David:
Before you start screaming "Vast-Right-Wing-Conspiracy", watch the video. When the two major-party candidates are aged 69 and 70, should a presidential candidate's health be an issue?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2ePyLt6K6M
Doug:
First, I don't scream. Although there are times I would like to, as I answer your questions in this blog. Often requires a glass of wine, or two. But no; no screaming. Second, a conspiracy is a secret plan organized by two or more people. Clinton's health has been a talking point for the conservative candidate for a long, long time. Hardly a secret plan. But why target her health? What else can one find fault with Clinton? Not much, so we can attack her health. The right has had many theories about Clinton's health for a long time (starting in at least 2014):
Before you start screaming "Vast-Right-Wing-Conspiracy", watch the video. When the two major-party candidates are aged 69 and 70, should a presidential candidate's health be an issue?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2ePyLt6K6M
Doug:
 |
| Trump's doctor (Jacob Bornstein) reports that Trump's lab tests were "astonishingly excellent," and "I can state unequivocally, [Trump] will be the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency." From the Washington Post. |
- She fell, hit her head, and had a concussion. She faked it to avoid testifying!
- No, she really did fall. BUT now she has neurological problems!
- She doesn't have the stamina. She is weak. "She can't stand. Look! She is sitting!"
- Katrina Pierson (Trump spokesperson) claimed that Clinton has dysphasia (a neurological disorder with language deterioration).
- She has Parkinson's.
- She gives short speeches because she can't handle anything longer.
- Sean Hannity launched a week-long "investigation" into Clinton's health, falsely claiming that a reporter "got scared" when seeing her make a funny facial expression.
- Steve Doocy said Clinton wearing glasses was "a sign of brain damage."
There is probably more. But you see a pattern over a long time. By all accounts, Clinton must be dead by now. Perhaps she is? That would be a conspiracy worth screaming about! Clinton is a zombie!
David:
See, you really do want to talk about her health. My question, however, was should a presidential candidate's health be an issue?
Doug:
I would much rather be talking about Trump's mysterious taxes, or any of the strange things that he said on any random day that should be an issue. But sure, let's just ask this simple question.
David:
I'd say that a general statement from their regular doctor outlining their general health issues and health status should be enough for most candidates. When you reach a certain age, where more serious health issues begin, or if you have had serious health issues in the past, perhaps a more thorough or detailed evaluation might be in order. After all, William Henry Harrison died from pneumonia only one month after taking office. We should prevent a repeat of that scenario, if possible. Richard Nixon took multiple medications, including Dilantin, a seizure medication, for undisclosed health issues.
We certainly saw the media go after John McCain when he ran for president in 2008, with his health taking a major portion of reporting space due to his history of Melanoma. Since this is a potentially lethal disease that can reoccur, I really don't think it was out of line to get his oncologist opinion regarding this prior diagnosis. And if his oncologist felt he was fine, that should have been the end of it. But it wasn't. He was eventually forced to allow a group of reporters and physicians to evaluate his records to "prove" he was healthy enough to run. Although unprecedented, the move quashed most debate about his health. Being forthright and truthful, and laying all of the information out on the table does have its benefits.
Doug:
David:
See, you really do want to talk about her health. My question, however, was should a presidential candidate's health be an issue?
I would much rather be talking about Trump's mysterious taxes, or any of the strange things that he said on any random day that should be an issue. But sure, let's just ask this simple question.
David:
I'd say that a general statement from their regular doctor outlining their general health issues and health status should be enough for most candidates. When you reach a certain age, where more serious health issues begin, or if you have had serious health issues in the past, perhaps a more thorough or detailed evaluation might be in order. After all, William Henry Harrison died from pneumonia only one month after taking office. We should prevent a repeat of that scenario, if possible. Richard Nixon took multiple medications, including Dilantin, a seizure medication, for undisclosed health issues.
We certainly saw the media go after John McCain when he ran for president in 2008, with his health taking a major portion of reporting space due to his history of Melanoma. Since this is a potentially lethal disease that can reoccur, I really don't think it was out of line to get his oncologist opinion regarding this prior diagnosis. And if his oncologist felt he was fine, that should have been the end of it. But it wasn't. He was eventually forced to allow a group of reporters and physicians to evaluate his records to "prove" he was healthy enough to run. Although unprecedented, the move quashed most debate about his health. Being forthright and truthful, and laying all of the information out on the table does have its benefits.
Doug:
I don't think we know anything about Trump's health (or taxes, which I want to know more about). Is Trump a sociopath? I don't really care if he has been diagnosed as such. I want to know more about his taxes and actual policies.
David:
Trump has never had any health issues that we're aware of.
Doug:
With Trump, there is a lot we are not aware of. But I think I see what you are saying between the lines: we must see Trump's real doctor's statement.
David:
I'm not between the lines at all. Is their something in his history? We'll soon know. He's supposed to release his health records this week. Clinton, on the other hand, has had some recent serious health problems. Bill Clinton stated that her recovery from her concussion and subsequent transverse venous sinus thrombosis (large blood clot in the brain) was very difficult and took 6 months. In regards to this most recent feinting spell, Bill Clinton told CNN that this same thing has happened a few times in the past, when she was a senator, as Secretary of State, and in the years since. He actually said, “Because frequently, well not frequently, rarely — but on more than one occasion, over the last many, many years, the same sort of thing happened to her when she got severely dehydrated,” according to CBS’ website. (In their on-line video, the comment "frequently" was edited out.) He indicated that whenever she works hard, and has a grueling schedule, she passes out from dehydration. That doesn't seem to be a little thing when you're running for the most demanding, grueling job in America. But she just needs to have her records reviewed, as John McCain did, and most people, including me, would put the issue to rest.
Doug:
I'm sure it would put the issue to rest, wink wink. You mean that in every word in a Clinton health report there is a possible conspiracy. Especially if it turns out that she is secretly a zombie!
David:
I find it interesting that you have diagnosed Trump with a mental illness, and then note that you "don't really care if he has been diagnosed as such". That sounds like something a conspiracy nut would say. "I don't need a doctor's diagnosis or proof. I believe it anyway!" (By the way, a sociopath is someone who incessantly lies to obtain their goals. That seems to describe Clinton more than Trump.)
Doug:
No, your reading-between-the-lines is faulty. I really mean that even if he is a diagnosed sociopath, I really don't care. He could have a doctor's statement that says, in bold "Trump is a sociopath" and I wouldn't care. I think that there are lots of other reasons to dismiss him outright.
David:
Because you have already diagnosed him, and you continue to say it, over, and over, and over, and over, and over, as if it will convince people.
Doug:
That would be very clever of me to suggest that Trump is a sociopath by repeating that I don't care even if he is a sociopath. But, trust me, I really don't care if Trump is a sociopath.
David:
Tax return are a completely different topic that we can discuss when they get released, or especially if they don't get released. I agree that we want to know as much as we can about the people who are running. Their financial history may have less to do with being able to run the country for the next 4-8 years than their health fitness, but it might. It all may come down to which one is perceived as the most transparent candidate following an administration that is only transparent when a judge orders them to be.
David:
Trump has never had any health issues that we're aware of.
Doug:
With Trump, there is a lot we are not aware of. But I think I see what you are saying between the lines: we must see Trump's real doctor's statement.
David:
I'm not between the lines at all. Is their something in his history? We'll soon know. He's supposed to release his health records this week. Clinton, on the other hand, has had some recent serious health problems. Bill Clinton stated that her recovery from her concussion and subsequent transverse venous sinus thrombosis (large blood clot in the brain) was very difficult and took 6 months. In regards to this most recent feinting spell, Bill Clinton told CNN that this same thing has happened a few times in the past, when she was a senator, as Secretary of State, and in the years since. He actually said, “Because frequently, well not frequently, rarely — but on more than one occasion, over the last many, many years, the same sort of thing happened to her when she got severely dehydrated,” according to CBS’ website. (In their on-line video, the comment "frequently" was edited out.) He indicated that whenever she works hard, and has a grueling schedule, she passes out from dehydration. That doesn't seem to be a little thing when you're running for the most demanding, grueling job in America. But she just needs to have her records reviewed, as John McCain did, and most people, including me, would put the issue to rest.
Doug:
I'm sure it would put the issue to rest, wink wink. You mean that in every word in a Clinton health report there is a possible conspiracy. Especially if it turns out that she is secretly a zombie!
David:
I find it interesting that you have diagnosed Trump with a mental illness, and then note that you "don't really care if he has been diagnosed as such". That sounds like something a conspiracy nut would say. "I don't need a doctor's diagnosis or proof. I believe it anyway!" (By the way, a sociopath is someone who incessantly lies to obtain their goals. That seems to describe Clinton more than Trump.)
Doug:
No, your reading-between-the-lines is faulty. I really mean that even if he is a diagnosed sociopath, I really don't care. He could have a doctor's statement that says, in bold "Trump is a sociopath" and I wouldn't care. I think that there are lots of other reasons to dismiss him outright.
David:
Because you have already diagnosed him, and you continue to say it, over, and over, and over, and over, and over, as if it will convince people.
Doug:
That would be very clever of me to suggest that Trump is a sociopath by repeating that I don't care even if he is a sociopath. But, trust me, I really don't care if Trump is a sociopath.
David:
Tax return are a completely different topic that we can discuss when they get released, or especially if they don't get released. I agree that we want to know as much as we can about the people who are running. Their financial history may have less to do with being able to run the country for the next 4-8 years than their health fitness, but it might. It all may come down to which one is perceived as the most transparent candidate following an administration that is only transparent when a judge orders them to be.
Doug:
Would people really vote for a deplorable person because the other candidate might (probably not) but might (ok, definitely not) have health issues? No. I'd rather vote for Clinton as a zombie than Deplorable Trump as a healthy (possibly) person.
David:
Wow. Doubling down on the comment that will likely haunt Clinton more than any thing else she's bungled since this campaign started. Half of Trump supporters are "deplorable and irredeemable", and the other half are deserving of big-government pity. That's a whole bunch of Americans she seems to both despise and pity. And this was in her prepared comments, not something off-the-cuff. She genuinely feels this way towards at least 20% of voting Americans. Maybe her concussion (possibly) led her to say it (probably).
Doug:
I think she is right: probably about 50% of his supporters are racist. Unfortunately, probably 30% of Clinton's supports are racist too. That is indeed a whole bunch of Americans. But let's talk about a case of pneumonia.
David:
I don't recall her saying that her supporters were deplorable and irredeemable.
Doug:
I think that language matters. She never said "irredeemable." I think you can reform any racist simply with education and experience.
David:
Perhaps her supporters are the correct form of racists? Perhaps you'd like to support some of your nonsense with data? Or perhaps you'd like to keep spouting nonsensical diagnoses and statistics. You are sounding quite a bit like a conspiracy nut.
Doug:
You ask a lot of questions, but not the right ones. There is another possibility: what if Clinton is correct? What if a large portion of our society is racist? What if a majority of his supporters (and a smaller number of hers) are racist? What then? Probably we should ignore that inconvenient point and argue about which candidate is in better health.
David:
What should one do when he is losing a debate? Desperately try to change the subject. You're having a very difficult time staying focused this week. We can talk about race and Colin Kaepernick next week.
Doug:
Who brought up Clinton's comment? You did.
David: Clinton wouldn't be in this fix, if she hadn't claimed to the FBI that the reason she couldn't remember anything about anything, was that her memory was damaged by her concussion. Yet, when she's not talking to the FBI, she says she has no memory problems at all. She can't have it both ways. She's brought at least some of this scrutiny on her health herself. She should just get it all out in the open, and put it to rest. Then we can move on to talk about more substantive things.
Doug:
Yes! Clinton is making us talk about her pneumonia! She is a sneaky zombie!
David:
Finally, we agree. Clinton has the personality, ideas, ethics, policies, and speaking abilities of a dead (undead?) person. Well, we'll see how she recovers from this past week of blunders, and see if she survives the media critiques, however tepid they may be. Meanwhile, Trump's campaign seems to have gained new life, now that his penchant for creating his own blunders appears to be in remission.
Doug:
I don't think you understand what is happening.
http://crooksandliars.com/2016/09/after-trapping-trump-deplorables-clinton
David:
Great. You're going to start inserting Hillary Clinton Campaign commercials into the blog? Please don't pretend this is something other than political propaganda. That would be deplorable.
Would people really vote for a deplorable person because the other candidate might (probably not) but might (ok, definitely not) have health issues? No. I'd rather vote for Clinton as a zombie than Deplorable Trump as a healthy (possibly) person.
David:
Wow. Doubling down on the comment that will likely haunt Clinton more than any thing else she's bungled since this campaign started. Half of Trump supporters are "deplorable and irredeemable", and the other half are deserving of big-government pity. That's a whole bunch of Americans she seems to both despise and pity. And this was in her prepared comments, not something off-the-cuff. She genuinely feels this way towards at least 20% of voting Americans. Maybe her concussion (possibly) led her to say it (probably).
Doug:
I think she is right: probably about 50% of his supporters are racist. Unfortunately, probably 30% of Clinton's supports are racist too. That is indeed a whole bunch of Americans. But let's talk about a case of pneumonia.
David:
I don't recall her saying that her supporters were deplorable and irredeemable.
Doug:
I think that language matters. She never said "irredeemable." I think you can reform any racist simply with education and experience.
David:
Perhaps her supporters are the correct form of racists? Perhaps you'd like to support some of your nonsense with data? Or perhaps you'd like to keep spouting nonsensical diagnoses and statistics. You are sounding quite a bit like a conspiracy nut.
Doug:
You ask a lot of questions, but not the right ones. There is another possibility: what if Clinton is correct? What if a large portion of our society is racist? What if a majority of his supporters (and a smaller number of hers) are racist? What then? Probably we should ignore that inconvenient point and argue about which candidate is in better health.
David:
What should one do when he is losing a debate? Desperately try to change the subject. You're having a very difficult time staying focused this week. We can talk about race and Colin Kaepernick next week.
Doug:
Who brought up Clinton's comment? You did.
David: Clinton wouldn't be in this fix, if she hadn't claimed to the FBI that the reason she couldn't remember anything about anything, was that her memory was damaged by her concussion. Yet, when she's not talking to the FBI, she says she has no memory problems at all. She can't have it both ways. She's brought at least some of this scrutiny on her health herself. She should just get it all out in the open, and put it to rest. Then we can move on to talk about more substantive things.
Doug:
Yes! Clinton is making us talk about her pneumonia! She is a sneaky zombie!
David:
Finally, we agree. Clinton has the personality, ideas, ethics, policies, and speaking abilities of a dead (undead?) person. Well, we'll see how she recovers from this past week of blunders, and see if she survives the media critiques, however tepid they may be. Meanwhile, Trump's campaign seems to have gained new life, now that his penchant for creating his own blunders appears to be in remission.
Doug:
I don't think you understand what is happening.
http://crooksandliars.com/2016/09/after-trapping-trump-deplorables-clinton
 |
| The trap is shut: video from the Clinton campaign. |
Great. You're going to start inserting Hillary Clinton Campaign commercials into the blog? Please don't pretend this is something other than political propaganda. That would be deplorable.
If Zombie-Hitler supports Clinton, does that make her either a zombie or a Nazi? As you yourself said, Hillary has racist supporters. By your logic, she's racist. You seem to be having trouble staying focused on this discussion of her health. Maybe it's your concussion acting up?
Doug:
You make a good point. Why would a racist support one candidate over another? What would David Duke find appealing in Donald Trump? But thank you for admitting that your plan to discuss "should a presidential candidate's health be an issue?" is really about "her health." As one of my friends said: this is the first time Republicans have ever cared about women's health.
Doug:
You make a good point. Why would a racist support one candidate over another? What would David Duke find appealing in Donald Trump? But thank you for admitting that your plan to discuss "should a presidential candidate's health be an issue?" is really about "her health." As one of my friends said: this is the first time Republicans have ever cared about women's health.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please be kind and respectful. Thanks!