Is Obama concerned about the safety of America?

TemplarKormac

Political Atheist
Mar 30, 2013
50,082
13,468
2,190
The Land of Sanctuary
There are thousands of West Africans fleeing their Ebola stricken countries, who are risking bringing with them the very deadly Ebola virus. However, Obama won't impose a travel ban. Why, you ask? According to Thomas Friedman “If we try to eliminate travel, the possibility that some will travel over land, will come from other places and we don’t know that they’re coming in, will mean that we won’t be able to do multiple things.” Friedman added, "Borders can be porous, especially in this part of the world."(1) The thing is, a travel ban would stop land travel too. It doesn't matter by what means these people get here by. You have to remember, Obama gets his advice from people such as Friedman.

Does Obama care more about maintaining the porosity of our borders than the health and welfare of American citizens? This is not a matter of liberty, this is a matter of safety. Nearly 4,000 of our men and women; belonging to the 101st Airborne Division headquarters, 101st Sustainment Brigade, 86th Combat Support Hospital, 44th Medical Brigade, and 16th Military Police Brigade are being sent to those Ebola stricken countries to build hospitals, provide medical care, and logistics support to the Liberian government. Apparently it seems, he believes our troops are more effective operating under the pall of a deadly disease, rather than on the battlefield.

Yet here on the home front, we have literally no protocol for handling this problem. Well, we did, until Obama scrapped the CDC Ebola protocol in 2010(2). Still there's no travel ban in the near future, only Obama's idea of combating the problem: with an "Ebola Czar" (add that to the list of 35 other 'Czars' he has installed since 2009).

In a meeting with his advisors, at the Oval Office of the White House concerning the need for a travel ban, Obama stated, "I don’t have a philosophical objection necessarily to a travel ban if that is the thing that is going to keep the American people safe ... the problem is that in all the discussions I’ve had, thus far, with experts in the field … is that a travel ban is less effective than the measures we are currently instituting."(3)

Why not then, does the President not act on his 'philosophy;' rather than on the whims of his advisors? Everyone in America is calling for one, both sides of congress and the American people; yet he remains stubborn. Obama's stubbornness and complacency will only get people killed.

He went on saying, “If we institute a travel ban instead of the protocols we put into place now, history shows that there is a likelihood of increased avoidance. People do not readily disclose their information, they may engage in something called broken travel — essentially breaking up their trip so that they can hide the fact they have been to one of these countries were the disease is in place. And as a result, we may end up getting less information about who has the disease, they are less likely to get treated properly, screened properly, quarantined properly, and as a consequence we may end up having more cases rather than less."

Contrary to Obama's version of 'history' an example of what could happen if this Ebola threat is not countered immediately, was in Northern Zaire. In 1976, 318 people contracted the virus, 280 of them died (4). Another instance occurred most presciently 25 years ago in 1989, in the town of Reston, Va; when dozens of monkeys imported from the Philippines suddenly died of the disease in the Hazelton Research Products' primate quarantine unit near Washington Dulles International Airport (5). The strain turned out not to be lethal to humans, but brought to light the lethality the ebolavirus presented to the American populous.

On a lighter but still serious note, Obama beamed that he had 'hugged and kissed' nurses who were still treating a doctor with at Emory University Hospital when he visited on September 16 (6). It was a week earlier on September 9, that this selfsame doctor was admitted and quarantined after being diagnosed (7). I couldn't help but notice how little he cares, not only for our health and welfare as Americans, but for his own it appears. He simply just doesn't care anymore.


Links (in chronological order, starting from top to bottom):

1. CDC chief Porous borders in Africa would undermine travel ban - Bob King - POLITICO.com

2. Ebola in the U.S. Stricter travel quarantine practices dropped by Obama admin. in 2010 - Washington Times

3. Obama I don t have a philosophical objection necessarily to a travel ban - Reuters

4. Ebola haemorrahagic fever in Zaire, 1976 - Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 56 (2): 271-293 (1978)

5. 25 years ago a different Ebola outbreak - in USA - USA Today

6. Obama I Hugged And Kissed Nurses Treating Ebola Patients In Atlanta - Huffington Post

7. Third Ebola Patient At Emory Hospital - Business Insider
 
Last edited:
Well since you didn't all move away when a ****** was elected President (plan A), we had no choice but to try and overrun the country with illegals (plan B), and since that didn't work now we have to use plan C, bring in lots of Ebola infected ******* with a deadly disease so that you get sick and die. Want to know what plan D is? Don't ask, but it involves fluoride in the drinking water and aliens with a fetish for medical probes.
 
"Obama doesn't care about the safety of American citizens, or his own it seems"

This fails as a straw man fallacy, as you seek to misrepresent your opponents' position with contrivances and lies.

Yet you don't prove how I am doing so, nor do you prove how my assertions are based on contrivances or lies. Your post is a non sequitur as it doesn't even attempt to address the topic.

Click on the little red words next time.

Go away.
 
Last edited:
Well since you didn't all move away when a ****** was elected President (plan A), we had no choice but to try and overrun the country with illegals (plan B), and since that didn't work now we have to use plan C, bring in lots of Ebola infected ******* with a deadly disease so that you get sick and die. Want to know what plan D is? Don't ask, but it involves fluoride in the drinking water and aliens with a fetish for medical probes.

(Plans A, B, C, and D) Go see a psychologist.

Dude, you cray.
 
Yet you don't prove how I am doing so, nor do you prove how my assertions are based on contrivances or lies. Your post is a non sequitur as it doesn't even attempt to address the topic.

Click on the little red words next time.

Go away.

Sadly, he won't go away...he will just pop in...say something stupid, then wait for the next post...he never posts anything of his own, simply makes dumb comments about other people...
 
"Obama doesn't care about the safety of American citizens, or his own it seems"

This fails as a straw man fallacy, as you seek to misrepresent your opponents' position with contrivances and lies.

Yet you don't prove how I am doing so, nor do you prove how my assertions are based on contrivances or lies. Your post is a non sequitur as it doesn't even attempt to address the topic.

Click on the little red words next time.

Go away.
Your very title is an unproven statement and on face value a lie, why should any sane person then read numerous paragraphs of distortions, half truths and lies??
 
"Obama doesn't care about the safety of American citizens, or his own it seems"

This fails as a straw man fallacy, as you seek to misrepresent your opponents' position with contrivances and lies.

Yet you don't prove how I am doing so, nor do you prove how my assertions are based on contrivances or lies. Your post is a non sequitur as it doesn't even attempt to address the topic.

Click on the little red words next time.

Go away.
Your very title is an unproven statement and on face value a lie, why should any sane person then read numerous paragraphs of distortions, half truths and lies??

Like I told Clayton, you can start by issuing your own rebuttal and proving my statements are 'distortions, half truths and lies.' Or, you can simply try clicking on the little red words before lecturing me. I even did it in Wikipedia form for factually challenged people like you.

That's two liberals who have zero arguments. Obama doesn't care, he won't institute travel bans, won't stop illegal immigration, won't stop out of control spending... I could go on and on and... well you get the idea.
 
There are thousands of West Africans fleeing their Ebola stricken countries, who are risking bringing with them the very deadly Ebola virus. However, Obama won't impose a travel ban. Why, you ask? According to Thomas Friedman “If we try to eliminate travel, the possibility that some will travel over land, will come from other places and we don’t know that they’re coming in, will mean that we won’t be able to do multiple things.” Friedman added, "Borders can be porous, especially in this part of the world."(1) The thing is, a travel ban would stop land travel too. It doesn't matter by what means these people get here by. You have to remember, Obama gets his advice from people such as Friedman.

Does Obama care more about maintaining the porosity of our borders than the health and welfare of American citizens? This is not a matter of liberty, this is a matter of safety. Nearly 4,000 of our men and women; belonging to the 101st Airborne Division headquarters, 101st Sustainment Brigade, 86th Combat Support Hospital, 44th Medical Brigade, and 16th Military Police Brigade are being sent to those Ebola stricken countries to build hospitals, provide medical care, and logistics support to the Liberian government. Apparently it seems, he believes our troops are more effective operating under the pall of a deadly disease, rather than on the battlefield.

Yet here on the home front, we have literally no protocol for handling this problem. Well, we did, until Obama scrapped the CDC Ebola protocol in 2010(2). Still there's no travel ban in the near future, only Obama's idea of combating the problem: with an "Ebola Czar" (add that to the list of 35 other 'Czars' he has installed since 2009).

In a meeting with his advisors, at the Oval Office of the White House concerning the need for a travel ban, Obama stated, "I don’t have a philosophical objection necessarily to a travel ban if that is the thing that is going to keep the American people safe ... the problem is that in all the discussions I’ve had, thus far, with experts in the field … is that a travel ban is less effective than the measures we are currently instituting."(3)

Why not then, does the President not act on his 'philosophy;' rather than on the whims of his advisors? Everyone in America is calling for one, both sides of congress and the American people; yet he remains stubborn. Obama's stubbornness and complacency will only get people killed.

He went on saying, “If we institute a travel ban instead of the protocols we put into place now, history shows that there is a likelihood of increased avoidance. People do not readily disclose their information, they may engage in something called broken travel — essentially breaking up their trip so that they can hide the fact they have been to one of these countries were the disease is in place. And as a result, we may end up getting less information about who has the disease, they are less likely to get treated properly, screened properly, quarantined properly, and as a consequence we may end up having more cases rather than less."

Contrary to Obama's version of 'history' an example of what could happen if this Ebola threat is not countered immediately, was in Northern Zaire. In 1976, 318 people contracted the virus, 280 of them died (4). Another instance occurred most presciently 25 years ago in 1989, in the town of Reston, Va; when dozens of monkeys imported from the Philippines suddenly died of the disease in the Hazelton Research Products' primate quarantine unit near Washington Dulles International Airport (5). The strain turned out not to be lethal to humans, but brought to light the lethality the ebolavirus presented to the American populous.

On a lighter but still serious note, Obama beamed that he had 'hugged and kissed' nurses who were still treating a doctor with at Emory University Hospital when he visited on September 16 (6). It was a week earlier on September 9, that this selfsame doctor was admitted and quarantined after being diagnosed (7). I couldn't help but notice how little he cares, not only for our health and welfare as Americans, but for his own it appears. He simply just doesn't care anymore.


Links (in chronological order, starting from top to bottom):

1. CDC chief Porous borders in Africa would undermine travel ban - Bob King - POLITICO.com

2. Ebola in the U.S. Stricter travel quarantine practices dropped by Obama admin. in 2010 - Washington Times

3. Obama I don t have a philosophical objection necessarily to a travel ban - Reuters

4. Ebola haemorrahagic fever in Zaire, 1976 - Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 56 (2): 271-293 (1978)

5. 25 years ago a different Ebola outbreak - in USA - USA Today

6. Obama I Hugged And Kissed Nurses Treating Ebola Patients In Atlanta - Huffington Post

7. Third Ebola Patient At Emory Hospital - Business Insider

Frieden. Not Friedman.

What borders was he referring to? You said "our" borders and you also said west Africans will "bring" the virus with them. What part of the world are you talking about?

We have protocols. Obama did not scrap the protocol.

"Apparently, it seems, blah blah the troops blah blah" . Only an idiot doesn't realize the importance of stopping Ebola's spread at the source.

You want Obama to ignore his advisors? Their whims? And instead, do something that he isn't certain will be effective because of his having no personal philosophy against it? By the way...you introduced that brainstorm with a double negative. The more you pretend to be a person with writing skills.....the funnier your lack of skill becomes.

The paragraph you started with "He went on saying......." Is spot on. That is exactly what would happen. Thanks for leaving something accurate in your post.

The next paragraph accuses Obama of having a version of history that you wish to contradict. What version? Where did he say anything about the outbreak in Zaire or the unrelated monkey case? You are reading weird accounts of this matter and pasting them here, idiot. Your style is weak.

Fuck....all this thread is.....is another example of how you'll go a long way...and waste a bunch of words to say that you want the guy to do whatever it is he isn't doing and you want him to not do whatever it is he is doing.

Content: F
Presentation: F
Grade level: 6th
 
"Obama doesn't care about the safety of American citizens, or his own it seems"

This fails as a straw man fallacy, as you seek to misrepresent your opponents' position with contrivances and lies.

Yet you don't prove how I am doing so, nor do you prove how my assertions are based on contrivances or lies. Your post is a non sequitur as it doesn't even attempt to address the topic.

Click on the little red words next time.

Go away.
Your very title is an unproven statement and on face value a lie, why should any sane person then read numerous paragraphs of distortions, half truths and lies??

Like I told Clayton, you can start by issuing your own rebuttal and proving my statements are 'distortions, half truths and lies.' Or, you can simply try clicking on the little red words before lecturing me. I even did it in Wikipedia form for factually challenged people like you.

That's two liberals who have zero arguments. Obama doesn't care, he won't institute travel bans, won't stop illegal immigration, won't stop out of control spending... I could go on and on and... well you get the idea.

Yes, I get the idea. You don't know what the hell you are talking about.
 
"Obama doesn't care about the safety of American citizens, or his own it seems"

This fails as a straw man fallacy, as you seek to misrepresent your opponents' position with contrivances and lies.

Yet you don't prove how I am doing so, nor do you prove how my assertions are based on contrivances or lies. Your post is a non sequitur as it doesn't even attempt to address the topic.

Click on the little red words next time.

Go away.
Your very title is an unproven statement and on face value a lie, why should any sane person then read numerous paragraphs of distortions, half truths and lies??

Like I told Clayton, you can start by issuing your own rebuttal and proving my statements are 'distortions, half truths and lies.' Or, you can simply try clicking on the little red words before lecturing me. I even did it in Wikipedia form for factually challenged people like you.

That's two liberals who have zero arguments. Obama doesn't care, he won't institute travel bans, won't stop illegal immigration, won't stop out of control spending... I could go on and on and... well you get the idea.

Yes, I get the idea. You don't know what the hell you are talking about.

Oh I do. It appears you still can't challenge me to a debate. I've backed each and every assertion with links, quotes, and historical evidence.

However, this is your argument in comparison:

1. Lies

2. Distortions

3. Half truths

4. You don't know what you're talking about.

Is this all?
 
"Obama doesn't care about the safety of American citizens, or his own it seems"

This fails as a straw man fallacy, as you seek to misrepresent your opponents' position with contrivances and lies.

Yet you don't prove how I am doing so, nor do you prove how my assertions are based on contrivances or lies. Your post is a non sequitur as it doesn't even attempt to address the topic.

Click on the little red words next time.

Go away.
Your very title is an unproven statement and on face value a lie, why should any sane person then read numerous paragraphs of distortions, half truths and lies??

Like I told Clayton, you can start by issuing your own rebuttal and proving my statements are 'distortions, half truths and lies.' Or, you can simply try clicking on the little red words before lecturing me. I even did it in Wikipedia form for factually challenged people like you.

That's two liberals who have zero arguments. Obama doesn't care, he won't institute travel bans, won't stop illegal immigration, won't stop out of control spending... I could go on and on and... well you get the idea.

Yes, I get the idea. You don't know what the hell you are talking about.

Oh I do. It appears you still can't challenge me to a debate. Your argument in summation:

1. Lies

2. Distortions

3. Half truths

4. You don't know what you're talking about.

Is this all?

That's all that is needed.

A debate should be challenged on facts, when the very title of your thread is a lie why should I bother debating it...
 
Yet you don't prove how I am doing so, nor do you prove how my assertions are based on contrivances or lies. Your post is a non sequitur as it doesn't even attempt to address the topic.

Click on the little red words next time.

Go away.
Your very title is an unproven statement and on face value a lie, why should any sane person then read numerous paragraphs of distortions, half truths and lies??

Like I told Clayton, you can start by issuing your own rebuttal and proving my statements are 'distortions, half truths and lies.' Or, you can simply try clicking on the little red words before lecturing me. I even did it in Wikipedia form for factually challenged people like you.

That's two liberals who have zero arguments. Obama doesn't care, he won't institute travel bans, won't stop illegal immigration, won't stop out of control spending... I could go on and on and... well you get the idea.

Yes, I get the idea. You don't know what the hell you are talking about.

Oh I do. It appears you still can't challenge me to a debate. Your argument in summation:

1. Lies

2. Distortions

3. Half truths

4. You don't know what you're talking about.

Is this all?

That's all that is needed.

A debate should be challenged on facts, when the very title of your thread is a lie why should I bother debating it...

"That's all that is needed"

Is that a cover for your lack of an argument? I've backed each and every assertion with links, quotes, and historical evidence. I am willing to rescind anything in this thread if you can prove to the contrary.

Let's go hotshot. That, or you never intended to debate me in the first place
 
Last edited:
1. There are thousands of West Africans fleeing their ebola stricken countries.

Please prove that.

Thank you.

No, there are thousands of West Africans with Ebola coming here and they threaten to infect us (Americans)

, who are risking bringing with them the very deadly Ebola virus.

The poster thinks I'm going to waste my time debating non-sense like this...
 

Forum List

Back
Top