Question US
Swine Flu: Conservatives Have Suggested the U.S. Should Close Its Borders Because of the Outbreak. Your take?
Grace W. Bush April 28, 2009 17:00:36
- 91 answers
- Read all 271 comments
- +10 raves
With new cases cropping up, the World Health Organization moves closer to declaring the swine flu outbreak a full-blown pandemic. With over 150 deaths in Mexico, 50 cases in the US (not fatal), and the swine flu spreading world wide -- many Conservatives suggest that closing the borders temporary is a step closer to the epidemic swine flu. What do you think?
Loading... 
Top Comment
-
Yes. The U.S. should close its borders until the swine flu is controlled.
I think the borders should always be closed...keep out drugs,terrorists,etc !View thread
SodaHead Hot Trends
No. Keep the borders open for now.
No. Keep the borders open for now.
Yes. The U.S. should close its borders until the swine flu is controlled.
Yes. The U.S. should close its borders until the swine flu is controlled.
Yes. The U.S. should close its borders until the swine flu is controlled.
In an article in the New York Times, as Obama has tried to do with Dictator run Countries and Terrorist Countries, Obama will negotiate and / or talk to the new Swine Flu Virus to see if he can come to terms with the Swine Flu's demands, "Our US Citizens life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness is expendable... We cannot afford to be discriminatory to any new forms of life... We must give the new Swine Flu Virus a chance to negotiate possible terms".
Yes. The U.S. should close its borders until the swine flu is controlled.
Yes. The U.S. should close its borders until the swine flu is controlled.
No. Keep the borders open for now.
No. Keep the borders open for now.
Yes. The U.S. should close its borders until the swine flu is controlled.
But hey - close the damn border anyway.
No. Keep the borders open for now.
This Swine Flu is THE BEST example of why we should NOT have nationalized healthcare in the USA!!!!!!!
My point wasn't that at all, I was merely saying it's idiotic to think it's much of a threat. And idiotic to close the borders because of an illness that wouldn't end up doing much harm.
THAT is the problem with nationalized/universal/social... healthcare. It SUCKS...so epidemics like these get out of control when they shouldn't.
Swine flu isn't an epidemic here, in fact, it's just as harmless as the regular flu. The only people likely to die from it are infants and the elderly and other such people with weaker immune systems. In Mexico it's a problem because they don't have the same medical resources, that's all.
It has absolutely nothing to do with universal health care, and universal health care is hardly the reason epidemics get out of hand. Blaming something like that on one thing doesn't work.
EDIT: And, honey, I don't get my news from the cartoons.
The people with money go to private doctors for a REASON. In Canada, in Mexico and in ALL other socialist countries.
You make assumptions, sweetheart, and that's just not a very good thing. You think only rich people deserve medical attention? Then I'm glad you think what I wrote was "absolute nonsense" because you are obviously a very selfish person, and not worth my time.
I am saying we don't need it from the government.
And I'm saying not everyone has enough money to pay privately, without the government's help, many people would not be able to afford medical attention, myself included. And here's the thing, it's not just lazy people with no jobs that have little money, no, it's people like me that work two jobs so they can pay for school and make rent every month that can't afford it. Just because a person works hard doesn't mean they have money, does that mean they deserve less? Does that mean their health doesn't matter? No, if you think that, you're a moron.
And, honey, from what you've written, it's quite evident you think people should pay their own way, there-by me thinking you're selfish is hardly a wrong assumption.
Oh, and sweetheart? I'm not the one being the ass here, you are.
However...charity should be a CHOICE...not an obligation. Most human beings are very giving...but try and take from them and they become selfish.
HUGE DIFFERENCE.
Try studying BEHAVIOR and then you might get it.
;)
People's charity would never cover the costs of the medical care that most people couldn't afford, and that's the truth. Most human beings aren't nearly as charitable by choice as you might think. Most don't give a shit, but at least here we figure we may as well pay slightly higher taxes so that everyone benefits, instead of just a few.
You are completely wrong. Look at ALL the charities we have and if we had more to give (if we paid less taxes) we would.
The number of charities hardly shows how generous a group of people or a society is.
Noooooooooo....Americans aren't giving at allllllll
*eyeroll*
You don't have free health care, or free food. Like I said, you don't even take care of your own people.
And the fact that you're rolling your eyes only shows an immaturity in you. Grow up.
Your stupidity alone is a joke.
Get a brain and then we will talk.
I'm not the one lacking in intelligence, honey.
Again....
DEAL WITH IT!
good night.
I'm not the one making an ass of myself, sweetheart. Nor am I the one spouting bullshit.
Now run along...yawn
This is about as much as you are going to get out of me. Get a clue. YOU ARE A WASTE OF MY TIME. GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION SUCKS AND IT IS NOT EFFECTIVE. PERIOD!!
'