Artvoice: Buffalo's #1 Newsweekly
Home Blogs Web Features Calendar Listings Artvoice TV Real Estate Classifieds Contact

Cognitive Weppner Dissonance

The big news Tuesday afternoon was that the first case of Ebola was diagnosed Stateside, down in Texas. By the late afternoon, we knew that the afflicted man had flown from Liberia (a former American colony) to Texas to visit relatives. 

Around 4:45 pm, walking, talking insult to your intelligence Kathy Weppner tweeted and posted this to the Bookface

I enjoy the anti-vaxxer weighing in with his idiot opinion, but I actually can’t fault Weppner here. We should deal with it medically and not politicize a disease, and we should be ensuring that the disease is not spread. The CDC worked last night to remind people that you can only catch Ebola by coming into contact with the bodily fluids of someone who has the disease. 

Yet just 30 minutes later – at 5:16 pm – Weppner asked this question on social media: 

Wait a cotton-pickin’ minute. I thought we were supposed to deal with this medically, not politically! But here we are, worrying not about containing the spread of this virus, but how much it’s going to cost and whether the person is here “illegally”.  

I’m guessing the fact that the person had traveled to a place other than Ireland, they must be – according to Klownshoes Kathy – likely illegals. Of course, when someone flies to the United States from Liberia, they need to apply for a visa, their passport is checked prior to departure and their identity transmitted to the US authorities to ensure that they’re not on any list. Upon arrival, the traveler must go through passport control at the port of entry, as well as a customs check. Just like any of the other millions of travelers who come to the U.S. annually from non-visa-waiver countries. 

But, you know, all brown people are probably illegals.

Weppner also inadvertently makes the case for Obamacare or some other universal coverage construct – who’s going to pay?! Who knows? Who the hell cares? Who paid for the American volunteers in Africa who caught Ebola and were flown on private jets back to the States to get treatment? I don’t give a crap, and neither should you.  I’m just glad they’re ok. Likewise, I hope our Liberian visitor gets the medical care he needs so that he can enjoy his family and go home healthy and safe. One Ebola Liberian isn’t going to bankrupt the Republic. 

If the person was Texan and didn’t have insurance, that means they’re either in violation of the Affordable Care Act’s coverage mandate, and possibly that they fell into the gap left by indictee-cum-Texas Governor Rick Perry’s refusal to expand Medicaid in the U.S. State with the lowest rate of people with health insurance. Texas refused federal money to ensure that people who make too much for Medicaid, but too much for Obamacare subsidies to render private insurance affordable for their incomes. It was a deliberate, political choice to do harm to the most vulnerable people in Texas society. Perry is the person who was feted last night by local thug Carl Paladino and the tone-deaf Erie County Republicans and fusion Conservatives. 

So, yes, Kathy – we should treat the Ebola patient with medical care, and not politicize it at all. 

It’s high time you asked Thug Paladino and the local Republicans and fusion Conservatives why they’re backing this abhorrent, repulsive candidate. 

  • UncleBluck

    Gotta admit those new “smart glasses” Perry wears make him a “formidable” candidate….OOPS!!

    • Chris S

      his Iq raised 3 points now that he can read with his “spectacles”

      • FrJesusGaylord

        Do you have an editor?

      • He’s been banned.

  • Chris S

    anti-vaxxer— not to ever be confused with “advocate for safe vaccine” in liberaltopia

    My children are vaccinated and I advocate for safe vaccines, most all “ant vaxxers” have vaccinated children……… GROW UP.

    Are you a writer or a rabid FB troll? Do you know what vaccine court is? Do you ever actually read the news?

    • UncleBluck

      Love that “Hildabeast” avatar!!

    • You calling someone else a troll? Now that is hilarious

      • Chris S

        So anyone who comments is a troll. Ironic as you just apparently trolled me by your standards. Journalism based on trolling, the future of liberal media

      • Do you ever speak in coherent sentences or did your parents drop you on your head a lot?

      • I banned him.

  • Chris S


    “you have to pass it to find out whats in it” nancy Pelosi

    Liberal logic

    So whats in it writer, i see assumption, disparaging a governor of a state who used his discretion because the expansion would cost much in the coming years.

    Todays decision, cannot wait till you guys finally read your bill….its not what you “hoped” for.
    The judge could not find any authority in the law that allowed the IRS to offer such subsidies to those who purchased insurance through a federal exchange.

    In short, the judge concluded that when the Obamacare statute says “Exchanges established by the State” (with State defined to by that statute to mean the 50 States plus D.C.) it means only what it says and not additionally “Exchanges established by the federal government.”

    The judge ripped into other judges who upheld the IRS view.

    Other judges in similar litigation have cast the plaintiffs’ argument in apocalyptic language. The first sentence of Judge Edwards’ dissent in Halbig is as follows: “This case is about Appellants’ not-so-veiled attempt to gut the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (‘ACA’).” Concurring in King, Judge Davis states that “[a]ppellants’ approach would effectively destroy the statute . . . .” Further, “[w]hat [appellants] may not do is rely on our help to deny to millions of Americans desperately-needed health insurance. . .”

    Of course, a proper legal decision is not a matter of the court “helping” one side or the other. A lawsuit challenging a federal regulation is a commonplace occurrence in this country, not an affront to judicial dignity. A higher-profile case results in greater scrutiny of the decision, which is understandable and appropriate. “[H]igh as those stakes are, the principle of legislative supremacy that guides us is higher still. . . This limited role serves democratic interests by ensuring that policy is made by elected, politically accountable representatives, not by appointed life-tenured judges.”

    This is a case of statutory interpretation. “The text is what it is, no matter which side benefits.” Such a case (even if affirmed on the inevitable appeal) does not “gut” or “destroy” anything. On the contrary, the court is upholding the Act as written.


  • observer

    Maybe Kathy sent the second post because she needed something to do. At 5:16 pm was Perry coming down the stairs at the Ellicott Square Building. Could it be that the local Reps and Conservatives didn’t want her in the pictures with Perry?

  • jerkwagon420

    As noted on Twitter it is now easier to get Ebola than an abortion in Texas.

    • WhatMeWorry888

      Maybe Wendy Davis should be trying to promote a babies right to get ebola

      • Even Ward thinks you’re a hack

      • jerkwagon420

        Or her detractors might create a fund to support all the unwanted babies they care so deeply about right up until they’re born. Fucking hypocrites

  • MaxPlanck

    Well, Gov. Great Clips has proclaimed that ISIS is coming over the border so no reason why Ebola wouldn’t. After all, the Lone Star State continues to be a powerful draw for effluent.

  • wnyresident

    “Alan says:

    Wait a cotton-pickin’ minute. I thought we were supposed to deal with this medically, not politically!
    But here we are, worrying not about containing the spread of this
    virus, but how much it’s going to cost and whether the person is here
    “illegally”. ”

    Alan? Wouldn’t you agree that is a valid question? There is no denying that many people are illegally crossing the southern border. Right? I don’t want to mislead people reading your blog but that is a fact.

    As long as the current Administration doesn’t do anything to curb these illegal crossings we can easily see how this can become an expensive burden on existing US citizens. Why let it get to that point to begin with? Right?

    Wouldn’t you rather see funds spent on needs in our local community? Invested in our cultural groups, our schools, political party family members who need jobs and infrastructure needs?

    Or are you under the belief that the net tax payer is a never ending source of cash?

    I’m not defending Kathy but that is a very valid question and it should be addressed.

    • Hey, Tony: the ebola guy came over from Liberia. Liberia isn’t Mexico. I explained to you the hurdles that someone flying to this country from Liberia would need to go through, and you’re bothering me about “illegals” from Mexico.

      Would you rather have the ebola patient rejected from our hospitals and walking around Dallas, or should we treat and isolate him? Which do you think makes more sense, from a public health standpoint?

      • Kevin Hickey

        The term “public health” isn’t in his vocabulary.

      • wnyresident

        I didn’t say the ebola person came from Mexico. Did I?

        “As long as the current Administration doesn’t do anything to curb these
        illegal crossings we can easily see how this can become an expensive
        burden on existing US citizens. Why let it get to that point to begin
        with? Right?”

        My question was generic and to the point. Next week we could possibly have 100 people infected with what ever sickness cross an open border while the current Administration plays golf or hits up the next fund raiser.

        Apparently there are no “hurdles” to cross the southern border.

        Did I say I would rather have the man with ebola rejected from our hospitals and walking around Dallas. No.

        I said “As long as the current Administration doesn’t do anything to curb these
        illegal crossings we can easily see how this can become an expensive
        burden on existing US citizens. Why let it get to that point to begin
        with? Right?”

        You know what makes the most sense?

        To be proactive to prevent this from happening again and not to because an expensive burden. Close the borders. I mean really close the borders and stop all tax payer funded grants/programs/support that tends to make people want to illegally enter the country.

      • When’s the last time you tried to cross the southern border? What does this have to do with anything?

      • UncleBluck

        See what happens Alan when you try to engage in discourse with someone who got their “degree” from the “University of Fox News”……

      • wnyresident

        I really don’t watch fox or Cnn much.

      • WhatMeWorry888

        I’ll go you one better, turned cable off. They are both spinning and lying

      • WhatMeWorry888

        Yes you get an answer from the university of MSNBC

        For a post that’s suppose to be apolitical this has been anything but

      • wnyresident

        Has a lot to do with everything.

        My question was:

        “As long as the current Administration doesn’t do anything to curb these illegal crossings we can easily see how this can become an expensive burden on existing US citizens. Why let it get to that point to begin with? Right?”

        We had one man who took a flight from over seas with Ebola. Right? That is a fact.

        I could easily see people who illegally cross the southern border with various illness come into the states.

        Don’t you think it would be wiser to be proactive and prevent that? What happens if 100 people illegally cross the southern border and happen to have Ebola? Your solution is to be reactive and just keep admitting them to hospitals?

        How does “When’s the last time you tried to cross the southern border?” relate to to the question I asked?

        Apparently it isn’t hard to cross the border illegally because there is a current problem with people here illegally.

      • 1. Illegal border crossings have nothing whatsoever to do with the Ebola case. That guy flew over and entered the US legally.

        2. You say it’s an unprotected, open border. Do you know that from first-hand experience, or because of what you’re hearing from others? Because I’ve crossed the Mexico border and I can tell you that it’s neither unprotected nor open, and it’s not easy to cross.

      • wnyresident

        Did you actually pass the bar exam? Why would you even say “When’s the last time you tried to cross the southern border?” how do you think the people who are here illegally down south came into the country? Star Trek teleporter? No, they physically cross the border by stepping over it.

      • I actually passed two state bar exams simultaneously, thanks for asking. It’s quite an intellectual point of pride for me, so I appreciate you bringing it up. There are thousands of people every year who toil through 3 years of law school yet fail to pass the bar on multiple tries.

        I take it from your intemperate response that the answer is “never”, and everything you think and say about the southern border is bullshit vomited at you by Fox News and WBEN and myriad online propaganda outlets.

        You bitch and moan about how much it’ll cost the “net taxpayers” to educate thousands of children (the only ones being allowed to stay are those who already have family here, but that’s beside the point). How much will it cost to provide the type of inviolable border you’re imagining in your deepest fever-dreams? Want to build a wall? Great! Did you know that people were able to breach the Berlin Wall, and it was far more secure than anything anyone’s proposing to do along the Mexico border. If we did want to build a Berlin Wall style device, complete with towers and tank traps and constant maintenance, it would likely cost millions of dollars per meter, and you’re talking about a border that’s almost 2,000 miles long.

        By contrast, the Berlin Wall was only 100 miles around. It cost $4,000,000 1975 dollars – in 2014 dollars, that amounts to $17.6 million. If we extrapolate that to 2,000 miles, you’re talking about a minimum of $352 million – but because the conditions are not established and urban, but desolate and rural, involving the transportation of men and materials to isolated locations, and also because we’re not Germany, you and I know that the the cost would likely be 10 times that.

        So, let’s say it would cost $3 billion to build that wall you want, and then you have to hire enough people to guard every tower, and watch every inch – and even then it wouldn’t be inviolable. (Hint: tunnels).

        And don’t forget – every person guarding this new border wall to keep out the brown people will be a federal employee, earning public money and benefits – not “net taxpayers” in your twisted jargon.

        Of course, border security has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with this Ebola case, so who the hell knows why you brought it up. You don’t know what you’re talking about, and you’ve never even crossed the Mexico-US border. I have, and it’s 100x more intense and secure than any crossing you ever made between the US and Canada.

        Also, I have to point out how fascinated I am by the sudden interest people have in Ebola now that it’s not just killing destitute black people in West Africa.

      • jimd54

        When people are afraid, they often become irrational. It is stunning to me how preposterous some of the things said here are. What if the Ebola virus did mutate and survived airborne, it’s possible since a virus intrinsically wants to survive as much as any other organism. These “government is the problem” guys would be the first in line to hide under her skirt.

      • wnyresident

        Alan, relax. I was only joking about passing the bar. I know you did. Relax.

      • I’m exceedingly relaxed. I want to know who’s going to pay for your $30 billion anti-Messican wall, and who’s going to pay to train and maintain guards every kilometer, the anti-tank traps, the combed area between the walls, and the walls themselves. That’s 3,145 KM long, so 3,145 towers with 2 – 3 guards each, so about 9,500 guards on duty at any given time.

        You need at least 3 shifts, so that’s 28,300 guards on hand every day, plus reserve, so let’s call it an even 30,000. You have to pay them and provide benefits to attract them to go live in the desert, so let’s say $55,000 plus benefits, so round it out to about $65,000 each. That’s $1,839,825,000 per year in employee cost alone. $2 billion per year budget just to populate your border with adequate, well-remunerated guards.

        It’s not the money and taxes you’re worried about. It’s something else.

      • wnyresident

        “I take it from your intemperate response that the answer is “never”, and
        everything you think and say about the southern border is bullshit
        vomited at you by Fox News and WBEN and myriad online propaganda

        Alan. Start reviewing what you post up in your blog. People are illegally cross the border in the south.

      • You mean people break laws? Get me my fainting couch. Whatever will we do?

        But seriously I note a very glaring silence from you in response to my conservative cost estimate to build a Berlin Wall along the Messican border.

      • wnyresident

        I want to responded more to your response but I do work. I’ll get back to you.

      • Ding-dong! Bullshit alert!

        “Close the borders” – I assume you are from the Seneca or Mohawk tribe to have the chutzpah to make that statement. Because, otherwise, how the fuck do you think YOU got here?

      • wnyresident

        DIng-Dong? Those are cakey goodness not bullshit. You like chocolate don’t you?

        If 10,000,000 people decide to leave South America, illegally cross the southern border and 100,000 come to Erie County you are fine with that? You don’t mind having your property taxes increasing to cover the educational and housing costs if 10,000 of those people have 5000 kids? Really now.

        Next let us address your “fact”

        “CNN Fact Check: Illegal border crossings at lowest levels in 40 years”

        Last time that fact was update was “updated 9:11 AM EST, Wed February 13, 2013” Today’s date is Oct 2014.

      • If a kazillion Klingons decide to invade Earth and occupy Buffalo, we’d be in the same loopy “reality” that prompted your goofy scenario.

      • wnyresident

        I believe we have 1000’s (upwards of 60k) of people who recently illegally crossed the border. From what I have read on the news they are looking to enroll those kids in schools around the USA.

        Sorry I simply do not want to cover that cost. Hate me for it. I don’t care. I don’t mind contributing to schools for legal citizens but don’t open the door for anyone who wants to hop the border.

    • Russ Andolina

      Describing human beings as “net taxpayers” sounds like something out of Soylent Green.

      • wnyresident

        That was an excellent movie but doesn’t relate to anything I posted above.

      • Russ Andolina

        Google “dehumanization”. Noodle on it – I trust you.

  • Marc Rebmann

    This is why wen need tort reform. NOBODY should get a free ride just because they got sick, and didn’t want to pay for insurance before. It cost US, TAXPAYERS, too much to subsidize these animals. If anyone catches Ebola, they should be able to sue for damages from the person that gave it to them.

    • UncleBluck

      1)Who says he didn’t have insurance. 2) I thought “tort reform” was about less lawsuits. 3) Are you going to start suing people when you catch a cold or the flu.

      • wnyresident

        1) Who says he did have insurance so you do have a point.

        3) If someone knowingly has a deadly sickness then decided to go out which ends up infecting more people, are they liable? I don’t know so I am asking.

    • Wait, is this a joke? First of all, “animals”. Second of all, tort reform in the same paragraph as “should be able to sue for damages”.

      • Marc Rebmann

        The government has failed at eradicating illness, and people just keep getting sick and spreading it to others. We need a market solution. People will stop spreading disease if they have to pay for it. You see liberals propose the same thing with cap and trade system to lower carbon emissions. We need tort reform to limit frivolous lawsuits on doctors to make insurance more affordable.

      • Connors

        What? How do you propose the government goes about “eradicating illness”? Take those with EV-D68, Ebola and HIV out to pasture?

      • Marc Rebmann

        I don’t advocate for government to do anything but get out of the way. Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem!

      • Sean Danvers

        Your two comments here gave me the best laugh I’ve had all day. Lay off the sauce so early in the mornin pal!

    • Russ Andolina


  • jimd54

    A few years ago when I was finding dead birds on my lawn, it was comforting to know the government handled the problem. Because I sure as fuck didn’t know what to do. And how do you sue a bird? This morning driving to work I heard the head of the Erie County Health Department say, don’t worry, we got this. Again I felt comforted knowing someone qualified was handling it. I don’t know how the government could eradicate disease, or should they. I’m seeing a whole lot of chicken in these threads.

  • American

    [Wait a cotton-pickin’ minute. I thought we were supposed to deal with this medically, not politically! ]

    Rhetoric is free and abundant, while medicine is expensive, especially when one is uninsured. Maybe it took a half hour for those realities to hit her.

  • American

    The Medicaid situation in Texas is being paved over by the right’s obsession with the infected man’s immigration status, lest we be deprived of our daily dose of irrational fear.