Monday, October 27, 2014

Charming-6-Year Old "Princesses" Dropping F-Bombs For Feminism

Upon first glance at the little girl in the video above, not reading the title or anything, this little girl looks pretty cute in a princess outfit complete with a tiara.
That, my friends, is where the charm ends.
The video is produced by a for-profit group known as FCKH8.
I guess with a name like that, one should expect what you see when you watch the above video.
And a little background about FCKH8 is that they are in the business of making money and supporting the usual left wing topics such as gay rights, abortion rights, women's rights, all the politically correct causes. I have no problem with them making money. Where I have doubt as to their sincerity of the cause. If they did not think that they could make a buck, they would not be doing this enterprise. There are sincere, yet misguided, non-profit groups that are all in on similar issues and I think if I were interested in pursuing their agenda, I would support one of those groups.
OK, so the video itself?
Besides a slew of lies, there are 13 F-bombs, 1 a-bomb and 1 s-bomb for a total of 15 profanities that I was able to count in a little over a minute. What you will see if you can stomach watching the whole thing is a boy dressed as a girl and saying how awful it is when the phrase "You are like a girl" is said by another boy. And the big push to make sure you buy articles of clothing from FCKH8. Their come on is that $5 of each purchase goes to some "great causes" without exactly being specific.
And they do have their detractors that claim among other things their business practices leave a lot to be desired. I found this blog that while on the fringe of the sexual issues du jour at least is sincere. And I actually agree with their premise that FCKH8 is exploiting the sexual alphabet community. Anytime a for-profit company is involved in some hip, new, great cause one must at the very least raise an eyebrow of suspicion. No matter what side of the political aisle they may be on.
I will address the points quickly because that is not really the point of this post.
The princesses toss out the debunked 'women are paid 25% less than men for the same work' meme. These links should help dispel those charges. And the simple fact is that if all were true, who would want to hire a guy when they can pay a gal 25% less for the same job. There is a lot about this, but not germane to this post.
The latest cause is that one in four women will face some kind of sexual assault at some point in their life.
Now I think that sexual assault, and it is intentionally a broad term, is a very serious problem that needs to be addressed without hysterics and hyperbole. A lot of this comes from the university in which many in academia are basically suggesting that male and female sex is an assault on women. Thus I think the one in four number is a bit much. Thus again, if one makes it sound awful and have some cute little girl princesses saying how f---ing awful it is, well it must be true.
Then the cute princesses go off about how a gal's body should not be what defines her. Of course when a cute, six year-old says that she should not have to grow up worrying about what her a-- looks like, well that gets me on the the bandwagon to allow girls, and really boys as well, to end up looking, whatever.
The issues brought up in this ad are encapsulated by Christine Sisto in this post on National Review Online.
Now, if you are reading this, note that I do keep referring to these little girls, one at least six years-old and no older than 10 at the most, as cute.
Because they are.
And they are pretty politically correct as far as the right mix. You know, an Asian. A Black. At least one Hispanic, maybe two. And at least one that looked to possibly be mixed race.
But, where was that not-so-cute fat ghetto kid? Where was she? I watched this wretch at lease three times and voila! Nothing of a sort!
And come to think of it, there was not an ugly little girl. Let's be honest, not all little girls are cute looking. Sorry, it's true. But since a girl's appearance was a big point, it would have been nice to see the ugly girl.
The closest we got to out of the box is when the Hispanic boy was in a princess dress. I guess one for the trannies, eh?
What is so awful about this is what is obvious about this.
How many of these girls actually really grasp what they were saying in their parts? Did they even understand at their age what sexual assault means? What an imaginary pay gap is? Do all of these cute girls really get what it is to be not so cute? To not be attractive?
I'm going with a big fat no.
A better commercial could have used girls, but maybe of high school age. An age in which maybe they have done a little research and come to their conclusions on their own.
But no for you see, in the mind of the left, the children are always the smart ones and have all the answers. The younger the better. And even the most complex issues can of course be reduced to f-bombs and bromides.
Clearly the material was written for the girls. Clearly, they were told to do all the ghetto hand gestures because after all, this really is being driven to a little bit older but still very young audience.
But for adults, this solidifies a sad reality.
That the coarseness of our culture knows no bounds.
Thus parent participants in this f-bomb extravaganza think there is not one thing wrong about little girls looking angry. Acting angry. Made to feel angry. So angry that yes, it's OK to drop f-bombs.
I'm going to admit to something that you probably already have figured out.
I am a sexist on this whole thing.
I do find disgusting to hear what look to be sweet little girls talking worse than I do watching the Los Angeles Dodgers go down in flames again in the baseball playoffs. I don't like girls and women who swear beyond a level one hears in a cheap bar. I do have a level of old-fashioned feelings to the opposite sex.
I open doors much easier for a girl or woman than I would a male. I would let a girl or woman go in front of me in line at the supermarket. I try to walk on the outside on the sidewalk. A lot of this is because that is what my parents taught me about how to be with the opposite sex. And another fact drilled into my noggin is to always remember that a girl and or a woman is a daughter and a sister and how would you like another guy treating your daughter or sister when it comes to things like dating and the like.
So yeah, in today's lexicon I guess I have no choice but to be characterized as a sexist pig. And I am proud of that.
Having said that, women work very hard on the job. Women are right now dominant on colleges and universities. Women make up over 50% of college and university students, a first. Women excel at all they do. And yet, yet so many that claim to speak for women make them out to be poor, helpless creatures. Except one should remember that one of the little princesses says, "I’m not some pretty f***ing helpless princess in distress! I’m pretty f***ing powerful.” in full faux tough-girl look and talk.
The bigger fear that these little girls are being raised to be angry and not trusting in the opposite sex. Angry girls and boys do not grow up into nice and sweet adults. They end up being some kind of victim. Real and or imagined, they will feel victimized. They are being set up for failure.
So why this video in the first place?
Of course its a marketing ploy and we are talking about it. No matter what the one mother and video director say on this interview with Entertainment Tonight (very appropriate if you ask me!).
It is the very exploitation that the company claims to be against. Using the cuteness of little girls to twaddle on about issues the for-profit clothing company, FCKH8, deem important. The parents that are part of it by allowing their little girls to be used this way are not all that different from Honey Boo Boo or whatever that show was called. And as a side treat, maybe they can make some bucks off the girls.
Sorry but it is not at all charming to see this video. It is depressing, quite frankly, to see some parents set no boundaries for their children. That coarse language is not so wonderful. That to make a point, you have to talk with not just your lips but strange hand gestures.
If this is what modern feminism is reduced to, we are in a sorry state. I hope and pray that this is not representative of the future of this nation.

Thursday, October 23, 2014

The Texas Governor Race Hits A New Low

I guess when you are behind by about 15 points with two weeks to go and you are Texas Democrat gubernatorial candidate, state senator Wendy Davis, you throw the kitchen sink at the front runner, Republican attorney general, Greg Abbott.
A couple of weeks ago, Miss Davis decided that Mr. Abbott was a hypocrite for suing his then next door neighbor after the incident that rendered Mr. Abbott a paraplegic and winning a $10,000,000 settlement. After making a slight-of-hand implication of Mr. Abbott's disability and if he really needs to be in a wheelchair in the first place, Team Davis said that because Mr. Abbott seeks tort reform, after he got his, that he does not want to see other people compensated in a similar manner. As Mr. Abbott has noted here, the law that he gained a settlement from is still the law in Texas and that it could still be the same result.
Which is actually an out of court settlement. That is noted here. And also noted here, and this is the real issue, is that Mr. Abbott never sued for punitive damages.
And that is where many legitimate lawsuits go off the rails.
Punitive damages is exactly what it means. Punishing a party beyond legitimate compensation. It is why we see multi-million dollar jury rewards in lawsuits. In essence, its how to stick it to the man. Whoever and whatever the man may be. Because no doubt, evil intent was done.
That is another issue for another post.
So, how is the race hitting a new low?
With an assist from the San Antonio Express-News, Mr. Abbott was asked a question that is absurd on the face of it.
Mr. Abbott was asked if he would defend a ban on interracial marriage.
A little digging that the questioner might have done would make the question moot. For you see, Mr. Abbott is married  . . .to a Hispanic woman named Cecilia Phalen.
But dig deeper my friends and the real thrust of the question is about same-sex marriage, which Mr. Abbott is opposed to.
Sorry but the link to the Express-News is a pay firewall but the headline and little one could read lays it all out there and why the question was asked in the first place.
It's all about same-sex marriage.
But the race question, while a set up, did have the tone that if Mr. Abbott would in his capacity, as attorney general, defend such a law had the side benefit of trying to see in Mr. Abbott was indeed a closet racist.
The answer is seen as a dodge my many, but it is not and in fact is a hit on other attorney generals that decided defending some states laws not recognizing same-sex marriage is OK. Thus by default it is exactly how same-sex marriage became legal in California. Not by a vote of the people (not a vote recognized by a federal court) not a vote of the legislature and a governor's signature reflecting the will of the people. Nope, by judicial fiat.
So, how did Mr. Abbott answer the question? Here is his answer per The Dallas Morning News:

“And all I can do is deal with the issues that are before me,” Abbott said. “The job of an attorney general is to represent and defend in court the laws of their client, which is the state Legislature, unless and until a court strikes it down."

Well, I guess he would defend such a law. As attorney general, he could defend it but not with any passion or gusto and hope the other side makes a better case. Which is the point about other state attorney generals who just throw in the towel like ours did in the person of Kamala Harris.
Does that mean he would be for an interracial marriage ban? Again, not likely since he is married to a Hispanic woman. But let's suppose he is not married and running for governor. He can say that while he is the sitting attorney general he has to defend the law passed by a state legislature and signed by a governor. But he wants to end the law and would fight hard to do so if elected governor.
Here is the rub.
Same-sex marriage advocates have based much of the reasoning why there should be same-sex marriage that homosexuals are born to be homosexuals and they can not nor should not change their "natural" same-sex attraction. Much the same way that a person can not change their race.
Thus, if you oppose same-sex marriage, you must have opposed interracial marriage as they are really the same thing.
OK, most people can not change their race, unless one is the late singer Michael Jackson, but one can choose not to be married. It is not exactly a constitutional right nor a God-given right either. There are many heterosexual people that are not married and do not intend to. They are making a choice. Many homosexuals also can make that choice. But a minority of a minority think that while their intimate relationship of some one of the same sex can only be sanctioned by society if marriage is allowed.
Of course today, that is really flawed thinking as people are changing their views about homosexuals in general. Most people, myself included, want to give homosexual couples as much of the state benefit of marriage without changing the definition of the institution.
Having said that, an argument that those who support the position of non-state recognition of same-sex marriage is that one can choose to be in that kind of relationship or not. But one can not choose the race that they are and that miscegenation laws are pointless.
So, advocates of same-sex marriage get the twofer courtesy of a question asked of the current sitting attorney general. And the answer to them makes him not really honest and a homophobe and closet racist.
This is why many conservatives and Republicans have problems discussing the media approved social issues, especially regarding same-sex marriage.
Mr. Abbott should have gotten the context of the question. It was not about miscengenation laws. It was defending traditional marriage. It was about if Mr. Abbott was anti-gay. Because if he would defend traditional marriage, he was by extension a bigot.
This is what the left is reduced to.
Character assassination and even making up stuff as they go along.
Again, in this case they got a twofer. Why by his answer, Mr. Abbott would defend any law banning interracial marriage and supporting the state in traditional marriage.
Also this takes away from the fact that the Texas Democrats hitched their hopes on a one-note Wendy. All she is famous for is a pointless filibuster regarding an abortion law. A filibuster that never derailed the law from taking effect. For some reason, they thought that in the effort to turn Texas into Blue heaven, social issues are the ticket.
Most people talking about this latest low of the governor campaign are talking about the interracial marriage issue and ignoring the real thrust of the question. Which is his approach to same-sex marriage.
No matter what, the Texas gubernatorial race has hit a new low. And there is no reason to think that it will not get any lower.

Monday, October 20, 2014

Ebola Is Here And The Keystone Kops Are In Charge; What Can Go Wrong?

Well, now that the dreaded ebola is here in the United States and we have Team Obama The Keystone Kops in charge, why not much can go wrong, right?
Except everything is going wrong and contributing to an atmosphere of fear, hyperbole and loathing throughout the United States.
To be clear, ebola in and of itself does not scare me as much as the federal government's "handling" of it at so many levels that does scare me.
First off, it is not like this latest incarnation of ebola was not going to go beyond the so-called Hot Zone. With the ease of air travel, passenger ship travel being more affordable than ever, and just the fact that it already was in three African nations (Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone), it was just a matter of time before the viral, hemorrhagic disease was going to come to the United States.
And in no surprise, it came in the person of one Thomas Eric Duncan, a citizen of Liberia who came to the United States on an airplane from the Liberian capital, Monrovia, by Brussels, Belgium. Mr. Duncan went to Texas Health Presbyterian hospital on September 25 and was giving anti-biotic and sent on his way. Even though Mr. Duncan told anyone who would listen that he just came from Liberia. Mr. Duncan returned to THPH three days later and a more careful examination showed that he did indeed have the dreaded disease. And regrettably, he died on October 9, 2014.
So, here is a problem off the top.
It appears that THPH was not all that prepared for anyone coming in with the possibility of having ebola. It appears that Mr. Duncan went through the emergency room on the initial visit. Ever been to a hospital ER? Unless it is in a small town or non-urban area, they are usually packed to the gills and the staff, even doctors, rush through every thing that they do. And if they had no idea what to look for in a potential ebola patient, sending Mr. Duncan off with anti-biotics does not seem all that bad. At least he was examined.
So, the local Dallas hospital has had problems and are working on getting the protocols in place.
But what is wrong more than anything else is how the federal government has responded to this potential medical crisis.
Well, about as well as can be expected of a government that has no clue and playing on the fly.
Let's go back to when the current elbola outbreak occurred and it is even seen as longer than thought. It appears to have started last year. And the mortality rate in a staggering 71%. And over 9,200 have been recorded to having contracted the disease. Note I said recorded. Who knows how many cases are not recorded.
In other words, the potential of this disease spreading beyond the Hot Zone was pretty high.
Had the administration simply acknowledged this say six months ago, they could have quietly implemented such things as a ban on travel to and from the hot zone and screening those that have come to the United States by way of a third nation. And also to send doctors to the Hot Zone to try harder to contain the spread of ebola.
Now we are sending 3,000 United States soldiers to Western Africa to fight ebola. What will they do? Machine-gun their way out of ebola?!
No, they have decided to bob and weave. First, no chance that ebola will hit the United States. Wrong. That even if it does there are ways in place that it will not spread. Wrong. That a travel ban will do more harm than good. Wrong. Ask Nigeria. They have been able to all but eradicated ebola and a part of that is a travel ban to and from affected nations.
Ineptitude is the real story here. One way the administration could have done a better job is having someone who can explain everything in a coherent way. To be honest with the American people. To admit that yes, there is a possibility that ebola could, could become an airborne virus and then what can be done.
So, the Keystone Kops think a Democrat party operative, Ron Klain, can get everything together.
Too bad the dude can't even make the first two meetings of essentially the task force that Mr. Klain was named to lead.
The bottom line is that a disease that has a currently staggering 71% death rate was minimized when it was known to be a potential danger a year ago. And is keeps going on from worse to worse.
Is there anyone that can get us out of this mess?

Tuesday, October 07, 2014

Say It Ain't So! 7th Heaven Dad A . . .Child Molesting Perv?!

If this is to be believed, then a confession that Stephen Collins made to a therapist and his estranged wife may be all she wrote for the pastor and patriarch of the Camden family in the television program 7th Heaven.
Mr. Collins made a name for himself on 7th Heaven as the always there for anyone in need Rev. Eric Camden, supported by his wife, Annie Camden, played by Catherine Hicks. They started off with four children but later in the series Mrs. Hicks' character had twin boys. One well known actress that has made it big is Jessica Biel.
In retrospect, the show dealt heavily with charged problems and a lot related to sex. It was more down the middle, but often led surprisingly toward a traditional view of sexual relationships. That one should wait until marriage and yet some of the characters clearly did not.
But the issue at hand is that Mr. Collins supposedly admitted to showing himself in the buff at least once. And according
The mere speculation of such acts prompted the UP Television channel, which has been showing reruns of the popular show to stop as of today.
Let me stop all right here.
The fact is that Mr. Collins is being investigated based in part on this recording. It appears that it is legal, although that may end up being for a court to decide. And that is the problem. A court will more than likely be the final arbitrator in this, as it should be. It is not fair for the UP network to punish a whole cast that did not know any of this may or may not have been going on. It is also assuming guilt and that is not what the American legal system should be doing, especially on a charge as serious as child molestation. Just because he said stuff on tape, a court has to determine much more than that to convict Mr. Collins. And that is how it should be.
Of course one could suggest that the horrible website TMZ got a hold of this and that the estranged wife, actress Faye Grant, set him up to admit things that may not have happened. That is why after police investigate, and so far the New York police department is doing so (Los Angeles is evaluating reopening a complaint.), and it is adjudicated in a court of law, we will know a lot more.
Divorces can be a very nasty business. And this one has been dragging on for a couple of years now. And suddenly, this revelation.
Now I don't want anyone to think I am defending Mr. Collins in the least. If he has is day in court and is convicted, put in in prison in the general population and wish him luck.
But why I think we should all sit back and let things play out is the infamous McMartin Preschool investigation and trial during most of the 1980s.
A long investigation and equally long trial proved that the adage "Children would not lie." about such things as being sexually abused is not entirely true. In fact most if not all the children that were interviewed, most being of preschool age, were being heavily suggested of events that never happened. Essentially, they were coached. As it turned out, none of those charged were convicted of any crime, period. Yet their lives, reputation and dignity were entirely ruined based on the wild accusations of a mentally ill alcoholic, Judy Johnson.
Of course this potential case is different in that Mr. Collins may have confessed and it does appear of his own free will.
But he has already been convicted in the court of public opinion.
In addition to the reruns of 7th Heaven being suspended, Mr. Collins was fired from his minor role in the upcoming movie Ted 2. And he resigned from a position on the Screen Actors Guild national board.
Because this involves children, it makes the potential to be so repulsive.
But this is why we have a legal system. So that people accused of such heinous crimes have their day in court.
I loved 7th Heaven as I watched it during it's original run. It was a wholesome show and actually had a minister and a religious angle. Something that seems to be banished to the depths of cableland. If even there.
Does it bother me that the family patriarch in the show is now a possible child molesting perv? Hell yes. Does that mean the show should be off the air? No. Remember, its a broadcast show and that it does deal with the frailties of the human condition. I, and I believe most people, can separate the acting from the actor. The messages are still the same.
But as I said, say it ain't so! How can the pastor dad on 7th Heaven be a possible . . . child molesting perv?

Monday, October 06, 2014

Are We Living In The End Times?

And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.
Matthew: 24:6

I do not mean to be provocative, but with all that has been going on lately, I think it is a fair question to ask if we are entering the End Times that many Christians believe have to occur before the return of Jesus Christ.
I think that before I explain what I am trying to convey, it is important to have a brief as possible primer on the End Times.
Firstly, the End Times is not just a Christian idea of the 18th century American church. Almost every conceivable Christian sect and or denomination has a vision of the End Times. The Roman Catholic church believes in the End Times, although as we see here, many do not believe in a literal End Times scenario. However, there are many RCs that have a more Protestant view of the End Times as we see here. But to be honest, in much of the liturgical tradition, there is a lack of teaching and or fervor about the End Times. In the United States, non-liturgical Protestants are more likely to teach and believe in an End Time. But there is a lot of dispute about the exact nature of it and the whole 1,000 year reign of Jesus Christ. The bottom line is that for the most part, Christians of all stripes believe there will be an end of the world as we know it.
Judaism believes in a messianic age and the return of the Messiah. For the most part, Jews do not believe that Jesus Christ is that messiah. But the messiah will come back for his people.
Islam believes in an End Time scenario. But because there is the Sunni-Shit'e division in Islam, there are different variations that come to the same conclusion.
Even non-monotheistic religions have a belief in some kind of End Times.
The original link is a great place to have a basic understanding of what the End Times mean to different faiths.
There endeth the lesson.
Do I believe we are in the End Times as described by many non-liturgical Protestant Christians?
I introduce you to this salient passage in the Holy Gospel according to Matthew:

But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
Matthew 24:36

So does that answer the question? Not in a yes or no way. So here is the context of this passage.

He said to them: "It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority.
Acts 1:7

But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
2 Peter 3:10

Well, to fully give you an answer, please go back to the beginning of this post.
In a way, I do believe that we are closer to the End Times than at any time in history.
There are reasons why. For one, only in this era is the world so connected. At no other time in history have we the capacity to communicate the way we do now. We can watch a war in real time taking place in the Middle East as we watch the Islamic State go on the march. We can witness disasters in real time. That could be the fulfilment of biblical prophecy of the whole world being able to see the return of Christ.
It is not just the wars in the Middle East but all over the world. There are civil wars we hardly know about but are still going on. The Philippines comes to mind with the Roman Catholic majority fighting a radical Islamic faction in Mindanao. The continent of Africa, sadly, is almost nothing but wars, civil wars and terrorism. There is the war in The Ukraine between proxy Russians and the Ukrainian government over portions of the Eastern Ukraine. And where there is not war, there seems to be an uneasy tension ready to boil over from a lot of different sources. Even here in the United States, there is a lot of tension that could spark something. People are just anxious.
Christian persecution is definitely on the rise all over the world. Of course the Middle East is the hot bed of this. Yet again, this is happening all over the world and yes, right here in the United States. It is also one of the signs of the end. Of course different Christians come to different conclusions on their faith journey, but a sign of the hostility to Christianity is the assault on the Christmas and Easter seasons. Christmas is now known as Holiday. What holiday?! Every other one has a name so after eliminating those, I and many assume the holiday is Christmas. Christmas break is now winter break in schools. Christmas shows are now winter shows also in schools. One can not in any public setting it seems wish anyone a Merry Christmas. Because of faux-offense. Christmas songs about, well the birth of Christ is a no-no. And one can change the word Christmas with Easter and much of the same thing.
These are but a couple of examples of why I think that we could possibly be in the End Times. I could go on and on. We could have a great debate over Preterism or Dispensationalist or Pre-tribulation and Post-tribulation. But that is not the point of this post.
But the reason why I write this post is because we have to be very, very careful not to play God as one Harold Camping did a couple of years ago.
Mr. Camping believed that he knew when the end of the world was to occur and the date was October 21, 2011. But before that, Jesus Christ would come down and save the people he wanted in to be with him in heaven in the Rapture. That was to occur on May 21, 2011. What was to happen in between? Well the fire and brimstone many End Time preachers talk about. The plagues. The wars. All the evil would be loosed on the world and it would all end on October 21, 2011. 
Remember what I wrote above? Jesus himself said that no man would no the day, or hour. Yet Mr. Camping tried to play God. He did realize that he was mistaken, but there was a lot of damage that he did.  
Most End Time preachers are careful not to search for the date, time and all of that. But there is a temptation to do so. Just as dangerous as not discerning the Word of God in proper meaning and context.
For me, I do believe that we are in the throws of something major. Possibly the End Times. There are lots of signs. A lot of persecution. Wars and rumors of wars.
But as Jesus Christ himself said, do not be troubled.
I will say simply to be aware and to live a good life for yourself and especially your family and yes, your neighbor.

 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
  This is the first and great commandment.
  And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
  On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
Matthew, 22:35-40

Ebola Is Here In The United States

I have been warning that this would happen for the past month or so on Facebook.
That ebola would eventually come to the United States.
And surprise, surprise, surprise!
I have, half jokingly, said that I hope there is room on The Last Ship because of the irony of the timing of this latest outbreak.
And this latest outbreak is the worst since the disease was discovered in 1976 in West Africa.
When one reads the description of Ebola, there is a good reason I think that this is bigger than many want to realize.
This information from the World Health Organization does not sugar coat it. The fatality rate is on average 50%. However, there are variables as low as a 25% to 90% fatality rate. Thus, the average case of ebola gives a patient a 50-50 chance of survival.
Those are not great odds.
I expressed righteous concerns when Dr. Kent Brantly and his nurse, Nancy Writebol, came back to the United States after caring for ebola patients in Liberia. They ended up contracting the disease and are, thank God, alive to tell about it. My concern was not like Ann Coulter. It was based on what we do not know about ebola and the fact that this outbreak is now the worst in history.
What we do know is that there is no cure and any possible vaccine is in the clinical trial stage at best.
Yet we are being told by a lot of people not to worry. That people die everyday from the common cold and or flu(s). And that because the health care system is so much more advanced in the United States than that of Third-world Africa, there will be no outbreak here.
Sorry if I do not share such confidence when one Thomas Eric Duncan was able to come to the United States. And contracted ebola while in his home nation of Liberia. How many more Thomas Eric Duncans are there lurking out there?
And the same people telling us not to worry are suggesting we should not restrict travel to and from the ebola hot zone. That hot zone comprises Liberia, Sierra Leone, and to a lesser extent Guinea and Nigeria.
The absurd reasoning for not having travel restrictions all rest on one word.
Why even this dim bulb,  David Quammen, suggests because of the United States role in the development of the founding of Liberia, we can't have travel restrictions.
The problem is that we have two forces running dead into each other.
A highly contagious, deadly disease for which there is no cure up against the tidal wave known as political correctness.
Because of the racial sensitivities here, we have a problem that is not rational.
The disease hit this area of the world and did not check the "Is this a politically correct area to strike" box off as it began it's wrath. Many good people have tried to improve the medical needs of the people of nations such as Liberia, Sierra Leone, Guinea and Nigeria for eons. Corruption, lack of stable governments and constant warfare is the rule of the day in these nations. But the fact that this outbreak has become the largest, is it not better to contain it and try to seek at least a vaccine if not a turn around in those that have that possibility?
According to the PC police, I guess not.
Of course it make no sense but that is the way it is for now.
It is also why many of us just do not trust the government and how they will handle this situation in the long run.
Responsible treatment is needed here. And that is why this must be contained at the source. Otherwise, this will become commonplace around America.