Reflections From a Murky Pond

It is easy to think of the evils of America’s domestic enemies, the Liberal, Progressives, and their minority tenants, to be solely or primarily assaults upon American citizens’ natural right to individual liberty. Yet, while they do repeatedly attack some our our Divinely ordained individual rights, mostly those that could be disruptive, e.g., those of defense and speech, these Leftist enemies far more often attack American communities and various and sundry collective endeavors. This is because our domestic enemies are devoutly loyal and faithful to their own collective, the State.

For this reason the Liberal and Progressives are not opposed to individual liberty because most individual liberties, far from being the effect of emancipation from the power of the State, are, in point of fact, a key precondition of the State’s power. In the twisted minds of the Left the State must be the penultimate, preferably only, collective agency. They seek a collective tyranny with the state operating in a tyrannical manner to quash any other collective associations.

They do not sek to wage war against the individual; they wage their war against those non-coercive, intermediate institutions which claim the individual’s allegiance: the family, the church, the school, business, and so on and so forth. The Liberals and Progressives demand that an individual be wedded exclusively to the State as an exclusive community, and offer him a certain limited range of freedom in exchange. It is not individual liberty that these would-be tyrannts oppose, but competitors to their authority that they find utterly unacceptable. They do not mind individual freedom; they only mind competitors to the allegiance they require of men. They are willing to give men a long leash, so as long as they and they alone are grasping the other end.

In other words, despite State not being a community, our domestic enemies demand that the State be the only community that is allowed. They know that when people’s lives, hopes, and aspirations are severed from family, church, and vocation, they are an easy prey for the State.

If you’re lucky, you’ve no idea who or what Ebola-Chan is, though now your luck has taken a turn for the odd.

Ummm…We Love You, Ebola-Chan?

It’s a simple but sad truth that sometimes you just have to go ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ so that you don’t go all (ノ °益°)ノ.

Gentlemen – and some number of you ladies – it’s cold, flu, and ebola season in the US.

The best course of action I can prescribe for you is to go to the doctor’s for a check-up. The right doc can relieve all your ills and stresses. 😛

It’s almost 2014’s Halloween and I’m sure that a lot of children are looking forward to getting dressed up in costumes to celebrate.

Scary Halloween Costumes For 2014

For those kids both looking for scary costumes and willing to cooperate, this might be the best costume choice for Halloween 2014. 😉

I’ve already asked the question of whether or not Obama wanted ebola to strike the US. Now, watching the progress of ebola within America, another question comes to my mind. Did Obama and his CDC engage in “medical experimentation” in their handling of the late Thomas Duncan’s fatal and communicable illness.

This is more plausible than one might first believe.

It all comes down to the evidence presented by how Thomas Duncan’s case of ebola was handled.

Why wasn’t Mr. Duncan immediately moved to Emory Hospital, one of the best hospitals in the world for dealing with diseases such as ebola and attached to the CDC? It’s where all or most of the infected medical personnel from Africa have been sent. Barring that, why were the CDC largely uninvolved in the treatment of Mr. Duncan? Why instead were local civilian medical personnel put in charge of it with only CDC-approved protocols for them to follow?

Why, after those protocols were proven to be ineffective, resulting in the infection of one of his nurses, Nina Pham, were CDC staff not subject to emergency briefings reenforcing quarantine and containment procedures for other possibly infected Dallas medical personnel?

The only two answers I can come up with are gross negligence or a planned non-response. While normally I’m among the first to chalk up such things to negligence and/or incompetence, the White House’s and their CDC’s reaction really fits the model for an experiment.

So I have to ask if Obama and his CDC deliberately refused to respond to this initial ebola case in the US as a true emergency requiring the mobilization of CDC resources as a means of testing the in-place procedures and biological disaster response capabilities already in use. After all, various professionals have warned us for over a decade that our response and containment capabilities were lacking and this would be an effective “live fire” exercise to prove or disprove those predictions.

I admit though that it’d be horrendously ironic if this is the case – as it very well might be – since it mean the Black POTUS engaging in “medical experimentation” upon another Black man.