1. Account suspended
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    19 Oct '14 22:10

    This post is unavailable.

    Please refer to our posting guidelines.

  2. Standard memberDeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    Quarantined World
    Joined
    27 Oct '04
    Moves
    87415
    19 Oct '14 23:06
    Unlike the American right, at least as represented here, I trust the NHS to keep on top of Ebola, so I'd go for that rather than ISIS. But bring them on, we eat terrorists for breakfast round here.

    Having read the hysteria from them I've begun to wonder, what is it with Ebola and the right wingers? It's like they've all turned into Lady MacBeth and are going into a cleaning frenzy.
  3. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    22048
    19 Oct '14 23:53
    The post that was quoted here has been removed
    I would prefer ISIS. Unlike ebola they can be reasoned with. All you have to do is stop bombing them.

    Funny how bombing people pisses them off. Go figure... 😛
  4. Joined
    05 Sep '08
    Moves
    66636
    20 Oct '14 05:16
    Originally posted by Metal Brain
    I would prefer ISIS. Unlike ebola they can be reasoned with. All you have to do is stop bombing them.

    Funny how bombing people pisses them off. Go figure... 😛
    If you could give the virus a different host they would leave you alone. Ebola has no stated policy to try to wipe groups off the earth.
  5. Joined
    29 Dec '08
    Moves
    6788
    20 Oct '14 05:29
    The post that was quoted here has been removed
    "...If you knew that ISIS or Ebola would invade your neighbourhood, which
    would you prefer and why?

    Insha'Allah, baby, Insha'Allah.
  6. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    13644
    20 Oct '14 06:251 edit
    The post that was quoted here has been removed
    What a wonderful choice we have there. I think I would just flip a coin, with heads for ISIS and tails for Ebola.

    Reason why: How could I go wrong?
  7. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    20 Oct '14 07:08
    Originally posted by Metal Brain
    I would prefer ISIS. Unlike ebola they can be reasoned with. All you have to do is stop bombing them.

    Funny how bombing people pisses them off. Go figure... 😛
    As far as I am aware, ISIS's main victims never bombed anyone in their lives.
  8. Standard memberfinnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    Joined
    25 Jun '06
    Moves
    64930
    20 Oct '14 09:561 edit
    Originally posted by DeepThought
    Unlike the American right, at least as represented here, I trust the NHS to keep on top of Ebola, so I'd go for that rather than ISIS. But bring them on, we eat terrorists for breakfast round here.

    Having read the hysteria from them I've begun to wonder, what is it with Ebola and the right wingers? It's like they've all turned into Lady MacBeth and are going into a cleaning frenzy.
    The virus is a metaphor for all that conservatives loathe
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/19/ebola-america-fear-barack-obama-virus
    Conservative eminence grise Phyllis Schlafly believes Obama is allowing it into the country deliberately. “Obama doesn’t want America to believe that we’re exceptional,” she said. “He wants us to be just like everybody else, and if Africa is suffering from Ebola, we ought to join the group and be suffering from it, too.” Rightwing radio host Rush Limbaugh claims liberals won’t impose a travel ban from infected areas because Ebola is “payback” for slavery.
    South Carolina congressman Joe Wilson last week warned that Hamas might deliberately bring Ebola sufferers into the US through Mexico illegally. You couldn’t make it up; you wouldn’t know where to start. There have been three confirmed cases of Ebola in the US and none in Mexico – if anyone should be sealing the border to protect themselves from the virus it should be the Mexicans keeping Americans out.
    One of the reasons the government can’t ban direct flights from the infected west African countries – Sierra Leone, Liberia and Guinea – is because there are no direct flights from those countries to America.
    In 2012, 43% of Americans reported not getting the medical care they needed because of costs. The figure for the uninsured is far higher. Fearing high bills and long waits at emergency rooms, the uninsured generally wait to see if an ailment is really serious before seeking assistance. Imagine how likely they would be to seek immediate help for a temperature and, if they did turn out to have Ebola, how many people they might infect before they did. About a quarter of Texans, the state where the outbreak is centred, do not have medical insurance. (That includes Thomas Eric Duncan, the only person to die from Ebola in the US.) It would be less but Texas governor, Rick Perry, refused to cooperate with the federal government to expand Medicaid under the provisions of Obamacare.
    Ebola makes the case for government: an institution Conservatives have no love for. It is an issue of public health to which no individual or privatised response can make any substantial, meaningful contribution. To fight an epidemic like Ebola you need a well-resourced public sector, well-trained government employees, central planning and coordination and a respect for science.
  9. SubscriberWajoma
    Die Cheeseburger
    Provocation
    Joined
    01 Sep '04
    Moves
    77382
    20 Oct '14 10:33
    Oh dear duchess tries something a little light hearted and along comes Mr happy.
  10. Standard memberfinnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    Joined
    25 Jun '06
    Moves
    64930
    20 Oct '14 10:341 edit
    Originally posted by Wajoma
    Oh dear duchess tries something a little light hearted and along comes Mr happy.
    I'm happy laughing at you.
    To fight an epidemic like Ebola you need a well-resourced public sector, well-trained government employees, central planning and coordination and a respect for science.
  11. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    22048
    20 Oct '14 11:56
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    As far as I am aware, ISIS's main victims never bombed anyone in their lives.
    That is a domestic conflict that Obama intervened in by choice. If there was no oil there we would not be talking about it.
  12. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    12857
    20 Oct '14 12:101 edit
    The post that was quoted here has been removed
    Neither, the main conern is Obola.
  13. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    13644
    20 Oct '14 22:53
    Originally posted by finnegan
    The virus is a metaphor for all that conservatives loathe
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/19/ebola-america-fear-barack-obama-virus
    Conservative eminence grise Phyllis Schlafly believes Obama is allowing it into the country deliberately. “Obama doesn’t want America to believe that we’re exceptional,” she said. “He want ...[text shortened]... d government employees, central planning and coordination and a respect for science.
    [/b]
    Mexico isn't about to seal their border, because they wish to get rid of their undesireables.
  14. Account suspended
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    21 Oct '14 18:52

    This post is unavailable.

    Please refer to our posting guidelines.

  15. Account suspended
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    21 Oct '14 19:12

    This post is unavailable.

    Please refer to our posting guidelines.

Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree