atomic_fungus (atomic_fungus) wrote,

#4436: The Keystone Doctors Korps is at it again.

Enterovirus 68 is a recent import from Mexico, thanks to all the "unescorted minors" that have been showing up in the wake of Obama's stupid amnesty promises.

These "unaccompanied minors" have been sent to public schools, of course, where they infected a whole bunch of American children. Now we have kids who are having symptoms like those of polio from this virus.

...but of course they're all proles, and we have plenty of those, and nothing must stand in the way of the unrestricted immigration of Mexicans because they all vote Democrat, as instructed. (Even though they're not eligible to vote because, y'know, illegal alien and all. Keeping Voter ID laws off the books is not easy and you must thank the Democrats for that.) So, yeah, omelettes, eggs, yada yada, right?

So the Clown Doctors Corps has decided that you can, after all, get ebola from an infected person sneezing nearby which further means that the disease isn't as difficult to transmit as we have been told. Also there's that pesky fact that deposits of ebola-laden bodily fluids on various surfaces remain infectious for up to three weeks, which is why Dr. Dumbass' visit to a bowling alley meant the whole place had to be decontaminated.

Ebola can't be spread by air, sez CDC, but if someone with the disease sneezes and a droplet of their spume lands on a doorknob, it can remain infectious for most of a month.

Meanwhile the press continues to scoff at people who are rightly concerned about the lax and stupid policies our government has so far employed in containing the spread of ebola.

And plenty of the medical people who are at risk for infection and should remain indoors are arrogantly assuming that the rules don't apply to them. Like that stupid nurse, like Dr. Dumbass, these people just do what they want--and end up forcing other people to bear the costs of their arrogant stupidity, such as the unfortunate owner of the bowling alley that was contaminated by Dr. Dumbass.

The notion that civil liberties trump public health is laughable, but not all that surprising considering the climate of the times. Ask people of my parents' generation whether they thought it was more important--before the invention of vaccines--to contain the spread of polio or not to trample on the civil rights of people infected with polio. Further ask people what their reaction would be if it were the bubonic plague, rather than ebola, being spread by these idiots.

* * *

So by now I'm sure everyone has heard that the CEO of Apple, Tim Cook, decided to come out of the closet and broadcast to the entire world that he is a homosexual.

Steven Den Beste has about the same reaction I do.

As does Karl Denninger.

Okay--so first off I want to know what in the everlasting fuck any of this has to do with his suitability to function as CEO of Apple. Does it have any bearing whatsoever on his duties as CEO? Is there any practical consideration for which it makes any kind of difference whatsoever what his personal proclivities are?

I tell you what difference it makes: absolutely none whatsoever. There is no practical benefit to having a gay man as CEO of your company. (Evidence: most CEOs are either not gay, or at least do not identify as such in public.) A gay CEO is not inherently better at his job or more suited for it, not wiser nor smarter than a heterosexual CEO.

No, there is only one reason Tim Cook came out as gay: because it gets PC points for Apple. "Look, we're so progressive, we even have a gay CEO!"

As pointed out by one commentor at the article Steven linked:
I think it goes something like "we in the LGBT community want to be treated just like everybody else, which is why we need to hold press events and announce to everybody in the world that we are gay."
A stockholder in Apple shouldn't care about Tim Cook's sexuality; he should care about his effectiveness as CEO. But because Tim Cook's sexuality is irrelevant to that role, why is he publicizing it?

I further love the PC arguments against referring to heterosexuality as "the norm". If (as the PC folks argue) homosexuality is just as "normal" as heterosexuality, why is Tim Cook's annoucement such a big deal? Why don't these same people say, "Okay, shut up, Tim, because no one cares," eh?

It's precisely because homosexuality is abnormal that these people insist that it's such a great thing that Tim Cook came out.

* * *

Another intemperate thought:

If the election process for Presidents had not been altered, and the first runner up in the election became vice President--would Kennedy have been assassinated, since his VP would have been Richard M. Nixon, and Kennedy's assassination would have elevated Nixon to the Presidency?

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.