Thanks ScanIAm for providing a bit of utter hilarity in these dark times of Ebola, ISIS and winter coming.
So you accuse me of taking your quote out of context... but actually failed to provide context then or not. Sure you quoted jinx both times, neither of you specified which news reports or who was being reported on... so I did.
How is that out of context?
Oh right! Bringing some possible context to a discussion means implicitly taking all other statements out of context... that must be it, right?
More so, I seem to recall even the CDC director saying that they would be able to prevent a spread from Duncan. Never mind the fact that when the first of two nurses tested positive... he went on to blame her for a breach in protocol.
I have and continue to cite either specific articles or specific cases... you've done neither.
Remind me now... who is pulling a strawman?
Now, please show me where a CDC official ever stated any of that. Or you could just slither back to FreeRepublic.com and look for more reasons why Obummer beat Liberty to death with a copy of Das Kapital.
Again, here we see you engaging in strawman tactics as I have not cited any of those sites or arguments you seem to be implying I read. Odd how I'm not telling you to back to the Daily Kos or Pravda... it's almost as if I'm discussing the topic at hand.
More so, did you note JohnAskew's comment from earlier today? It is one that has been of concern of many in the medical arena, the fact that Ebola transmission isn't fully understood and that it may spread easier than previously believed.
If you want to limit sources to just the CDC then that is your right to shield yourself from other perhaps contradictory or even more correct information. That's how science tends to work, various studies put forward and examined before some being accepted and others discounted... if you wish to view the CDC as the source of all medical truth in the country that is your right... but I think you'll eventually find it a rather limited one.
Or would you care to cite specifics facts or articles? Of course not.