[CFrance]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

WHY does it seem that people who are left of center in their views seem to pooh pooh the risk here? Are they defending the party in office or WHAT????

I don't think anyone left of center is pooh-poohing the risk of ebola. I think we are reacting to the right-of-center people who are ready to throttle anyone crossing the border or who have absolutely no faith in ANYONE in government to do ANYTHING right, or who think such simplistic measures of stopping air flights is going to do any good when people who are infected can easily find ways to enter the country.

And I'm surprised, frankly, that the mods are not screaming about all the political statements that have been going on.

But please don't make a blanket statement about left-of-center people not believing in the risk. I think you are missing the point of how we feel. Some of the comments on this thread are very strong about certain aspects.

[graciegirl]

[

Why did the last surgeon general step down?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3431270.html
I can't find her background, does anyone know?

Here is what the former surgeon general has to say about the Ebola crisis;
http://www.baynews9.com/content/news...eon_gener.html

Background of attorney general under George Bush;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonia_Novello

[sunnyatlast]

John Goss, Czar of Asian Carp in the Great Lakes

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/...kes-asian-carp

[JB in TV]

Interesting and informative article about Ebola protection:

I'm a Hazmat-Trained Hospital Worker: Here's What No One Is Telling You About Ebola | Abby Norman

[handyman]

Not so scary

to me I like Stephen King

[TNLAKEPANDA]

Read all about our new Czar.... Totally NOT qualified. I don't think our leader gets it. Also heard a roomer that he is thinking of bringing infected people to our country for treatment.


White House Ebola Czar Was 'Key Player' In Solyndra Debacle | The Daily Caller

[michaelkir]

1 CASE, the CDC could not even control one case. We all saw it coming for the last YEAR and they couldn't do it. They knew or should have known it was coming. What happens if there are 10 cases, 1,000 cases 10,000. How bad will it be.
CDC, do your job, please! For all those who are excusing the CDC, there is no excuse for not controlling just one case when we knew it was on the way.

[billethkid]

Let's just wait and see how long it takes for this new czar to get back to the American people with any meaningful information.

He reports to Rice.....remember the Benghazzi Rice who repeatedly professed a conjured up story about Benghazzi.....and she is going to let this new cazar present any rock the boat information to ANYBODY.

I think the folks in Washington could care less about logic and external optics or concerns of we the people.

I am sure Obama now feels he has addressed the ebola problem because he has taken action.....he appointed a czar.....oooppppsss....ANOTHER czar. Mission accomplished.

Does anybody recall anything all the other czars accomplished?

In Washington it seems to me that as long as an issued is discussed and a czar is appointed the given issue has been addressed. The track record easily supports this conclusion.

We the people are too short on memory and easy to fool!

[quirky3]

Originally Posted by CFrance

I don't think anyone left of center is pooh-poohing the risk of ebola. I think we are reacting to the right-of-center people who are ready to throttle anyone crossing the border or who have absolutely no faith in ANYONE in government to do ANYTHING right, or who think such simplistic measures of stopping air flights is going to do any good when people who are infected can easily find ways to enter the country.

And I'm surprised, frankly, that the mods are not screaming about all the political statements that have been going on.

But please don't make a blanket statement about left-of-center people not believing in the risk. I think you are missing the point of how we feel. Some of the comments on this thread are very strong about certain aspects.

Absolutely! I couldn't have said it better myself!

[TexaninVA]

Originally Posted by CFrance

I don't think anyone left of center is pooh-poohing the risk of ebola. I think we are reacting to the right-of-center people who are ready to throttle anyone crossing the border or who have absolutely no faith in ANYONE in government to do ANYTHING right, or who think such simplistic measures of stopping air flights is going to do any good when people who are infected can easily find ways to enter the country.

And I'm surprised, frankly, that the mods are not screaming about all the political statements that have been going on.

But please don't make a blanket statement about left-of-center people not believing in the risk. I think you are missing the point of how we feel. Some of the comments on this thread are very strong about certain aspects.

Please explain your reasoning for saying “stopping air flights” (actually, preventing people with passports/visas from Ebola stricken countries from entering the US) is “simplistic.”

Rather than simplistic, I say it’s a “simple” solution per the KISS principle, and it will work. Numerous African countries, ironically, have already done that. It’s a hollow argument to say people will simply go elsewhere to get in. They still have to cross a border, and show a passport to get on a plane etc. Not saying it’s impossible to do, but logically it will obviously be harder, and thus the number of people gaining entry will most certainly go down—which is the objective. Anyway, what’s your prescription for a “non-simplistic” and presumably more enlightened approach?

With regards to “throttling anyone who crosses the border” please read my post on General Kelly’s “Katie Bar the Door Scenario” and reply to let us know what actions you would take to protect the US if your were in charge. I do not think you are pooh-pooing the Ebola risk, but we still don’t know what you would do to reduce the risk. Do you agree that stopping Ebola infected illegals from crossing the border is critical, and should be done by any means necessary, including the use of deadly force if required?

[TexaninVA]

Originally Posted by janmcn

Who would you appoint if you wanted someone to coordinate all the government agencies involved? Who would you appoint if you wanted to cut through all of the government red-tape? A physician or a businessman would not be able to do this, but a political operative is a perfect choice.

BTW: if you want to tweet the president some of your ideas, his twitter handle is @barackobama (very easy to remember).

First of all, I admire your loyal attempt to defend the indefensible.

Second of all, I can tell by your question (“…who would you appoint”) either you have never worked in Washington or have never been in charge of a very large organization …ie military, business, government etc.

To answer your question -- I would not appoint anyone! I would use the current organization for which, were I President, responsible for and make them produce results, not just soothing words. I would direct the senior cabinet officer official, in this case HHS, to own the problem, and further direct Dod and others in the USG to work in supporting roles to HHS. If they didn’t get results over time, I would fire them, and keep firing them, until I found someone who could solve it. That’s the way the system should work. However, please note if you appoint competent Cabinet officers in the first place, you actually don’t have to fire anyone because guess what … they can actually do what they were hired to do.

You should also be aware of other factors. In Washington, people with political backgrounds who are put in charge of a problem are not taken seriously unless they have two elements of organizational power … power to promote/demote, and budget power. Without that, people will nod, sometimes try to help the ‘czar’ but essentially say “it’s the czar’s problem.” Plus they all know what’s going on, and what kind of problem (ie political) the new czar is really supposed to solve. His true mission is not to solve the Ebola medical problem unfortunately.

There’s another way to quickly deduce that this appointment is essentially a means to divert the bad stream of recent PR surround Ebola. Mr. Klain will be on the job for six months or so (ie career people will thus ignore him) and he reports to two Staff Officers! This is crazy in its own right. So, not only does he not control budget or have any other power, he is not even a direct report to POTUS. Plus, he reports to two bosses, both White House homeland security adviser Lisa Monaco and National Security Adviser Susan Rice, which means neither one of them is really accountable for results either. Mr. Klain will also likely not be taken seriously by the DoD nor HHS NIH, CDC, etc. Everyone will be polite, attend meetings and seem to help of course, but in reality … but nothing much of substance will happen because of Mr. Klain.

Other than that, it was an inspired appointment.

Thanks too for the easy to remember twitter handle … I will be submitting a simple recommendation.

[TexaninVA]

Originally Posted by sunnyatlast

It's a matter of faith.

I think there’s an element of truth in what you say. For some (ie not all) it is indeed a matter of secular faith even if they don’t recognize it as such. Thus, given that heresy is a sin in any religion, it’s understandable why some will reflexively defend the indefensible or, in some cases, defend what is plainly illogical (eg failure to ban entry temporarily for those from infected West African countries etc)

[sunnyatlast]

Originally Posted by billethkid

Let's just wait and see how long it takes for this new czar to get back to the American people with any meaningful information.

He reports to Rice.....remember the Benghazzi Rice who repeatedly professed a conjured up story about Benghazzi.....and she is going to let this new cazar present any rock the boat information to ANYBODY.

I think the folks in Washington could care less about logic and external optics or concerns of we the people.

I am sure Obama now feels he has addressed the ebola problem because he has taken action.....he appointed a czar.....oooppppsss....ANOTHER czar. Mission accomplished.

Does anybody recall anything all the other czars accomplished?

In Washington it seems to me that as long as an issued is discussed and a czar is appointed the given issue has been addressed. The track record easily supports this conclusion.

We the people are too short on memory and easy to fool!

The singular job of this "czar" (monarch or prince) is to rein in and clench an iron-clad grip on all the well-informed employees in all the vast federal agencies, who know the inside story and try to go public…..out of fear for their/our safety, and they can no longer live with the deception being fed us.

The czar is now in place to stop their leaking, and to extinguish any disloyalty to the party-agenda talking points….talking points in which this czar's boss, Susan Rice, has already shown her mastery and loyalty to the agenda.

Janmcn already identified what this choice is--a "a political operative", and explained above how "a political operative is the perfect choice" for that very purpose:

"Who would you appoint if you wanted someone to coordinate all the government agencies involved? Who would you appoint if you wanted to cut through all of the government red-tape? A physician or a businessman would not be able to do this, but a political operative is a perfect choice."

[janmcn]

Originally Posted by TexaninVA

First of all, I admire your loyal attempt to defend the indefensible.

Second of all, I can tell by your question (“…who would you appoint”) either you have never worked in Washington or have never been in charge of a very large organization …ie military, business, government etc.

To answer your question -- I would not appoint anyone! I would use the current organization for which, were I President, responsible for and make them produce results, not just soothing words. I would direct the senior cabinet officer official, in this case HHS, to own the problem, and further direct Dod and others in the USG to work in supporting roles to HHS. If they didn’t get results over time, I would fire them, and keep firing them, until I found someone who could solve it. That’s the way the system should work. However, please note if you appoint competent Cabinet officers in the first place, you actually don’t have to fire anyone because guess what … they can actually do what they were hired to do.

You should also be aware of other factors. In Washington, people with political backgrounds who are put in charge of a problem are not taken seriously unless they have two elements of organizational power … power to promote/demote, and budget power. Without that, people will nod, sometimes try to help the ‘czar’ but essentially say “it’s the czar’s problem.” Plus they all know what’s going on, and what kind of problem (ie political) the new czar is really supposed to solve. His true mission is not to solve the Ebola medical problem unfortunately.

There’s another way to quickly deduce that this appointment is essentially a means to divert the bad stream of recent PR surround Ebola. Mr. Klain will be on the job for six months or so (ie career people will thus ignore him) and he reports to two Staff Officers! This is crazy in its own right. So, not only does he not control budget or have any other power, he is not even a direct report to POTUS. Plus, he reports to two bosses, both White House homeland security adviser Lisa Monaco and National Security Adviser Susan Rice, which means neither one of them is really accountable for results either. Mr. Klain will also likely not be taken seriously by the DoD nor HHS NIH, CDC, etc. Everyone will be polite, attend meetings and seem to help of course, but in reality … but nothing much of substance will happen because of Mr. Klain.

Other than that, it was an inspired appointment.

Thanks too for the easy to remember twitter handle … I will be submitting a simple recommendation.

Since this is not a cabinet appointment, President Obama can appoint whoever he wants without senate confirmation (I think that is correct). The opposing party can critique all they like. That's the beauty of free speech, but the fact remains the president's appointee will stay on the job.

[Sandtrap328]

While I am extremely concerned about carriers of Ebola entering the USA, I cannot see the US military being ordered to shoot to kill people coming across our northern or southern borders illegally. The illegal entrants would be unarmed most likely and I doubt if most of our soldiers would actually shoot an unarmed person walking toward them with their hands in the air - even if ordered to shoot.

I think the southern border should be cordoned off with concertina wire ASAP and National Guard be posted 24/7 - but after that, I am at losses for ideas.