Monday, October 13, 2014

Why Hasn't Obama Nationally Addressed Ebola Safety Measures?

The Ebola virus has already claimed thousands of lives in West Africa. Recently, a health worker from Liberia who had Ebola entered the United States with the virus. A major threat to national security, the patient was locked down in the Dallas Hospital. Unfortunately, a nurse tending the patient somehow contracted Ebola, the first contraction case in the United states.

Now that the virus is in the U.S., Obama needs to act now and address the Ebola Virus nationally. I feel that Obama has underplayed the risk of Ebola entering the United States.  Obama should've put flight restrictions before there was already a case, or two, in the United States. U.S. Senator Rand Paul agrees, saying “It’s a mistake. A big mistake to underestimate the potential for problems worldwide.”
Now we can all agree there may be some politics behind a Republican Senator's criticism on the Obama Administration, but aren't there some politics behind Obama's approach to the coverage of Ebola?  I mean, when there are thousands of people dying in another country of this disease, and the CDC is simultaneously saying "Ebola is not spread through casual contact; therefore, the risk of an outbreak in the U.S. is very low. ", isn't there a discrepancy: Why can't they contain it in Africa then?

The Obama Administration might be downplaying the coverage of this virus in order to keep U.S. citizens calm. Meanwhile, CDC workers quietly enter the largest airports in an effort to combat the possible entrance of the Ebola virus that could hop off almost any plane. I can't really find much evidence for such intentions, but think about thermonuclear war in the Cold War era. When thermonuclear war was imminent, the U.S. government told its citizens to just get under a table and "Duck and Cover":

In other words, the government was telling everyone that they would be okay, when in reality they would all die in the event of a nuclear bomb hitting the U.S.

So like the Cold War era "Duck and Cover" campaign, could Obama be directing the CDC to downplay the risk of an outbreak in order to calm down the population? I mean, in the first case of contraction in the United States, we don't even know how the virus was transmitted. The CDC said that there was a "breach in protocol", but do we really know if that's the case? What if the CDC is covering up the whole incident? What if  there was no known cause of transmission, wouldn't that make the public a lot more afraid than if they said there was a "breach in protocol"? There may not be a lot of evidence for these conspiracy theory like accusations, but if people all fell for "Bert the Turtle", then who knows what lies we could be believing in now? That's why Obama needs to address Ebola and specifically how he plans to stop its entry/spread in the United States.

Do you guys agree with my thoughts? Is it reasonable to doubt the CDC?


  1. Hi, David.

    I think you linking the Ebola outbreak to "Duck and Cover" is quite masterful! But I would be very cautious regarding the conclusions you have drawn. Meaning, I worry that your post comes off like a conspiracy theory rather than writing supported by hard evidence.

    We know exactly how Ebola is transmitted. It's not a new disease. Asking "[w]hy can't they contain it in Africa then?" demonstrates a lack of understanding of the culture and the lack of resources and education in those countries.

    I do agree with you on one point: "Obama has underplayed the risk of Ebola". For good reason. And now, due to political pressure, he's going to make Americans panic for no good reason, unfortunately.

    1. Mr. Bolos,
      Sorry I knew that in less developed countries their medical knowledge is insufficient to contain the virus and I shouldn't have written that, I mean my own quote practically destroyed my argument there. I was just pulling a cable news tactic and trying to incite fear into the audience to make the article more interesting. Am I allowed to write with intent to evoke feelings such as fear or outrage? Is that a part of blogging?

    2. *medical training* is insufficient to appropriately deal with the virus