The recent flurry of news regarding Andrew Speaker, aka "TB Andy" leave you scratching your head trying to sort out the fly specks from the pepper. This story has garnered a lot of interest and raised a number of questions. The link provides a photo of Diane Sawyer speaking with a mask wearing Andrew Speaker, which makes you question whether it is 'sweeps week' in TV-land or there really is a huge interest in the story.
TB Andy defends himself saying he was really never told he 'could not fly or was a danger to others.' But mostly, he felt so good he didn't believe he could be a threat and decided to go on his honeymoon anyway. Call it the Typhoid Mary defense, who also claimed she could not be the source of the disease that was killing people in the early 1900s.
His interview with Sawyer includes the tidbit that his actions were justified because the US government should have paid his way back from Europe in a chartered aircraft. He also feared he would die if he remained in Europe (despite all that 'wonderful' socialized medicine there). Yep, it looks like the theory of 'being owed' by the government and refusing responsibility for one's own actions has even reached into the mentality of our effete intellectual judicial system members too. Should we call this ACLU Syndrome?
Some have suggested his vacation in Europe and exposing of hundreds to TB was criminal. One called him "Public Enemy #2," right behind Osama bin Laden adding:
I'm not going to speculate on the motivation or personality of this guy. Lots of folks have already done that. There is little question that not a one of them will be allowed to be empaneled on any jury that will hear the facts of the doubtless rain of lawsuits headed toward Mr. Speaker.
Am I the only one who finds it very curious that Mr. Speaker's new father-in-law works for CDC and is considered an expert on infectious TB? What a coincidence eh? It makes you wonder where TB Andy got his exposure to this very infectious form of tuberculosis in the first place! Who will end up being the true "Patient Zero"? It may get even more interesting yet. Let me be the first to suggest the next conspiracy theory! It will suggest that Andrew Speaker was deliberately infected by the CDC and misled to travel so the CDC could test it's theories of infectious diseases and get more funding from Washington. Oh heck, lets blame the CIA too who ... lets see ... wanted to prove that the Department of Homeland Security was a joke and the CIA should get funding now going to DHS? I have not read it yet, but trust me, it will show up on some "Bush Knew" website any day now.
The treatment in the press and in the blogosphere seems to universally agree that TB Andy was irresponsible. The real question is going to come down to whether he was really informed of the risk he posed to others. It is hard to fathom that his new father-in-law did not give him a objective and realistic appraisal of his condition and risk to others. It is even more hard to imagine letting one's newly married daughter fly off with a dangerous TB source if Speaker was really a risk to others. It also drives the question whether the health risk this guy posed was based upon science or the CDC was basing it on covering it's butt - and we all know no government agency would do that right? But the reported action by the father in law does not pass the 'duh' test when you look at his personal or professional actions in this case.
While lots of folks suggest we quarantine this guy and throw away the key, I suggest we stay tuned in and let this play out. Put away the pitchforks and douse the bonfires. There is going to be lots of fault, and certainly systemic failures surface as new facts surface. In the long run, TB Andy may have done us a favor by reminding us that government 'protecting' us is a joke. The real lesson is that personal responsibility seems to have been lacking here. That is what the infection of government really kills in each of us.
TB Andy defends himself saying he was really never told he 'could not fly or was a danger to others.' But mostly, he felt so good he didn't believe he could be a threat and decided to go on his honeymoon anyway. Call it the Typhoid Mary defense, who also claimed she could not be the source of the disease that was killing people in the early 1900s.
His interview with Sawyer includes the tidbit that his actions were justified because the US government should have paid his way back from Europe in a chartered aircraft. He also feared he would die if he remained in Europe (despite all that 'wonderful' socialized medicine there). Yep, it looks like the theory of 'being owed' by the government and refusing responsibility for one's own actions has even reached into the mentality of our effete intellectual judicial system members too. Should we call this ACLU Syndrome?
Some have suggested his vacation in Europe and exposing of hundreds to TB was criminal. One called him "Public Enemy #2," right behind Osama bin Laden adding:
This guy is an immature, selfish, self-absorbed, narcissistic MENACE to SOCIETY and a piece of ****. Lock him up and throw away the key.Its easy not to like the guy, after all, he is a lawyer! One blogger suggested he is an "Adam Henry" which is a wonderfully pejorative description and points out his reentry into the US is but another classic failure by government to protect our borders. As Michelle Malkin points out, this incident pretty much makes a mockery of the effectiveness of the no-fly list. Another blogger who cut him no slack, leaves little doubt she believes this Naval Academy graduate - turned lawyer is arrogant, self-centered and appears to have the idea that 'rules' are made for the 'little people,' not guys like him. Essentially, what she describes sounds an awful lot like a full blown sociopath, which seems to be a rather common affliction among lawyers!
I can't get a lot of compassion going for this vermin.
I'm not going to speculate on the motivation or personality of this guy. Lots of folks have already done that. There is little question that not a one of them will be allowed to be empaneled on any jury that will hear the facts of the doubtless rain of lawsuits headed toward Mr. Speaker.
Am I the only one who finds it very curious that Mr. Speaker's new father-in-law works for CDC and is considered an expert on infectious TB? What a coincidence eh? It makes you wonder where TB Andy got his exposure to this very infectious form of tuberculosis in the first place! Who will end up being the true "Patient Zero"? It may get even more interesting yet. Let me be the first to suggest the next conspiracy theory! It will suggest that Andrew Speaker was deliberately infected by the CDC and misled to travel so the CDC could test it's theories of infectious diseases and get more funding from Washington. Oh heck, lets blame the CIA too who ... lets see ... wanted to prove that the Department of Homeland Security was a joke and the CIA should get funding now going to DHS? I have not read it yet, but trust me, it will show up on some "Bush Knew" website any day now.
The treatment in the press and in the blogosphere seems to universally agree that TB Andy was irresponsible. The real question is going to come down to whether he was really informed of the risk he posed to others. It is hard to fathom that his new father-in-law did not give him a objective and realistic appraisal of his condition and risk to others. It is even more hard to imagine letting one's newly married daughter fly off with a dangerous TB source if Speaker was really a risk to others. It also drives the question whether the health risk this guy posed was based upon science or the CDC was basing it on covering it's butt - and we all know no government agency would do that right? But the reported action by the father in law does not pass the 'duh' test when you look at his personal or professional actions in this case.
While lots of folks suggest we quarantine this guy and throw away the key, I suggest we stay tuned in and let this play out. Put away the pitchforks and douse the bonfires. There is going to be lots of fault, and certainly systemic failures surface as new facts surface. In the long run, TB Andy may have done us a favor by reminding us that government 'protecting' us is a joke. The real lesson is that personal responsibility seems to have been lacking here. That is what the infection of government really kills in each of us.
1 comments:
Right on!!
Post a Comment