the responsible party/parties?

thompsonx -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/19/2014 4:16:32 PM)
ORIGINAL: Sanity While its a bit odd to complain that a thread is a partisan pissing contest in the partisan pissing contest section, How bout it? Whose responsibility do you think it is?

thompsonx -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/19/2014 4:17:35 PM)
ORIGINAL: TheHeretic It was hardly the participants on the board who turned the subject into a partisan pissing contest, Mari. Would you care to participate? Who's responsiblity is it?

thompsonx -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/19/2014 4:19:48 PM)
ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Obama care sucks donkey dicks, Obama is a blithering idiot who has ordered the murder of US citizens supporting terroris without benefit of a trial, and I am a or was a Democrat. How about you? Whose responsibility do you feel it is?

FieryOpal -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/19/2014 4:51:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity While its a bit odd to complain that a thread is a partisan pissing contest in the partisan pissing contest section, How bout it? Whose responsibility do you think it is? Lest anyone wrongfully assume otherwise, I am not affiliated with any political party. It is coincidental if I happen to support an issue which is on a partisan platform. In that sense if you want to call me an Independent, then fine, but I don't label myself one way or the other. How can a national security issue in terms of the (consolidated) public welfare, such as an external threat to the entire country - whether it be to contain an epidemic or pandemic - not therefore be a national issue? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that States' Rights are not at stake here. As for private industry, they are providers of necessary resources, and it is not their role to spearhead efforts which are outside of their purview as if they were a governmental agency. (Sure, as lobbyists they influence policy, but I'm not speaking about that.) It would behoove a pharmaceutical company to find and mass-produce antigens, but would one be accountable to the public if it could not? No, the entity who should shoulder the bulk of any responsibility is the one who is the best qualified to do so, whose efforts would not be disjointed, and to whom accountability can be assigned and/or tracked realistically.

BamaD -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/19/2014 4:56:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FieryOpal quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity While its a bit odd to complain that a thread is a partisan pissing contest in the partisan pissing contest section, How bout it? Whose responsibility do you think it is? Lest anyone wrongfully assume otherwise, I am not affiliated with any political party. It is coincidental if I happen to support an issue which is on a partisan platform. In that sense if you want to call me an Independent, then fine, but I don't label myself one way or the other. How can a national security issue in terms of the (consolidated) public welfare, such as an external threat to the entire country - whether it be to contain an epidemic or pandemic - not therefore be a national issue? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that States' Rights are not at stake here. As for private industry, they are providers of necessary resources, and it is not their role to spearhead efforts which are outside of their purview as if they were a governmental agency. (Sure, as lobbyists they influence policy, but I'm not speaking about that.) It would behoove a pharmaceutical company to find and mass-produce antigens, but would one be accountable to the public if it could not? No, the entity who should shoulder the bulk of any responsibility is the one who is the best qualified to do so, whose efforts would not be disjointed, and to whom accountability can be assigned and/or tracked realistically. Only the government can forbid people to come in from another nation. The states don't have that power. Private companies don't either. Debating left vs right on this is a red herring.

FieryOpal -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/19/2014 5:05:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD Only the government can forbid people to come in from another nation. The states don't have that power. Private companies don't either. Debating left vs right on this is a red herring. Agreed. [:)]

thompsonx -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/19/2014 5:06:54 PM)
ORIGINAL: BamaD Only the government can forbid people to come in from another nations. Where does the constitution authorize this?

thompsonx -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/19/2014 5:11:37 PM)
ORIGINAL: BamaD Debating left vs right on this is a red herring. How so? Is it the governments job or not?

DesideriScuri -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/19/2014 5:26:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FieryOpal quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity While its a bit odd to complain that a thread is a partisan pissing contest in the partisan pissing contest section, How bout it? Whose responsibility do you think it is? Lest anyone wrongfully assume otherwise, I am not affiliated with any political party. It is coincidental if I happen to support an issue which is on a partisan platform. In that sense if you want to call me an Independent, then fine, but I don't label myself one way or the other. How can a national security issue in terms of the (consolidated) public welfare, such as an external threat to the entire country - whether it be to contain an epidemic or pandemic - not therefore be a national issue? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that States' Rights are not at stake here. As for private industry, they are providers of necessary resources, and it is not their role to spearhead efforts which are outside of their purview as if they were a governmental agency. (Sure, as lobbyists they influence policy, but I'm not speaking about that.) It would behoove a pharmaceutical company to find and mass-produce antigens, but would one be accountable to the public if it could not? No, the entity who should shoulder the bulk of any responsibility is the one who is the best qualified to do so, whose efforts would not be disjointed, and to whom accountability can be assigned and/or tracked realistically. Does everyone in Liberia, etc. have Ebola? Have all those people been infected, or even exposed to someone who is infected? How much of a National Security Threat is this really? I'm not talking about theory here. In theory, anything anywhere in the world that isn't supportive of the US could be claimed to be a "National Security Threat." There are things in place (fever checks, etc.) that will help prevent the spread into the US. The two nurses weren't wearing proper protective gear (not blaming them). Has anyone been infected in the US that has used proper protective gear?

dcnovice -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/19/2014 5:33:51 PM)
quote: How much of a National Security Threat is this really? Thank you, thank you, thank you for raising a key question that hasn't gotten nearly enough attention!

PeonForHer -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/19/2014 5:39:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FieryOpal quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD Only the government can forbid people to come in from another nation. The states don't have that power. Private companies don't either. Debating left vs right on this is a red herring. Agreed. [:)] In a fundamental sense I disagree. Western countries need to become more socialistic, in a global sense, to sort this out. We need more of a sense of looking after the welfare of others around the world. A sense of 'global society' - in other words. The help that's being given by Western countries has so far had little effect. We need to have the institutions in place to deal with events like this and we need to front the money for that, too. The neoliberal institutions that we've all come to rely upon in the last few decades just aren't up to the job: for instance, we could never expect any of the multinational drug developers to have come up with the solutions. I say 'more socialistic' - but really this about enlightened self-interest. We need to take on board the fact that we don't get to keep ourselves happy and healthy unless those living far away are kept happy and healthy - to some minimal degree - too.

BamaD -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/19/2014 5:54:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: FieryOpal quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD Only the government can forbid people to come in from another nation. The states don't have that power. Private companies don't either. Debating left vs right on this is a red herring. Agreed. [:)] In a fundamental sense I disagree. Western countries need to become more socialistic, in a global sense, to sort this out. We need more of a sense of looking after the welfare of others around the world. A sense of 'global society' - in other words. The help that's being given by Western countries has so far had little effect. We need to have the institutions in place to deal with events like this and we need to front the money for that, too. The neoliberal institutions that we've all come to rely upon in the last few decades just aren't up to the job: for instance, we could never expect any of the multinational drug developers to have come up with the solutions. I say 'more socialistic' - but really this about enlightened self-interest. We need to take on board the fact that we don't get to keep ourselves happy and healthy unless those living far away are kept happy and healthy - to some minimal degree - too. You can do that and quarantine the area as well.

PeonForHer -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/19/2014 5:56:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD You can do that and quarantine the area as well. You can, and you probably should.

BamaD -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/19/2014 6:04:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD You can do that and quarantine the area as well. You can, and you probably should. We (and that doesn't mean just the U S) have been sending them aid and health experts all along, I can't think of a single reason not to impose a quarantine. It is much easier to help them there if we don't have an epidemic here, wherever your here is.

Marini -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/19/2014 7:34:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD Only the government can forbid people to come in from another nation. The states don't have that power. Private companies don't either. Debating left vs right on this is a red herring. I agree it is primarily a government issue.

Page: << < prev 11 12 [13] 14 15 next > >>

Spam Policy

0.046875