Bush to ease rule limiting HIV-positive foreign visitors (will the Right go apeshit over this?)

[bluestateguy]

I'm inclined to sit back and watch the Right beat up on Bush over this, and let this issue go. This could be like the Dubai Ports story this summer, after which the Baby Bush's approval ratings dropped to the low 30's. Or it could be blown off by our corporate media. We'll see.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/12/02/MNGKFMO1ST1.DTL

President Bush will ease a long-standing rule barring HIV-positive people from entering the United States without a special waiver, a ban long criticized by human rights groups.

Because of the rule, organizers of the biannual International AIDS Conferences have not held a gathering in the United States since 1990, when San Francisco hosted the event.

The White House chose Friday, World AIDS Day, to announce that Bush would issue an executive order allowing HIV-positive people to enter the United States on short-term tourist or business visas without having to seek special permission.

"This administration is very serious about fighting discrimination on AIDS,'' U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator Mark Dybul said during a telephone interview after White House ceremonies marking the day.

more

[Kiouni]

1. thank you

i had no idea we were doing this.

[and-justice-for-all]

2. I was not aware that you had to take a blood test...

...before you entered the US, that sound pretty discriminatory to me. I am sure this only goes for ENTERING and not LEAVING the US right?
The only thing I see the GOP being serious about is fucking up the world and filling their pockets with more black gold cash.

[Bluebear]

3. Why on earth would this LOWER his rating?

This is one of the few good things he has done.

[bluestateguy]

4. This is why

Will any of us, who might be inclined to support this measure (I'm undecided), all of a sudden decide that Bush is not such a bad guy?

Of course not.

Will doing this be popular with the Great Wishy Washy Middle? I also doubt it.

Who is still supporting Bush? His base. Will doing this be popular with them? No way. If this story has legs (and I freely admit that maybe it does not), then I could see them jumping off the boat when those pollsters call them up doing a Bush approval poll.

[Bluebear]

5. It's a shame you are undecided about this. I'm mystified. nt

[GreenZoneLT]

7. Kneejerk partisanship?

I can't believe a bluestateguy would have any reason to oppose it other than that Bush is for it, which is a pretty lame reason.

[Bluebear]

8. Well the OP sounds pretty critical of it, too.

The hypothesis is that Bush's approval ratings would sink...who supports him anymore but his 30% base of rapture ready idiots?

[Skittles]

10. gawd

I'm with ya PT

[and-justice-for-all]

9. When Shrub says...

" oops, my bad...GAYS CAN Marry " I might, MIGHT give him .5 of an inch.
I know he is a sneaky bastard regardless, so fuck him.

[ThomCat]

11. I hope you don't stay undecided.

The only reason I can imagine why someone might not support this measure is fear that HIV positive people are going to recklessly spread it around. The stereotype of gay men is that that we compulsively have sex with lots of partners, and most people think anyone who's HIV positive must be gay. But people's right to travel should not be infringed based on stereotypes and prejudiced fears.

[GreenZoneLT]

6. Oooh, ooh, ooh.

That's a major dilemma for the average Limbaugh listener. Slavish Bush worship vs. AIDS hysteria and xenophobia. Which to choose? We may have to alert the brain trauma wards to stand by for a heavy influx.

This probably won't tear them up as much as Bush's immigration policy; with heavy hearts, the true believers are almost all against him on that one (the only conservatives with him are the cynical Chamber of Commerce types). AIDS hysteria is a lot less fresh in their minds, so they'll probably be able to rationalize W's call on this one.

Oh, and props to W for having some sense. Not a tough call for him, since AIDS doesn't affect either the War on Turr or corporate interests, but worthy of praise nonetheless.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

12. wow...how did he suddenly acquire a soul?

[w4rma]

13. I'm not sure that I support this. The spread of disease is a serious situation.

What was wrong with requiring a waver?

[JackBeck]

14. How is letting an HIV+ positive person to freely come in and out of our country

spreading disease?

Would you support not allowing someone with the flu to enter our country?

[w4rma]

15. I don't know, but I do know that the example you noted is an apples/oranges example.

Bird flu would be a better analogy for this situation, I think.

[JackBeck]

17. Tell that to the elderly who are encouraged to get flu shots every season.

Also, the flu is spread a lot more easier than HIV, putting more elderly at risk from dying from a cold than from HIV.

[Bluebear]

16. Please reread, this is a human rights issue.

One million Americans have HIV already. Are you troubled that letting someone from, say, Belgium to travel here for a conference will endanger the nation?