NY Times Suggests Racial Profiling To Protect America From Ebola

It’s no wonder when the Editorial Board is comprised heavily of White People and Men

Stopping Ebola in America

The widening Ebola epidemic in West Africa — combined with the fears generated by an Ebola patient who carried the virus to Dallas — have led to calls for the United States to screen travelers when they reach American airports. That is a reasonable defensive tactic if done judiciously, although it is unclear if that would have stopped the Liberian man, who carried the virus to Dallas before developing symptoms.

Thomas Eric Duncan lied when leaving West Africa, because we all know that people are honest when they’ve been exposed to something like Ebola and want to escape the country and come to the US to be saved. But, for the Times to suggest advanced and intrusive screening for certain people, most who will be Black, is racist! Remember, we aren’t allowed to do this for those traveling from the Middle East who could have links to Islamic terrorist groups.

The American health care system needs to react with greater vigilance when cases do reach this country. It is incredible that doctors in a Dallas hospital reportedly made no effort to ascertain the patient’s travel patterns, and there were delays in cleaning the Dallas apartment where he had been staying, disposing of the medical waste and moving other residents of the apartment to a safer location.

True, but what did those who work for Obama do when he arrived? By the way, that’s a word that appears nowhere within the article: “Obama”.

Top American health officials are strongly opposed, with good reason, to take the more extreme step of banning all travel to the United States from Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone, where the epidemic is concentrated, as several prominent Republicans, like Louisiana’s governor, Bobby Jindal, have recommended. That could actually hamper the battle to contain the epidemic abroad — the first line of defense against the disease — in part by leaving Americans who are risking their lives to contain the epidemic stranded in Africa with no way to return home. If volunteer workers can’t return home, they may elect not to go in the first place, thus weakening the fight against the epidemic.

No Obama, but we do get a Jindal mention. Said travel ban would not be about Americans returning, who would be required to be checked heavily, but against those who live there and simply want to get the hell out.

There is room to improve the screening in West Africa, where government officials and workers are often incompetent and in some cases unable to use the temperature devices they have been given. Still the system seems to be working. Though the epidemic has been growing since it was first identified in March, only one case, Mr. Duncan’s, has reached the United States, while scores of people have been blocked from boarding planes.

Oh, the Editorial Board wants those Black people to do most of the work. Racist!

Even so, it makes sense to add another layer of protection at airports in this country. Travelers from West Africa could be asked to fill out an additional questionnaire, on which they might be less tempted to lie since they will already have reached American soil. Verbal questioning could further probe whether a passenger is likely to be infected. Until the epidemic in West Africa is controlled, it remains possible, even likely, that another Ebola case would reach this country. The American health care system should be prepared to move quickly, treat the victim and trace and isolate all people the patient had contact with. Bungled responses like the one in Dallas are simply unacceptable.

Interrogating them here? Racist!

Interestingly, again, Obama is not mentioned. If Bush, or some Republican, was president, think on the way that paragraph, heck, the entire article, would be changed in order to say that President Republican was failing to protect the citizens of the United States. Things like

Even so, it makes sense to add another layer of protection at airports in this country, which President Republican and his/her administration seem loathe to do. Travelers from West Africa could be asked to fill out an additional questionnaire, on which they might be less tempted to lie since they will already have reached American soil, a simple method for which President Republican has been slow to act. Verbal questioning could further probe whether a passenger is likely to be infected. Until the epidemic in West Africa is controlled, it remains possible, even likely, that another Ebola case would reach this country. President Republican has promised thousands of military members to help, yet only a few hundred have been deployed. What is the Republican administration waiting for? People are dying. The American health care system should be prepared to move quickly, treat the victim and trace and isolate all people the patient had contact with. Bungled responses like the one in Dallas, with President Republican’s FEMA, CDC, and other federal agencies nowhere in sight are simply unacceptable.

Still, it’s interesting that the Times thinks more screening people who will mostly be Black is a Good Idea when it comes to Ebola, but not Middle Eastern men with possible links to terrorist groups.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

8 Responses to “NY Times Suggests Racial Profiling To Protect America From Ebola”

  1. John says:

    Republicans are always complaining about how unfair the world treats them
    The right wing used to be the tough guys now they are always whining
    You also don’t seem to have mentioned the Texas governor at all I would blame him. Fir not doing a better job once the case arrived

  2. gitarcarver says:

    You also don’t seem to have mentioned the Texas governor at all I would blame him. Fir not doing a better job once the case arrived

    Project much john?

    In case you missed it, the case was being administered by the CDC – a FEDERAL agency – and Perry had nothing to do with it.

  3. John says:

    Gee I wonder if the GOP house is having sevknd thoughts about cutting the CDC budget?
    Should the local state governments be th defying line in medical. ” outbreaks” or should BIG GOVERNMENT
    immediately step in ?
    Should EBOLAGHAZI !!!! Be the new scandal if ghe week ?

  4. No, they aren’t having second thoughts, because they actually increased the CDC’s budget by Iberia half a billion dollars for FY2014, where Obama’s budget called for a decrease of around $250 million.

    Facts suck, eh, John?

  5. david7134 says:

    As is an everyday experience now, in Obama’s America, I find that with a deadly, highly infectious disease without a cure or prevention, Obama is yet making a political event out of it. We can not quarentine West Africa because, well that is not clear, but we can not do it. Quarentine is the main tool of disease prevention. But it is not allowed. I watched one of the Democratic mouths discussing the issue and said that quarentine would not work as the Africans would just fly to another country and then to here. I assume that they have never traveled outside of the US as you have to have a passport and that is the only way you get entry to a country, even here except for the southern border. And, it is only easy to get a false passport on the movies, not in real life.

    Then, today I was having lunch with my doctor group when they indicated that their employers were requiring them to have an Ebola test. Why?? They don’t have symtoms, we are in the middle of what would be generously called the sticks, and the test is meaningless in the present clinical setting.

    Once agian, like all the other stuff in the last 6 years, our leader and his group are screwing up and exposing us to harm.

  6. Jeffery says:

    Another infamous “Teach’s Reaches”. As is almost always the case, conservatives do not understand what is and isn’t racism. Selecting only Muslim men for searching is racist. Screening everyone who gets on an airplane is not. Auditing only white men is racist. Randomly auditing taxpayers is not.

  7. gitarcarver says:

    As is almost always the case, conservatives do not understand what is and isn’t racism. Selecting only Muslim men for searching is racist.

    Really?

    I didn’t realize that Islam was a “race.”

    And you want to say that conservatives don’t know what “racism” is and is not?

  8. david7134 says:

    Jeff,
    Yet wrong again. Screening everyone is wasteful, increases CO2 in the atmosphere and is bad for the environment. Plus, it is actually against the Constitution. Now what is covered under the Constitution is selectively targeting those that would cause us harm, and it ain’t Arab men, it is Muslims. Yes, I know freedom of religion, but Islam in not a religion as much as it is a political movement. I work with many Indian (Asian). They think that our screening procedures are laughable as they are not, I repeat not, targeted. They feel that they should be in any logical system. And, white men are targeted in reviews of financial irregularities. It is clear that you are suffering from the same level of ignorance as john.

Bad Behavior has blocked 7433 access attempts in the last 7 days.