Looking ahead: Zika's influence on the 2016 Presidential Election, this summer & fall...

Full disclosure: I am someone who believes there is, in fact, a shadow network functioning as a global government, which borrows heavily from the Democratic and Republican parties. Together these two parties drive our entire federal government and can potentially manipulate anything the federal government oversees.

While there are facets of the global government, like the UN and the WHO — which are obvious -- there are, however, tentacles that I believe are meant to be ‘secret.’ I am confident those tentacles extend deeply into both major parties and, therefore, into our federal government at the highest levels.

The evidence, to me, says it’s so.

So, today when I noticed that the director-general of the WHO made the following statement, a red flag went up:

Despite increasing worries about the Zika outbreak, an international health official says the 2016 Summer Olympics should not be postponed, canceled or moved from Rio de Janeiro.

Margaret Chan, director-general of the World Health Organization, addressed the issue at a Tuesday briefing in Geneva.

"You don't want to bring a standstill to the world's movement of people," Chan was quoted as saying by the Associated Press. "This is all about risk assessment and risk management."

Zika virus should not stop Olympics in Rio de Janeiro, health official says


Now, I am not arguing that people should succumb to fear and stop their lives — Ms. Chan may have a fair point — but I am surprised that someone supposedly concerned with the world’s health would take such a cavalier position. Considering the projection of how far Zika will spread this summer and considering the very serious effects of Zika continually being discovered, I found her opinion to be out of place.

Googling other news about Zika, I came across many headlines/articles, which also sent up red flags. Apparently, Congressional republicans have been “neglecting” the Zika issue, this week, and many major media outlets are seizing on the 'story:'

It’s been three months since the White House, working in coordination with the CDC and public-health experts, first sent Congress a $1.9 billion emergency budget request to address the Zika virus threat. The Republican majority has spent every week since looking for an excuse to do nothing.
 
The good news is, House GOP leaders unveiled their proposal yesterday to address the emergency. The bad news is, the Republican bill is practically a punch-line to a bad joke. The Hill reported:

House Republicans on Monday introduced a bill to provide $622 million in additional funding to fight the Zika virus this year.
 
The measure is fully paid for, in part by shifting over unspent money that was intended to fight Ebola, the House Appropriations Committee said.  The House is likely to vote on the bill, which would provide a fraction of the $1.9 billion requested by the White House, this week.
Keep in mind, Senate Republicans endorsed a $1.1 billion emergency package last week, which falls far short of what the administration and public-health experts believe is necessary. But the House GOP sees that bill as too generous, so Republicans in the lower chamber cut that total roughly in half.
 
Worse, note the trajectory of the debate. Soon after the White House made the case for the $1.9 billion Zika response, House Republicans said the administration should simply redirect $600 million that had been allocated to combat Ebola. The trouble, of course, is that this money (a) is far short of the $1.9 billion needed, and (b) is still being used to address Ebola in West Africa.
 
That was a month ago. Yesterday, House Republicans, after weeks of careful deliberation and analysis, introduced legislation to push the same discredited idea.
 
In other words, the more serious the Zika threat becomes, the less serious GOP lawmakers are about addressing it.

Congressional Republicans balk at taking Zika threat seriously

So, while Ms. Chan might have made an understandably fair enough point — if she didn’t work for the WHO, that is — I can’t help but wonder if we aren’t being set up for a major election issue, this summer and fall.

I do believe that these two horrible parties that run the federal government, along with the WHO, would compromise the world’s health in order to help deliver a presidential victory to a global government agenda-friendly candidate.

I am interested in other opinions, but I also just wanted to put it on your radar. Hindsight isn’t particularly helpful when it comes to political shenanigans because most people believe they actually witness things 'accidentally' unfold in real time.

I still have yet to see anything to suggest that Zika is anything other than a trumped up scare for everyone except women who are pregnant, and then it's scary for the unborn.

I have yet to see anything that suggests it is something you get and do not become immune to or that it mutates and will re-infect with new strains year after year making it more than a one time crisis with sporadic issues afterward once it becomes endemic.

Once this first wave is past, most of us will get it in childhood and become immune making it a moot point for the issues of pregnancy unless there are things about it no one has told anyone yet.

In short, this is less scary than Ebola. It does not kill. The odds of anyone catching it and suffering serious complications are less then you have with West Nile, and most of us won't even know we've had it when we do get it.

originally posted by: ketsuko
I still have yet to see anything to suggest that Zika is anything other than a trumped up scare for everyone except women who are pregnant, and then it's scary for the unborn.

I have yet to see anything that suggests it is something you get and do not become immune to or that it mutates and will re-infect with new strains year after year making it more than a one time crisis with sporadic issues afterward once it becomes endemic.

Once this first wave is past, most of us will get it in childhood and become immune making it a moot point for the issues of pregnancy unless there are things about it no one has told anyone yet.

In short, this is less scary than Ebola. It does not kill. The odds of anyone catching it and suffering serious complications are less then you have with West Nile, and most of us won't even know we've had it when we do get it.

Ha, well I don't think any of that would prevent Zika from being exploited for the election.

If there's an outbreak in the U.S., there will be fearmongering and I am certain repubulicans/conservatives will get the blame.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

To be honest I have to agree with ketsuko.

Zika virus, for most people, is not particularly hazardous.

Many people who contract the virus will not get sick

Source Here, LA Times

In Australia we already have Dengue fever, Australian encephalitis, Ross River virus disease and Barmah Forerst virus disease, Murray Valley encephalitis virus or Kunjin virus. All of these have the potential to really make a mess of a person, but in another person symptoms never become observable.

Zika virus is no different as far as I can tell and so normal precautions to prevent mosquito bites should be a sufficient defense.

Kind Regards
Myselfaswell

originally posted by: myselfaswell
a reply to: MotherMayEye

To be honest I have to agree with ketsuko.

Zika virus, for most people, is not particularly hazardous.

It doesn't really matter if it is or isn't. That's not the point.

Regardless of the truth about Zika, the media will continue to fearmonger. And it is looking like it will be to the detriment of republicans/conservative if there is any outbreak after the Olympics.

Do you think the media/CDC will suddenly say, "Whoops! Everyone was wrong. Zika doesn't cause microcephaly or guillain-barré syndrome?"

Zika? Oh, you mean Ebola's convenient replacement this year!
Oh ok, gotcha..

a reply to: EternalShadow

Yep. Just in time for the 2016 election...and perhaps a sharp rise in worldwide cases from the Rio Summer Olympics, will proceed it.

*AGAIN* It does not matter how dangerous Zika really is, it only matters how dangerous the media is reporting it is.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Oh, I don't think those are wrong. Zika likely does have something to do with microcephaly and it can cause Guillan-Barre. But the first is something preventable if you avoid getting pregnant until you have had the disease, and the second is a very rare complication that occurs with other illnesses too. So it's not like Zika has opened up entirely new and terrible vistas with that one.

If Zika becoems the scourge they predict, most women who want to get pregnant should have gotten it by the time the summer ends and should be cleared to proceed with their plans soon enough with a small delay. It's the virus, not it's antibodies that causes the potential problems with pregnancy.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Oh, I don't think those are wrong. Zika likely does have something to do with microcephaly and it can cause Guillan-Barre. But the first is something preventable if you avoid getting pregnant until you have had the disease, and the second is a very rare complication that occurs with other illnesses too. So it's not like Zika has opened up entirely new and terrible vistas with that one.

If Zika becoems the scourge they predict, most women who want to get pregnant should have gotten it by the time the summer ends and should be cleared to proceed with their plans soon enough with a small delay. It's the virus, not it's antibodies that causes the potential problems with pregnancy.

I can appreciate your thoughts on that. I personally have a lot of skepticism about about the entire issue. Part of that is the *use* being made of it.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

That I don't disagree with. The media seems to need their plague du jour. It just happens that last year's Ebola was a legitimate concern mostly due to its high mortality and medical science's complete impotence against it more than anything else. That and given our country's own 100% lack of any effective quarantine response, we should all thank out lucky stars and whatever gods we pray to that it wasn't airborne the way the fear-mongering whispered.

We'd be decimated or dead if it had been.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

If anyone wonders about the quality & extent of fearmongering that's actually being generated...search thebump forums and babycenter forums with the keyword 'Zika.'

You will find lengthy threads entitled things, like, "ANOTHER Zika Thread." I found the comments very interesting and telling to read.

ETA: One woman was talking about cancelling a trip to CONNECTICUT because of Zika!

a reply to: MotherMayEye

People have no basic understanding of disease ... It's sad. I'd blame the media, but the truth is that the reporters who write the stories likely don't have much better understanding of it.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Ok, I'll bite on your theory, I'll take it a bit further, they introduce this virus to the populace, let it spread globally, like it is. Now somewhere along the lines it will mutate or mix with something that has already been released on the public.

Then we will start to see birthrates drop, less people having babies out of fear or maybe the people are becoming sterile.
After all, what better way to help with the war on population management. A smaller populace is easy to manage.

Silent, quiet, and meanwhile lets make billions on selling drugs to help combat it?

originally posted by: Skorpy
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Ok, I'll bite on your theory, I'll take it a bit further, they introduce this virus to the populace, let it spread globally, like it is. Now somewhere along the lines it will mutate or mix with something that has already been released on the public.

Then we will start to see birthrates drop, less people having babies out of fear or maybe the people are becoming sterile.
After all, what better way to help with the war on population management. A smaller populace is easy to manage.

Silent, quiet, and meanwhile lets make billions on selling drugs to help combat it?

Are you asking me if this is what I think is going to happen?

No, I do not.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

I don't know about Zika being made into a political issue capable of affecting the election. I just can't see it:

A) Getting a perception of being a big enough deal in the US for people to care much.

B) Being blamed specifically on one political party over the other.

I have doubts as to whether Zika itself is the problem, the larvicide dumped in the water used to combat the mosquitos, or new medications/vaccines which haven't been properly tested. What I do know is that the threat of pervasive microencephaly could be one hell of a population control mechanism, regardless of the actual cause.

a reply to: dogstar23

We had so many crises hit just before the 2008 election that were blamed on republicans and Bush.

It's a tried and true tactic in swaying public opinion.

I feel Zika is on a definite course to help shape the election. Not a doubt in my mind.

I believe you made a very valid point here. Overall it won't matter the truth of what zika is, it will just matter how it will be played for this political season. Personally- not to bring in an argument- I can see it used for influencing the whole anti immigration debate.

It may not only help with the election shaping, but also if the media hypes it up even more we may also have less people traveling in fear of contracting it. There are plenty of obstacles one has to go through to travel as it is. CT wise maybe it's call for a more controlled population.

originally posted by: dreamingawake
Personally- not to bring in an argument- I can see it used for influencing the whole anti immigration debate.

Interesting thought!