RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Boardman writes: "In May 2008, presidential candidate Barack Obama released a summary letter of his general health signed by Dr. David Scheiner, who had been Obama's primary care physician for 21 years. Providing limited detail, the doctor found Obama to be in 'excellent health' and 'in overall good physical and mental health needed to maintain the resiliency required in the Office of the President.' The Obama campaign indicated at the time that it was not planning to release any further medical records, and it didn't."

Donald Trump. (photo: AP)
Donald Trump. (photo: AP)


The Presidential Dementia Meme Is Out There – Who Best Fits?

By William Boardman, Reader Supported News

13 August 16

 

Reliable, verifiable medical records from presidential candidates – what’s so hard about that?

n May 2008, presidential candidate Barack Obama released a summary letter of his general health signed by Dr. David Scheiner, who had been Obama’s primary care physician for 21 years. Providing limited detail, the doctor found Obama to be in “excellent health” and “in overall good physical and mental health needed to maintain the resiliency required in the Office of the President.” The Obama campaign indicated at the time that it was not planning to release any further medical records, and it didn’t.

As president, Obama has periodically released health summaries publicly. The most recent report available on the White House website, appears to be from June 12, 2014, in which Dr. Ronny Jackson, physician to the president, provides two pages of detail and concludes: “The President’s overall health is excellent. All clinical data indicates that the President is currently healthy and that he will remain so for the duration of his Presidency.”

This is not a high standard of disclosure for a candidate or a president to meet, assuming that a candidate or a president is in good health. This relatively low standard is also hard, if not impossible, to enforce. John McCain, a cancer survivor in 2008, chose to give selected reporters just a three-hour opportunity to look at some of his health records, but his health did not become a significant issue in the campaign. On his campaign website, McCain posted a health summary more detailed than Obama’s. Hillary Clinton in 2008 apparently did not make any health records public (she has released tax returns for the years 2007-2014, with 2015 promised to be forthcoming).

2016 Candidates vary in providing detailed medical records

Green Party candidate Jill Stein is a doctor married to a doctor, and they have two sons who are doctors. She has not released her medical records this year, nor did she when she ran for president in 2012. She has publicly posted the first two pages of her 2015 tax return filed jointly with her husband, Dr. Richard Rohrer.

Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson, president and CEO of a medical marijuana company, appears not to have released any medical records. Of all the presidential candidates, Johnson has had perhaps the most serious physical mishap:

On October 12, 2005, Johnson was involved in a near-fatal paragliding accident when his wing caught in a tree and he fell approximately 50 feet to the ground. Johnson suffered multiple bone fractures, including a burst fracture to his twelfth thoracic vertebra, a broken rib, and a broken knee; this accident left him 1.5 inches (3.8 cm) shorter. He used medicinal marijuana for pain control from 2005 to 2008.

Former Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders released a letter from his doctor in January 2016 summarizing his “general health history and current medical evaluation.” The letter said that the Senator takes daily levothyroxine to maintain thyroid function and intermittent indomethacin, a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medication to relieve pain. Dr. Brian P. Monahan, the Attending Physician for the Congress of the United States, concluded: “You are in overall very good health and active in your professional work, and recreational lifestyle without limitation.”

Before Republican candidate Donald Trump released any medical report, he promised that “it will be perfection.” He also wrote on twitter: “I consider my health, stamina and strength one of my greatest assets. The world has watched me for many years and can so testify – great genes!” On December 4, 2015, Trump’s doctor of 36 years issued a brief, four-paragraph letter, the highlight of which was that Trump had lost 15 pounds in the past year. Dr. Harold N. Bornstein of Lenox Hill Hospital, New York, concluded: “If elected, Mr. Trump, I can state unequivocally, will be the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency.”

The Democratic candidate, Hillary Clinton, released her own medical records letter months ahead of the others. A two-page letter dated July 28, 2015, noted that Clinton had “a deep vein thrombosis in 1998 and in 2009, an elbow fracture in 2009 and a concussion in 2012.” (Deep vein thrombosis involves the formation of blood clots, usually in the legs, and is not life-threatening with timely treatment.) Dr. Lisa Bardack of the Mount Kisco Medical Group (near Chappaqua, New York) has been Clinton’s personal physician since 2001. She described Clinton’s recovery from the noted conditions, adding that as a precaution against further blood clots, Clinton takes an anticoagulant daily. Dr. Bardack concluded: “In summary, Mrs. Clinton is a healthy female with hypothyroidism and seasonal allergies, on long-term anticoagulation…. She is in excellent physical condition and fit to serve as President of the United States.”

Drudge dredges old news and Fox News gets sweaty

A year after Clinton’s doctor specifically addressed Clinton’s already well-publicized falls, the Drudge Report reprised the incidents as if there were something new to them. Drudge was pushing the same Hillary health narrative back in February when it failed to get traction. That was after he pushed the same theory in October, based on Clinton’s coughing during the Benghazi hearings. All the same, The Hill of August 8 passed on the re-recycled Drudge story, while noting that a “new” picture of Clinton, apparently needing help up the stairs, was taken in February. Elements of the Drudge story reprise have gone viral, and are still going viral, despite detailed debunking by sites like Mediaite.com and wonderfully extreme rants from Wonkette.com.

There’s another internet meme that, if true, would be more troubling. In this case there’s a purported leak of medical reports written by the same Dr. Bardack who wrote Clinton’s July 2015 health letter. These reports first appeared on a twitter account that was apparently taken down by its owner soon after the post. The documents have a superficial credibility, but may be fake – Snopes.com analyzes the question and calls it “unproven.” And that is a problem, because the questions are serious and need to be answered despite the political lynch mob rushing to judgment.

The diagnoses listed in these reports are “Complex Partial Seizures, Subcortical Vascular Dementia.” “Dementia” is a scary word. Clinton’s opponents are running with it, while the Clinton campaign has yet to respond more effectively than to call the attacks “shameful,” without further elaboration.

Curiously, the Dr. Bardack “dementia” documents are both dated well before her July 2015 letter affirming Clinton’s “excellent physical condition.” The authenticity of the July letter is undisputed. The earliest Dr. Bardack “report” dated February 5, 2015, discusses complications continuing from Clinton’s December 2012 concussion – blacking out, twitching, memory loss “have become worse over the last few months.” The letter refers to a diagnosis of early-onset Subcortical Dementia in mid-2013. The plan included increasing anti-seizure medication and ordering another MRI (brain scan).

The second Dr. Bardack “report” dated March 20, 2015, repeats much of the first, noting that: “Patient is being treated with both an anticoagulant and anti-seizure medications…. Patient is starting to become more depressed about her medical condition and the way it’s affecting her life…. We elected to raise the dosage on her antidepressants and anxiety medications. She advised me of her future plans and I advised her to travel with a medical team.” Strikingly omitted from the second report was any mention of an MRI or its results.

Three weeks later, on April 12, 2015, Hillary Clinton announced that she was running for President.

Does the “dementia” meme have legs? And whose legs might it have?

Sean Hannity and other Fox News folks are running one-sidedly with the Hillary Health meme. One of the frequent Fox “experts” is Dr. Marc Siegel, who was chasing the Hillary health question back in April before it was a meme in the twittersphere (@ HilsMedRecords). Fox News seems prepared to pursue this as long as it can, with Hannity hammering away and Martin Shkreli making an on-air diagnosis of Clinton’s “Parkinson’s Disease.”

But there’s another question lying in wait for the honest inquisitor and it goes something like this: so if Clinton has dementia and sounds cogent all the time, what’s up with Donald Trump who always sounds demented?

Salon was making that case back in April, quoting Trumperies like this Q&A sample from a meeting with the Washington Post editorial board:

QUESTION: This is about ISIS. You would not use a tactical nuclear weapon against ISIS?
TRUMP: I’ll tell you one thing, this is a very good-looking group of people here. Could I just go around so I know who the hell I’m talking to?

The writer, Sophia McClennen, went on to wonder:

As we scratch our heads and wonder how someone who says and does such things can still be a frontrunner, I want to throw out a concern. What if Trump isn’t “crazy” but is actually not well instead? To put it differently: what if his campaign isn’t a sign of a savvy politician channeling Tea Party political rhetoric and reality TV sound bites? What if it’s an example of someone who doesn’t have full command of his faculties?... At times it can be very hard to distinguish between extreme right-wing politics and symptoms of dementia.

McClennen goes on to analyze Trump’s behavior as potentially early Alzheimer’s, which his father had for six years before he died. She suggests that Trump should take appropriate tests to demonstrate his mental fitness. And talking about all the ways comics have made fun of the way Trump speaks, she says: “It’s not funny if he really has lost the ability to speak like a healthy adult.”

Salon on August 10 had another McClennen piece again shredding the idea of Trump’s mental competence. One of her points is that when Trump announced his health letter, he got the name of his doctor wrong (naming the doctor’s father). The son is a gastroenterologist, whose website has since been taken down.

The Constitution (Article II, Section 1) requires only that a president be a natural born citizen, at least 35 years old, and a resident for at least 14 years. There is no challenge to Clinton or Trump on a constitutional basis. The Constitution is silent on a presidential candidate’s mental or physical health. Once in office, a president’s failing health is not an impeachable offense. The 25th Amendment (Section 3) allows the president to step aside upon “written declaration that he [sic] is unable to discharge the powers and duties” of the presidency. The vice president then becomes the acting president until the president self-declares in writing the ability to resume the office. The 25th Amendment (Section 4) also provides for the removal of a president who is unaware of an inability to perform, whenever “the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or such other body as Congress may by law provide” declare in writing the president’s inability and submit it to Congress. In the event that the president disputes the inability, Congress decides.

Everything about Section 4 looks like an opportunity for serious, perhaps long-lasting chaos. We need to know now how healthy Clinton and Trump actually are. Dr. Bardack could help by saying whether the reports with her name on them are genuine. Both candidates could help by taking such medical tests and making such disclosures as are needed to answer fundamental questions about their competence now and in the future (insofar as that’s knowable). That’s what a rational electorate would expect, that’s what responsible political parties would insist on, and that’s what honorable candidates would provide.



William M. Boardman has over 40 years experience in theatre, radio, TV, print journalism, and non-fiction, including 20 years in the Vermont judiciary. He has received honors from Writers Guild of America, Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Vermont Life magazine, and an Emmy Award nomination from the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences.

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+37 # librarian1984 2016-08-13 09:37
Dementia and seizures?!

I would hope every single one of us, no matter who we support, could agree that both candidates need a physical and mental assessment immediately. No joke.

Dr. Bardack should make a statement immediately and if she's smart she has bodyguards.

Uh. Sh!te just got real real.
 
 
+19 # librarian1984 2016-08-13 10:00
This must be what Trump meant two weeks (or was it years) ago when he said he noticed the film bio of Hillary Clinton left something out.

Being a family friend he might have known what was happening.

What are Democrats going to do if Hillary is examined and disqualified?

I know what I would do. Oh, Bernie!!!

Don't lose hope.
 
 
+12 # librarian1984 2016-08-13 10:04
Bernie can retire to his nice lakefront home in four (or eight) years.

Imagine what it would be like, to feel that again -- hope.

We are fighting the spineless Dems. We can do this.

Demand medical and psych evaluations .. for both .. now.

May actually watch the Sunday news shows this week.
 
 
-1 # librarian1984 2016-08-13 10:58
Joe Scarborough: Well I remember Newt once told me (redacted for brevity) But what do you think? Is Hillary crazy? I'm asking that in a neutral way.

Cokie Roberts: Of COURSE SHE'S NOT CRAZY!! I just had dinner with her last night. Sure, she has a temper. (winces) But the baby lion filets were delicious! And the orphans' tears sauce divine!

Mika: But reports say she has had seizures. Aren't we worried about her 'finger on the button'?

Joe, Cokie, Mika: No! (nervous laughter)

Madeleine Albright: And we had cake ....
 
 
-9 # rocback 2016-08-13 12:13
librarian walking out glass door:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hPOPavvo0c
 
 
+9 # BluePill 2016-08-13 18:45
GFY Buttcrack
I'm surprised you're still hanging around this forum since your psychopathic demented icon, using all possible forms of political skulduggery, managed to steal the nomination. What type of person resorts to twisting the truth to advance her agenda? Someone without empathy, which is an attribute of a psychopath. Thanks a bunch for that, dip shit.

I don't think that's librarian1984 in that video. It's most likely your mother when she was pregnant with you which explains a lot !
 
 
-6 # lights 2016-08-13 20:23
don't take it personally rocback! BLuePill is Librarian's OTHER name here...... she's using several of them.
 
 
+8 # economagic 2016-08-13 19:44
@librarian1984

Don't forget to breathe!
 
 
+3 # librarian1984 2016-08-13 19:56
haha :-D

'I am a leaf floating on the wind.' (5 points to anyone who knows what that's from. sob)

Are you pleased, e? Everybody's been fantastic!
 
 
# Guest 2016-08-14 16:03
This comment has been deleted by Administrator
 
 
+13 # CL38 2016-08-13 18:15
Hi librarian,

Thanks for finding this. Recently saw the videos about the Clinton seizures. Pretty frightening to think we could be 'led' by candidates who have early dementia or seizures as a result of blood clot. Been through that with Reagan. We saw how that panned out.

After the tactics of both the right and left over the past 4 decades, I think that mandatory testing should be required for all politicians running for office, both for physical health and psychological evaluations to rule out both physical and mental illness (INCLUDING indications of authoritarianis m). By truly independent, unbiased personnel.
 
 
-6 # BluePill 2016-08-13 18:52
I wonder how she got the concussion? Maybe from Dick Cheney banging her head against the headboard.

How's this for visual? Darth Dickhead Cheney grunting and speaking his gravelly voice while Hillary's maniacal laugh fills the room!
 
 
+1 # rocback 2016-08-13 13:18
Mr. Broadman, apparently you misread snopes. It doesn't say "unproven" it says "FALSE".

http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-medical-records-leaked/
 
 
+3 # rocback 2016-08-13 13:24
according to Snopes:

The "leaked" documents seemed rather obvious forgeries, as they didn't resemble anything like standard medical records, they weren't printed on any form of letterhead, nor did they include the doctor's signature (as if whoever crafted then hadn't actually seen the genuine letter from Dr. Bardack and thus had nothing to imitate). They also exhibited some obvious formatting differences from the official letter issued by Dr. Bardack: In the "leaked" documents Bardack is listed as "Chairman of the Department of Medicine, Mount Kisco Medical Group," while the letterhead of the verified document references her as "Chair of Internal Medicine[,] Diplomate of the American Board of Internal Medicine." The "leaked" documents also don't look like medical records, but rather like a report provided for purposes extrinsic to a standard medical charting (with no indication to whom or for what purpose such a report might have been provided)."

I have noticed in previous articles you trash Clinton with unfounded allegations, Mr. Broadman. Do you have an agenda and why did you falsely claim snopes said it was "unproven" instead of FALSE?
 
 
-4 # rocback 2016-08-13 13:38
By the way, Broadman, back in May you promised to apologize to Hillary if the FBI did not find she broke the law and should be indicted. When will she get that apology?
 
 
+6 # grandlakeguy 2016-08-13 15:03
But she DID break the law!
It was our corrupted Justice Department, in her pocket, who failed to throw the book at her as she so richly deserved!
Do you think that you or I would have gotten away with what she did?

GET REAL rokback!
 
 
-8 # lights 2016-08-13 15:38
NO! WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!

Yet another 60 Republicans in the HOUSE initiated by Republican Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn, started yet another propaganda SCANDAL, just like Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi!

ALL OF THIS AT THE COST OF THE AMERICAN TAXPAYERS!

MILLIONS AND MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF $$$$$$$$$$$$$ of taxpayer monies spent for FALSE Political Investigations!

THE REPUBLICANS MUST BE STOPPED! THEY WILL GO TO ANY LENGTH TO DESTROY THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY and in the process - THIS COUNTRY!!!

STOP SALIVATING GRANDLAKEGUY! This is just another RUN of Republican propaganda and they are DESPERATE just like YOU!
 
 
# Guest 2016-08-13 18:25
This comment has been deleted by Administrator
 
 
+3 # rocback 2016-08-13 16:30
according to the REPUBLICAN head of the FBI, "no reasonable prosecutor" would have brought the case so YES, grandlakeguy, you and I would not have been charged either. Something must be wrong with your hearing.

http://www.vox.com/2016/7/5/12096352/hillary-clinton-fbi-email
 
 
+9 # WBoardman 2016-08-13 18:40
rocback is half-right – Snopes now says "FALSE"

Late Thursday night Snopes called the story "UNPROVEN"

Curiously, the actual analysis is virtually the same.
There is only inferential evidence of the veracity of
the Bardack "reports"

I see rocback quotes that inconclusive passage in another post.

As for apologizing to Hillary Clinton because the FBI didn't indict her, indeed, I am sorry about that. From Comey's comments, it's not al all clear the FBI thinks she didn't break the law, and the State Dept Inspector General certainly thinks Clinton broke the law, but to make rocback happy, I'll apologize for that, too. The whole law/indictment thing came out about the way I expected and expressed in the original article. I'm definitely sorry about that. ;-)))
 
 
-2 # Barbara K 2016-08-13 18:59
Mr. B. I watched the entire hearing when Mr. Comey was being grilled. He said almost immediately that he believes that Hillary told the truth, and that there was nothing to indict her for. He mistakenly said that they found only 3 documents that they thought were Classified. Luckily one of the Dems in that hearing was smart enough to call the State Dept. and ask them if the small letter "c" next to one paragraph of each page means that it is Classified. He was told that it is not what it means, that those 3 were NOT Classified, and were included by mistake. Hence THERE WERE NO CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS FOUND ON HER SERVER. You can check the transcript for yourself if you can find it. But I saw and heard what was said.

..
 
 
+3 # librarian1984 2016-08-13 20:03
Boardman, you magnificent beast! I was reading along, in the hands of a master, as your polished writing took us through O's process and the candidates and then KA-POW!

OMG is this as big as it seems? If it's verified she HAS to step down, right?

If it happens I'll name my next child after you!

PS That is NEVER going to happen. Maybe I'll name a sandwich after you instead.
 
 
+2 # CL38 2016-08-13 22:04
what a big smile you have there.
 
 
0 # Capro-Lupo 2016-08-14 21:35
Has Snopes supplanted the Delphi Oracle?

If a REAL sociologist/for ensics-expert/s tatistician/log ician/physician /empiricist/law yer/unbiased-pe rson treated the same matters Snopes submits to its pontification, often the conclusion would be the contrapositive of Snopes's. PLEASE SEE MY POSTS AT 2016-08-16 07:11 AND 2016-08-16 07:11 AND 2016-08-16 07:45 (BELOW).

Or do you, William Boardman, hunger for whatever denial you can find coming from any source whose opinion and bias fits your objective?
 
 
-3 # Capro-Lupo 2016-08-15 18:39
A friend read my comment and asked that I explain "contrapositive " (which does not = "opposite" or mere "contrary").

Most commonly, "contrapositive " denotes putting "If not-B, then not-A," where the contested or opposed or challenged or tested proposition is "If A, then B."

But also contrapositive denotes the negative or "not-X" vis-a-vis an assertion of a positive or "X."

In Bayesian probability calculus, the contrapositive is "P(not-R)P(Q|no t-R)" vis-a-vis the positive probability-pro position "P(R)P(Q|R)"
in calculation of the probability of "R given Q" or "P(R|Q)" — the calculation of which is:

P(R∣Q) = P(R)P(Q∣R) ÷ {P(R)P(Q∣R) + P(not-R)P(Q∣not-R)}

where "P" means "probability of" and the symbol "|" means "given."
 
 
-1 # Capro-Lupo 2016-08-16 14:11
Perhaps the two thumbs-down indicate that my friend misadvised me.

Or is the trouble just that the down-turned thumbs' owners dislike math, propositional calculus, and statistics? But if they feel insulted, then I apologize.
 
 
0 # Barbara K 2016-08-13 18:52
rocback: Hillary has a clean bill of health. She had a mild concussion after falling once, and that has healed up with no problems. All the mild ones heal up. That doesn't mean she has dementia, and to see someone out to destroy her just shows how really evil they are. Looking for Dementia? Look no farther than Trump and some on here. This has become nothing more than a Hillary hate site, and poor Mr. Ashe wonders why no one is donating much to RSN. Just take a look around. I'm not willing to pay for this kind of tripe. I've been a member here since '09 and have never seen such vitriolic hate just running rampant and people being attacked for their opinions. Thanks for your help. If they don't like Clinton, they can just go to a Trump story and leave her alone. If these hackers can hack someone's medical records or emails, they also can falsify and make up additional false documents to spread around and smear anyone. Shame on them, and shame on those who spread the shams. This was once my favorite site, not so much any more. Too much hate on here.

..
 
 
+6 # CL38 2016-08-13 19:03
Here we go with the 'anyone who questions Hillary is evil' mantra.

Barbara, the Doctor, knows the facts about Clinton's health.

Demanding information about her medical condition and mental health is not evil or an attempt to destroy her. She's RUNNING for PRESIDENT. Everyone has the right to know who this person is.

'Vitriolic hate' is reflected in YOUR comments toward anyone who questions Clinton or wants the facts.

SHAME on you.
 
 
-4 # lights 2016-08-13 20:28
You are a pest CL38.
 
 
+1 # CL38 2016-08-13 23:22
The Truth About Hillary's Bizarre Behavior

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqbDBRWb63s
 
 
+5 # WBoardman 2016-08-14 14:43
This clip is provocative, but it has also been manipulated –
slow motion, and cut reporter before she smiles –
possibly in other ways.

The narrator assumes a conclusion that has not yet been proved.
 
 
-2 # Capro-Lupo 2016-08-15 13:23
But, William Boardman, YOUR article and YOUR comments posted under it assume unproved and purely unsupported conclusions and disregard or dismiss, cynically, hard evidence that is apparently valid and not disproved.

Consider my posts above at 2016-08-14 21:35 and below at 2016-08-14 20:06 and 2016-08-15 03:02 and 2016-08-16 07:11 and 2016-08-16 07:11 and 2016-08-16 12:42 and 2016-08-16 07:45.

Also this
http://globalresearch.ca/hillary-clinton-medical-records-leaked-dementia-seizures-black-outs/5541018

and this
http://inquisitr.com/3205003/is-ralph-nader-jumping-aboard-the-trump-train/

Pro-Clinton pundits and sleazy political journalists have begun bashing Jill Stein. Since she is a respected medical doctor and Harvard Medical School professor, the attacks paint her a "pseudo-scienti st" who promotes woo-woo junk-science that "true" science has debunked. The attacks rest only on cooked-up falsehood. But too many "intelligent," "well-educated" voters are eating the toxic soup.

Trump is an easy, but mis-cast target. Deceitful, inflammatory Trump-bashing is an easy way of installing Clinton and realizing her horrifically monstrous "policies" and the already-manifes t corrupt, greedy, power-hungry, criminal, and mass-murderous inclinations of her psychopathy.

The anti-Stein trash-journalis m is not abundant yet, but only because the usual polling sources hold that her election-market share is not greater than 6% (and about 4% average).
 
 
-3 # Capro-Lupo 2016-08-15 23:03
This evening, I had time enough to view the youtube video CL38 referenced (above, CL38 2016-08-13 23:22). I agree that the video is manipulated, perhaps to exaggerate behaviors to make them appear more likely pathological symptoms. Also, clearly the video's narrator is markedly biased and presents an almost ludicrously biased commentary (of quality rather like a late-night TV ad or infomercial).

Still, the video shows a person suffering some kind of neurological/me ntal/physiologi cal disorder. I will not guess the nature of her trouble. But clearly she is at least neurologically troubled, and clearly, too, the trouble affects her social, political, professional, and public interpersonal conduct.
 
 
+1 # Barbara K 2016-08-14 13:49
CL 38 Show me where I've shown hate and vitriol, then read the other stuff on here, including your own

..
 
 
-1 # librarian1984 2016-08-15 08:00
Even one blow to the head that results in a loss of consciousness can dramatically increase the risk of Parkinson's disease.

UW researchers found the risk of Parkinson's is 350% greater for those who lost consciousness after a head trauma.
 
 
+10 # BlueMorpho 2016-08-13 12:28
@lib,
1. Agreed.
2. I SERIOUSLY doubt either candidate will agree to that or to release genuine findings by disinterested doctors (i.e., at the very least, they'll want to continue breathing.).
3. Dr. Bardack's bodyguards need bodyguards. I wouldn't rule out food testers.
4. It's been real for some time now. I'm discovering the surreal and real can co-exist, even merge, rather well. Unfortunately.
5. Abandon all hope.
 
 
+11 # CL38 2016-08-13 18:34
I think you're right -- neither would agree to accurate information release. I still advocate mandatory physical and mental health testing for ALL candidates running for office. Good luck with getting that passed, right!?
 
 
+8 # norman markowitz 2016-08-13 12:34
There comes a point where you have to stop answering the "high functioning" crazies, Drudge, Hannity, etc. These people and Trump and their fans deserve each other. There is an German term for crazy which translates as "not with the rest of us". But what about the rest of us? What are our responsibilitie s?

In a political system based on competitive elections, even one like ours without the standard rules concerning funding, access to mass media, even runoff provisions to ensure fair elections, citizens still have the responsibility to take their rights and responsibilitie s seriously. If people can listen to Trump and watch Trump and vote for him to prevent a "demented" Clinton from reaching the Presdency,and the rest of us can't outvote them, then we can prepare to drink Trump and Tonic, put Trump Steaks on the table, never leave home without our Trump Express cards and most of all build our fallout shelters using contractors approved by the Trump,Emergency Management Administration( TEMA).
Then we will live in Trump America under the system of Demented Democracy for as long as it lasts. Of course, you should realize that I am just being sarcastic
 
 
+6 # CL38 2016-08-13 18:35
maybe sarcastic--not so much?!
 
 
+19 # grandlakeguy 2016-08-13 14:46
If we actually end up having to see either Clinton or Trump in the White House I think that there will be millions of Americans who will need mental health assistance after enduring this horrible election season.

The world deserves better than Clinton or Trump!
 
 
+7 # CL38 2016-08-13 18:36
good observation!
 
 
+12 # Majikman 2016-08-13 21:57
GLG..Back when Dubya stole the election I was so depressed that I called a friend, a shrink, to ask for an appt. She responded, "Don't bother, I'm as depressed as you". At least we had a good laugh.
 
 
+1 # Capro-Lupo 2016-08-15 13:38
Dubya did not steal it. Five Supreme Court Justices did — by denying the Court's own precedent, creating non-existent law, outright lying, and interfering unlawfully with Florida's legitimate, lawful election process.

Bush did not even have standing to sue.

One could argue, respectably, that the five Justices committed High Crimes and Misdemeanors that would have justified impeaching them and removing them from office.

But the real disgrace was Gore. He turned tail and ran to bed to hug his teddy bear, rather than fight the matter by putting an Electoral College challenge in Congress [3 U.S.C. §15].
 
 
+8 # jdd 2016-08-13 15:14
They are both mentally imbalanced.
 
 
0 # Capro-Lupo 2016-08-14 20:25
I am not prepared to determine any stranger's need of a mental exam. Rather presumptuous.

Do you believe Dr. Bardack would risk her license to disclose her patient's confidential medical record?

Dr. Bardack would require Clinton's consent.

Would Clinton consent to a disclosure that she (Clinton) did not have twisted into a glowing health report?

Might Dr. Bardock take some special value from Clinton (surely not a bribe) to fudge Clinton's record?
 
 
-1 # Capro-Lupo 2016-08-16 13:32
Please see my posts at 2016-08-16 07:11 and 2016-08-16 07:11 and 2016-08-16 07:45 (below).
 
 
-3 # WBoardman 2016-08-16 17:51
[quote name="Capro-Lup o"] says, above:
"I am not prepared to determine any stranger's need of a mental exam."

In an earlier comment Capro-Lupo says:

"Still, the video shows a person suffering some kind of neurological/me ntal/physiologi cal disorder. I will not guess the nature of her trouble. But clearly she is at least neurologically troubled, and clearly, too, the trouble affects her social, political, professional, and public interpersonal conduct."
 
 
-1 # Capro-Lupo 2016-08-16 18:03
I did not determine anyone's need of mental exam. I did not attempt to diagnose anyone. I did no more than notice symptoms (which any attentive person can notice) and notice also that the symptoms show "a person suffering some kind of neurological/me ntal/physiologi cal disorder."

I said also that "I will not guess the nature of her trouble." I thought that "she is at least neurologically troubled, and clearly, too, the trouble affects her social, political, professional, and public interpersonal conduct." The latter observation derives from how people have reacted to her apparent symptoms, some of which reactions the video shows, others of which include exactly what your article reports — though the report is patently slanted against Trump and in favor of Hillary.

Do not change my language — by implication or innuendo — to terms you can use, illegitimately, to refute my actual statements. You have seemed inclined to use such tactic recently, as in treating Trump’s non-murder-inci ting words as if they incited murder and in suggesting that Trump really did rape a 13-year-old girl, though you have no competent evidence of such.
 
 
+24 # heiko12 2016-08-13 10:05
a rational electorate?

are we talking Fantasyland here, or the USA?
 
 
+11 # Anonymot 2016-08-13 10:43
Is there a difference? We've been nation building and it's us - Usafanland.

Construction Termination Date - 7 November 2016
 
 
+40 # Majikman 2016-08-13 10:08
Speculation that Trump has early Alzheimer's and Clinton has dementia. Can this freakin' election get any crazier???
 
 
+16 # BlueMorpho 2016-08-13 12:08
@Majikman,
Let's hope not. But there's still time for more. This is Aug. It ain't over yet. (Gulp.)

: (
 
 
+15 # djnova50 2016-08-13 12:30
If Donald Trump has early Alzheimer's, then he has dementia as well. Alzheimer's is just one type of dementia. The only definitive way to diagnose Alzheimer's is through a brain autopsy. But, Alzheimer's seems to be the most common type of dementia.
 
 
+15 # dascher 2016-08-13 13:40
and why would Trump object to a "brain autopsy". He is so ignorant that he wouldn't understand that autopsies are performed on dead people.

Of course, the thing about Trump is that he's ALWAYS had a screw or two loose. His insane blatherings are more a sign of his lifelong psychotic state than of Alzheimer's or any other kind of dementia.
 
 
+13 # grandlakeguy 2016-08-13 14:48
But his "insane blatherings" represent the highest level of his qualifications to his supporters!
 
 
+9 # CL38 2016-08-13 18:40
"His insane blatherings are more a sign of his lifelong psychotic state than of Alzheimer's or any other kind of dementia."

Whether he's psychotic or has Alzheimer's, shouldn't we know for sure? Either one renders him incapable.
 
 
+3 # BlueMorpho 2016-08-14 10:40
@CL38,
I've seen psychosis and what it does to innocent people. It's (potentially) tragic, heartbreaking and frightening, especially if you've no prior experience or knowledge of it.

What I wonder about is the way Trump repeats the sentences before moving on to the next thing he says.
 
 
+4 # Capro-Lupo 2016-08-14 21:26
"Dementia" is a fascinatingly ambiguous and overbroad/under inclusive term.

If a 75 IQ person does not develop brain defects or a "disease" like Alzheimer's (also an ambiguous term) but becomes very emotionally tired when reaching 80 years and preforms intellectually worse than 40 years earlier, is the person demented? When? At birth? At 80?

Big Pharma compounds the linguistic/logi cal/real-scient ific trouble by inventing non-existent diseases, to sell drugs fraudulently advertised to cure the non-diseases. An outstanding example is Fibromyalgia. The scam-tendency seems to have begun in the late 19th century, with "halitosis" — invented to sell Listerine. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/marketing-campaign-invented-halitosis-180954082/?no-ist

The trouble was worsened also by the advent of the DSM, which seeks to supplant individual-spec ific effective psychotherapy with slide-rule pseudo-diagnosi s and pill-pushing, "justified" by incompetent mental health practitioners' dependence on bullshit assertions of genetic cause, assertions put to deflect attention from their being unable to diagnose accurately and treat fittingly with psychotherapy.
 
 
0 # Anarchist 23 2016-08-16 15:20
Yes
 
 
+21 # Jim Rocket 2016-08-13 10:19
We need to have a society-wide conversation about psychopathy...w hat it is, how it affects behavior and how we can protect ourselves from people who are born with literally no conscience or empathy. The most common misconception is that psychopaths are violent when the reality is that only a small percentage are and those are the ones who usually end up in the corrections system.

Psychologists have established a scale because it is a spectrum. Hillary may well be on the low end of the spectrum but I'm sure Trump score would be just tremendous... highest ever!
 
 
+14 # guomashi 2016-08-13 10:27
Quoting Jim Rocket:
We need to have a society-wide conversation about psychopathy...what it is, how it affects behavior and how we can protect ourselves from people who are born with literally no conscience or empathy.


Those people born with no conscience or empathy are the 1%. They will never allow a conversation.
 
 
+5 # Jim Rocket 2016-08-13 16:28
Not really. Considering you only have to be making around $200K to be in the 1% there are many there who aren't. Lots of psychopaths are failures in life, too., but certainly you'd expect to find many psychopaths at the top of the heap. I've read that some Wall St. firms are testing applicants and hiring the ones with the higher scores on the test. (!)

Some psychological studies have shown that wealth can REDUCE empathy which is why I think we should treat wealth like a drug. Indeed many very rich people act like junkies regarding money and they should be treated not with deference but like people who are intoxicated and have serious problems.

The "nobility" of old didn't want to have the conversation either but it happened. Now, like then, there's way more of us than there are of them. I don't expect it to be easy but you sound like you're already defeated.
 
 
+7 # CL38 2016-08-13 18:54
we can't allow THAT to stop us from eliminating people with no conscience or empathy. just one more thing to fight for.
 
 
+3 # GreenBee 2016-08-16 08:32
Also, the Religious Right has huge problem with the concept of the "unconscious mind." They find it very uncomfortable, probably because they have so much repressed material themselves, but they state that accepting this concept would absolve people from guilt and punishment, and we know how much they like to dole out punishment. Thus, they will fight any really deep analysis of how the human psyche works. Yet, paradoxically, they all will tell you they want the practice of "subliminal advertising" to be illegal.
 
 
+22 # librarian1984 2016-08-13 10:34
The point is NOT to be speculating at all .. but to demand both receive full exams by neutral examiners and the publc gets a full report.

It doesn't matter who's the farthest on the scale. We don't want ANY mental health issues with a finger on the button, right? What if one of them is a sociopath? Are you okay with that too?

I don't demonize mental health issues. I've got a few of my own and my husband's family ...

The greater argument is incredibly important. But more immediately we need to find out about these two before we vote, yeah?

My very favorite line of this whole campaign is that of the august and apparently persuadable Dr. Harold Bornstein, who declared Trump would be the "healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency". Still makes me laugh.

Cheers, Rocket Man!
 
 
+2 # GreenBee 2016-08-16 08:37
Yes,there is an imperative need to teach the public some fairly basic and well-accepted principles of human psychology. And it is not only people on the right who are quite ignoranton this subject. I meet very well educated and intelligent people of all political stripes who have a very poor understanding of how the human psyche works with no familiarity with ego-defense mechanisms in themselves or others. We should be teaching some of this in public schools starting in middle school and all the way through to graduation.
 
 
+5 # librarian1984 2016-08-13 10:25
Hey I just emailed all my Hillary-support er family and friends!
 
 
-9 # rocback 2016-08-13 11:13
When they get your e-mail maybe they will suggest you get YOUR head examined. :-)
 
 
+4 # Majikman 2016-08-13 15:52
Hey, buttcrack, you don't get to joke with normal people on this site. You are persona non grata and will be judged accordingly.... you and your troll ah-so's Sparkle Plenty, fruitboy, Lippy and the spam king.
 
 
-7 # rocback 2016-08-13 16:36
these aren't "normal" people. :-)
 
 
-1 # BluePill 2016-08-13 18:28
"Hey, buttcrack"

LOL!

That has to be the new official nickname for rocbac
 
 
+24 # Working Class 2016-08-13 11:39
The most recent polling results of the GOP office holders who are up for election or re-election in November showed that by overwhelming margins they favor building a wall. But they want to build it between themselves and Trump.
 
 
+12 # librarian1984 2016-08-13 11:54
haha Working Class!

And I just told a bunch of people at the farmer's market .. and the mailman. People like to stay informed.
 
 
+5 # Working Class 2016-08-14 09:57
And people say the guy couldn't unify the party!
 
 
+3 # CL38 2016-08-13 18:44
bet your HC friends and family will love that!
 
 
+1 # librarian1984 2016-08-13 20:07
They always LOVE hearing from me about politics :-D

Especially not today :-D :-D
 
 
+2 # Majikman 2016-08-13 23:59
Da debil made you do it
 
 
+15 # guomashi 2016-08-13 10:26
"At times it can be very hard to distinguish between extreme right-wing politics and symptoms of dementia."
--- wisdom for the ages.

“It’s not funny if he really has lost the ability to speak like a healthy adult.”
--- not to worry, based on past experience Trump would likely make fun of himself if he could cognize well enough to figure it out.

But the point of this article seems to be blunt. The venerable Saint Reagan served years as the dementia figurehead of these demented United States, and FDR served 3+ terms with polio.

Trump might could be taken out by his cabinet if he lets the Republican party control his choice of members.

Clinton is more likely to declare martial law if her behavior at the convention is any guide.

OH well.... hope dies the last. Here's to Clinton forgetting her seizure meds and Bernie picking up the pieces!
 
 
+17 # BlueMorpho 2016-08-13 12:03
@guomashi,
FDR wasn't a perfect prez, I know that. But is it really fair to his memory to put him in the same sentence as Reagan? Also, do polio and dementia have the same effects on the mind, etc?

As for Hill, how many of her supporters will give any credence to this? They're good at rationalizing.
 
 
+10 # guomashi 2016-08-13 12:25
My point was that physical problems don't necessarily lead to incompetency.
 
 
+7 # CL38 2016-08-13 18:52
of course, FDR was IMO one of, if not the best, President we ever had. He learned from his physical limitations, which helped him to become a more compassionate, effective political leader.

But we sure don't want blatant indications of mental health problems that impact leadership or judgement... or potential incapacitating physical health, in either candidate.
 
 
-3 # Capro-Lupo 2016-08-14 21:08
FDR caused Pearl Harbor, to get us into the war, because his economic program went bust in 1937. He told unions to f..k off, despite they got him elected. He remained silent against imprisoning Japanese-Americ ans in concentration (oops, "internment") camps (oops, Midwest rest resorts).

Oh, I know my Pearl Harbor note will draw "conspiracy theory" accusations. I do not give a damn. If this comment thing would permit a 5000-word post, I would submit proof of FDR's treason.
 
 
+3 # BlueMorpho 2016-08-14 09:19
@guo,
Fair enough.

@CL38,
While I don't want to stray far from the point, I thought I'd clarify what I meant apropos FDR. Yeah, I grasp that he was a good prez overall and better than Reagan. But wasn't he also the same prez was responsible for internment camps, refusing refugees and was less pro-active on civil rights (aka Jim Crow) than he might have been?

Btw, when you say potentially incapacitating physical ailment, to what degree and of what nature?
 
 
+5 # CL38 2016-08-14 12:51
good question about defining incapacitating physical illness. i thought about that as I posted it, but don't have a good answer. think it's important to have public debates/discuss ion about what's acceptable and what isn't.

agree, FDR wasn't perfect regarding issues you mention--and some others as well. but what he accomplished was amazing. what I'm weighing is:
1. he grew both as a President & human being, despite descending from 1% privilege and wealth into greater social and political awareness--in part due to the polio he'd contracted.
2. He pushed Democrats to pass legislation that created programs to lift the majority up out of poverty brought on by Wall Street corruption (sound familiar?)
3.Eleanor pushed him as much as possible on civil rights issues. She was far more aware of racism and seemed to function on so many social/economic issues as his and the nation's conscience.

FDR's work as President helped to pave the way for the thriving, successful middle class to grow, thanks to the Democrats of the late 40's and 50's.
 
 
+41 # MillValleyMaven 2016-08-13 10:28
Best line from the article:
"At times it can be very hard to distinguish between extreme right-wing politics and symptoms of dementia."
 
 
+13 # BlueMorpho 2016-08-13 12:06
@MillValleyMaven,
Fuckin' A. That's literally part of why my mentor used the term Republican Personality Disorder. She meant it literally.
 
 
+7 # CL38 2016-08-13 18:46
also known as "authoritarian" disorder.
 
 
0 # Patriot 2016-08-13 19:21
Please, no obscenities. See rules above.
 
 
+5 # BlueMorpho 2016-08-14 09:27
@Patriot,
I'm trying to feel confused. Was your reply to me and about my 1st sentence? As a courtesy, I did check the rules. I saw nothing that specified "no cursing." In one post I used the "f" word and, if I recall correctly, other readers did so before I submitted my comment. That's part of why I felt freer to do so.

What I do see are rules against personal attacks, vitriol, etc., some of which it seems I've already been subjected to.
 
 
0 # BlueMorpho 2016-08-15 02:16
Trying NOT to feel confused.
 
 
-18 # lights 2016-08-13 13:13
OR "extreme left-wing politics and symptoms of dementia."
 
 
+30 # Working Class 2016-08-13 10:30
We now know the Saint Ronnie was suffering from Alzheimers while in office and that turned pretty well didn't it?.....OH WAIT!
 
 
+13 # Radscal 2016-08-13 18:34
Saint Ronnie was "out of the loop" at least from the day a member of a family close to VP GHW Bush nearly shot him to death.
 
 
+5 # Capro-Lupo 2016-08-14 21:01
Do not forget Reagan followed the advice of Nancy's astrologist and believed, truly, that his B movies were real history that would come to life with his (Reagan's) Presidency, his/its decisions.
 
 
+2 # Radscal 2016-08-15 15:01
What? You mean Saint Ronnie didn't personally liberate Concentration Camps?

Blasphemy!

Next thing we'll hear is that HRC didn't really duck sniper fire in Bosnia.
 
 
+17 # Realist1948 2016-08-13 12:10
I am not qualified to offer a medical opinion regarding the mental health of either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton. But just listening to Trump and observing some video clips of him speaking, I must say that I'd be very worried if he were to somehow become president. Examples of his nonsensical pronouncements abound, and he seems to be getting worse.

Recently Trump called Obama and Clinton the co-founders of ISIS. As was widely reported, he insisted that he was not speaking in metaphors -- he meant it literally. Only after various pundits responded in horror did Trump claim he had been speaking sarcastically.

What sort of person makes preposterous statements, waits for reactions, and then tells the world whether or not he was being serious? Certainly not a person who might hold the most powerful office in the world.

Trump's run is over.
 
 
+15 # BluePill 2016-08-13 18:32
"What sort of person makes preposterous statements, waits for reactions, and then tells the world whether or not he was being serious? "

A child seeking attention.
 
 
+6 # Ralph 2016-08-14 08:12
Unfortunately, there is a kernel of truth in the ISIS statement. Who would claim that ISIS would exist today without Junior Bush invading Iraq, Obama/Clinton overthrowing the Libyan government, US/European allies destabilizing Syria. It's to the point that the US/Saudis are fighting WITH ISIS in Yemen. The CIA and US Military were fighting each other in Syria with two opposed proxy armies. Yet we continue to send arms into the region, hand over fist because it is good for business.
 
 
+2 # BlueMorpho 2016-08-14 10:49
@Ralph,
Thank you Ralph. It's a sizable kernel. I don't recall if I commented about that in another article on this website. But, keeping in mind Dubbya, Clinton's vote, etc., if Obama and particularly Clinton didn't give birth to ISIS, they were certainly helpful ob-gyns and midwives.

Trump might not be my cup of tea. But, fair is fair and once in a while he does make sense and speak truthfully, intentionally or not.

Makes me think a wee bit of Cassandra. No insult intended to the ancient playwrights.
 
 
+2 # Ralph 2016-08-14 18:03
As my old econ professor used to say, even a blind chicken gets a corn. Trump is without a doubt, a blind chicken.
 
 
+2 # James Marcus 2016-08-13 16:49
Why is this article presented ...with a scowling Trump face? Completely irrelevant.
It Wouldn't reveal a SERIOUS PREJUDICE, on your part, would it?
RSN is rapidly losing me with TRASH like this
 
 
-8 # Barbara K 2016-08-13 19:21
James Marcus: Totally agree. This once was a rational and sensible site. Not so much any more. Many of my friends from this site already left. I've been a member since '09 and never before have I seen such trash and lies spewed with all the hate rants on here. Poor Mr. Ashe wants donations? I don't think I am willing to pay for hateful trash. I do try to hold on to see if it ever returns to normal, as this was my favorite site, but not so much any more.

..
 
 
+1 # Ralph 2016-08-14 08:27
Thanks Barb. If you could take a minute, who do you see as the "problem"? People leaning towards Trump or Clinton supporters? You are replying to a pro-Trump post so it appears that you think there are too many Clinton supporters? We see this every election season on the internet. It's like a game of football for many of these people. Once the game is over, they go watch some other game until four years hence. I would take it with a grain of salt. If you were a moderator, how would you deal with it?
 
 
+1 # Barbara K 2016-08-14 14:03
Ralph: I am a Clinton supporter. I see lies and made up scandals on here a lot. When I try to show proof that they are wrong, I get sworn at, called names, and generally disrespected. My comment should be just as important as anyone else's. You can take a look at my comments, I guess that would be easier for you to understand what I am trying to say. I'm about to give up and leave this site, and really hate to, as it was always my favorite one until the Trump-like vitriol started. I have never personally attacked anyone, but I get personally attacked with nearly if not all comments I put on here. I am on some sites where the members are much more courteous to one another, and makes the experience of commenting much more enjoyable; like it once was on here. Most of my friends from this site, have gone, and I guess there is no reason for me to stay just to be treated like crap. At least, I know I tried to stay a member.

..
 
 
+1 # Ralph 2016-08-14 17:50
I certainly hope you stay and rough out these tough election seasons. Civility gets thrown out the window. Unfortunately, what we are witnessing is two very unpopular politicians being force fed on the working class. The working class in America is quite angry about the funnel being shoved down our throats. And rightly so. That said, it is unwise to turn on each other like a pack a rabid dogs.
 
 
+5 # Ralph 2016-08-14 08:22
This isn't specific to RSN. The MSM in general is frequently putting out pictures of Clinton and Trump side by side. Trump is usually scowling or angrily shouting whilst Clinton has her happy grandmother face on or looks seriously determined. I don't see RSN seriously invested in the corporatist duopoly as evidenced by the fair shake they gave Sanders during the primary.
 
 
+6 # lorenbliss 2016-08-13 20:34
The worst -- that is the deadliest and most terrifying -- aspect of Hillary the Horrible is that other peoples, other cultures, other world-views -- are unreal to her and therefore no more significant than a solitary dust mote or a single drop of rain.. That is why she can think and speak of exterminating us with even less concern than she would have for squashing a bug.
 
 
-6 # WYThomas 2016-08-13 21:46
There ARE too many Hillary-haters commenting here. I will continue to support RSN, because of the variety of excellent articles available. However, I will no longer spend time reading comments from the same cynical individuals, who time and again viciously attack dedicated public servants with decades-long records, who have not been found to have broken any law(s). Conjecture and conspiracy theories have no place in rational discussion.
 
 
+5 # guomashi 2016-08-13 23:34
Quoting WYThomas:
I will no longer spend time reading comments from the same cynical individuals, who time and again viciously attack dedicated public servants with decades-long records, who have not been found to have broken any law(s).


Huh.
Like Dick Cheney?
 
 
0 # Ralph 2016-08-14 08:45
I just don't see it. Right above, two posts eviscerating Trump and aptly pointing out that he is a man-child with plenty of thumbs up votes. It is imperative that we agree to disagree and state our cases in calm, rational form.

As for breaking laws, I don't think the Nazis broke many laws. They just rubberstamped their criminality with a judicial system that was corrupted and immoral. Think very carefully about what this nation has become today.
 
 
+5 # CL38 2016-08-14 13:24
As I'm sure you're aware, the Nazi's took over the media, destroyed unions, attacked education and universities, attacked professional working women to force them back into the home and controlled every part of public life. including employment, education and the economy.

The GOP based much of their 40 year agenda on the nazi platform. Democrats sat back and watched until recently. Today's 1% Democrats are colluding participants.
 
 
+2 # Ralph 2016-08-14 17:38
Have to give pastor Hedges credit on this. He astutely predicted this Wiemar Republic where weak and ineffective liberal and conservatives bow down to criminals and thugs. In this case, the MIC, banksters and Wall Street criminals are laughing all the way to the bank.
 
 
0 # angelfish 2016-08-13 23:29
The differences between Hillary and the Donald are GLARING. Aside from the fact that she is head and shoulders above him intellectually, she is able to conduct a lucid conversation for however long one wants. Trump can't connect three words together in anything resembling coherence for Sixty Seconds or longer! Aside from his OTHER Psychiatric Diagnoses, I'm sure Dementia is inching closer and closer to his Primary Disability. He is blatantly, obviously Non Compis Mentis. He just hasn't been Officially diagnosed yet, OR, if he has, he's not sharing that information with ANYONE!
 
 
+1 # Barbara K 2016-08-14 15:20
Hi, angelfish, good to see you. I agree with you totally. I gave you a green mark, but it switched itself to red, just so you know. The Donald cannot hold a candle to Hillary. They run on lies and made up scandals, even faked videos.

..
 
 
+1 # angelfish 2016-08-14 18:17
Thanks, Barb. I have a sneaking suspician that RSN has been over-taken by Trump Trolls considering all the Flak I've been getting lately. Not to worry, Truth, Justice and the American Way WILL prevail! We outnumber them by the Hundreds of Thousands!
 
 
-1 # Capro-Lupo 2016-08-14 20:06
William Boardman:

Concerning Clinton and Parkinson’s Disease, consider this source, not Fox News or Martin Shkreli, but a board certified anesthesiologis t, who believes that most or all Clinton’s increasing, strange symptoms are explained by Parkinson’s Disease [aka "PD"]: http://6889-presscdn-0-68.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Hillary-Clinton-Health.pdf

Parkinson’s can impair language (communication/ comprehension), intellectual performance, accuracy of intellectual apprehension, emotion-recogni tion, emotion-stabili ty, memory, reasoning capacity, or judgment, and it may cause seizures, fugues, loss of consciousness.......
A few of many scholarly sources:
http://jnnp.bmj.com/content/48/6/517.short
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1166(199910)14:10%3C866::AID-GPS38%3E3.0.CO;2-Z/abstract
http://www.neurology.org/content/39/4/557.short
http://www.pnas.org/content/93/24/13534.full
http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/ccp/37/3/364/
http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/neu/24/2/176/
http://journals.lww.com/cogbehavneurol/Abstract/2003/12000/A_Review_of_the_Cognitive_and_Behavioral_Sequelae.1.aspx
http://jnnp.bmj.com/content/68/4/423.short

Respecting various aspects of Hillary's health or possible illnesses, see also the observations of one internist, http://www.inquisitr.com/3430635/dr-drew-is-gravely-concerned-about-hillary-clintons-health-and-healthcare-possible-brain-damage/
 
 
-3 # Capro-Lupo 2016-08-15 03:02
23 May, Marc Ash published an RSN piece urging us to vote for Clinton if she wins the primary. The piece surprised because of its timing, rather like that of the 6 June AP announcement that Clinton won the nomination — a day before the California primary.

RSN has run four (libelous) pieces asserting that Trump incited murder, though he did not say anything that could be such incitement. RSN published a (libelous) Michael Moore piece that opined not only that Trump incited murder but also that he is insane.

William Boardman’s piece treats as if equal (a) invalid, "armchair diagnoses" and (libelous) assertions that Trump is insane and (b) not-disproved medical evidence that Hillary suffers early onset dementia or similar Parkinson's Disease symptoms that may render her unfit to hold office.

Has RSN been a Hillary soldier from the outset?

RSN republishes Counterpunch articles. But RSN has NOT published any Counterpunch pieces that criticize the current "journalism" trend of telling the public Trump incited murder or is nuts but not questioning Hillary's mental health, her mass-murderous and corrupt use of her Secretary of State position, or her empathically numb, devilishly cynical, bone-chilling reactions regarding violent deaths of people who stand in the way of the Clintons or their objectives.

One of several relevant Counterpunch pieces RSN has not republished:
http://counterpunch.org/2016/08/12/clintonites-feign-outrage-at-threats-of-violence/
 
 
+1 # WBoardman 2016-08-16 18:03
If Capro-Lupo will carefully re-read my piece,
Capro-Lupo should discover that
I assume NONE of the evidence relating to either candidate
is true or false, but in need of serious, transparent medical
testing as appropriate to the allegations.

If Capro-Lupo believes that neither candidate
has given us reason at least to wonder what's going on
in his or her head, well, OK, fine, don't worry, be happy ;-)))
 
 
-3 # Capro-Lupo 2016-08-16 18:10
Mr. Boardman: I have read your piece thrice, scrupulously. It says and does what I wrote earlier.

I wonder at Hillary's health, or psychopathy.

Trump's behavior does not make me apprehensive. I would feel concerned if Trump suffers a genetic or entrenched psychic problem akin to Copralalia. But I have not, yet, encountered any evidence that could support a case that he suffers such condition, rather than a refreshing, politically incorrect bluntness and occasional language slips or foolish off-hand comments.

The far left progressive Ralph Nader has complimented Trump’s speech, its style, its diction, grammar, and syntax — and a number of Trump’s policy positions. http://inquisitr.com/3205003/is-ralph-nader-jumping-aboard-the-trump-train/

I agree with Nader: Trump’s "outbursts" are virtues much more than troubles.

But I hope Dr. Jill Stein will develop a chance of winning.
 
 
+3 # JSRaleigh 2016-08-15 11:04
Quoting William Boardman, Reader Supported News:
political lynch mob rushing to judgment


I do believe Mr. Boardman has summed up the whole of the article in that single phrase.
 
 
-2 # Capro-Lupo 2016-08-16 07:11
Curious. William Boardman, Hillary supporters, Trump bashers, and Snopes ASSUME, without proof, that the 28 July 2015 "Dr. Lisa Bardack" letter is authentic AND speaks truth. On the premise of that ASSUMPTION, those persons or sources question the 5 February and 20 March Dr. Bardack documents, because (a) they do not look like the 28 July 2015 letter (different letterhead, no signature...... ) and (b) Snopes insists that physicians do not produce documents like the 5 February and 20 March reports.

But Hillary lies nearly as reflex, even concerning the most serious matters. Her campaign lies. The DNC lies. She and her campaign and the DNC create evidence. So, why do Snopes and Mr. Boardman and the others not consider the possibility (a) that Hillary or her campaign or the DNC faked the 28 July 2015 letter or (b) that Hillary or her campaign or the DNC obtained from Dr. Bardack a false (or "beneficially" incomplete) statement of Hillary’s health.

I have undergone surgery at a local major medical institution. The chief surgeon was a professor of vascular surgery, head of the vascular surgery department, a private physician, and a member of the general surgery department. He has four letterheads, each reflecting one of those four capacities.

I have received physician reports that are notably INformal, do not bear the physician’s signature, and do not state the physician’s credentials. An example follows in my next post, put as a Reply, immediately below.
 
 
-3 # Capro-Lupo 2016-08-16 07:11
The following is the text of an actual medical report issued in my case by the Legacy Health system of hospitals and clinics of the Portland, Oregon area. To protect my privacy and prevent identity theft and hacking of my financial life, I have Xed-out some items.

Patient Demographics - Male, born XXX XX, 1940
Patient Address Communication Language Race / Ethnicity
XX SW XX ST
XX, OR 97XXX
503-XXX-XXXX .Home.
XXXX@comcast.net
zzz@lhs.org
English .Preferred. White or Caucasian / Non-Hispanic

Note from Legacy Health
This document contains information that was shared with XX. It may not contain the entire record from Legacy Health.

X-RAY FINGER LEFT 3 VIEWS
CLINICAL DATA: Male, 75 years old, with pain.
COMPARISON: None.
TECHNIQUE: AP, lateral and oblique views of the left second finger are obtained.
FINDINGS: No fracture, dislocation, subluxation or radiopaque foreign body is
noted. Mild DJD is noted.
IMPRESSION:
Unremarkable finger aside from mild DJD.
Verified by XXX XXX, MD on 4/27/2016 9:02 PM
Procedure Note
Edi, Rad Results In - XX/27/XXXX 9:03 PM PDT
X-RAY FINGER LEFT 3 VIEWS
CLINICAL DATA: Male, 75 years old, with pain.
COMPARISON: None.
TECHNIQUE: AP, lateral and oblique views of the left second finger are obtained.
FINDINGS: No fracture, dislocation, subluxation or radiopaque foreign body is
noted. Mild DJD is noted.
IMPRESSION:
Unremarkable finger aside from mild DJD.
Verified by XXXXX, MD on X/27/XXXX 9:02 PM
 
 
-1 # Capro-Lupo 2016-08-16 12:42
If an INTELLIGENT person tried to fake the 5 February and 20 March Dr. Bardack documents, why would the person not (a) date the document LATER than 28 July and (b) use precisely the letterhead of the 28 July Dr. Bardack letter?

Perhaps the 5 February and 20 March documents' letterhead may be true and the 28 July letter's letterhead and the 28 July letter false.

The 28 July letter seems to serve a purpose different from that of the earlier documents, a purpose that requires a protection of Hillary's medical privacy (the secreting of her dementia or Parkinson's or their symptoms), because the writer expects letter will be read by the public or some indefinite number of third parties (not limited to medical persons treating or consulting medically with Hillary)..

The 28 July letter feels suspicious (to me): It reads like a promotional document, not a medical report. See letter copy posted at http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/hillary-clinton-medical-records

Perhaps the letter pursued the writer's knowledge that "Three weeks later, on April 12, 2015, Hillary...[woul d announce]...she was running for President" [quote of a sentence of Mr. Boardman's piece].
 
 
+4 # Radscal 2016-08-16 17:41
I am reminded of the "forged" document that brought Dan Rather down. The document "confirmed" what other documents and witnesses had been saying since W Bush's 2000 campaign: namely that he was a deserter in time of war.

But one document CBS got was apparently a forgery, and that became the story. The facts that W went AWOL, refused to do a drug test and then just never reported back to duty were forgotten.

I've always thought that smelled like a Karl Rove trick. Plant a fraudulent document to discredit all the evidence.
 
 
-4 # Capro-Lupo 2016-08-16 07:45
William Boardman notes that the 5 February Dr. Bardack letter proposed a plan and that "The plan included increasing anti-seizure medication and ordering another MRI (brain scan)." Then Mr. Boardman notes that "Strikingly omitted from the second [20 March] report was any mention of an MRI or its results."

Mr. Boardman does not consider that Hillary might have failed to submit to an MRI before 20 March, perhaps because of her busy schedule, perhaps because she DID and DOES suffer dementia or Parkinson’s (either of which can affect intellectual performance, accuracy of intellectual apprehension, emotion-recogni tion, emotion-stabili ty, memory, or reasoning capacity), OR even that perhaps Dr. Bardack forgot to mention MRI results — since even physicians’ memories are imperfect and physicians commit malpractice and make lesser mistakes — or that Dr. Bardack did not find the results medically interesting (to her, at least).

Malpractice? Mistakes? In the late 1970s (my memory believes), a study examined the records of several major, very highly respected hospitals of the Middle Atlantic states and New England (like Johns Hopkins, Einstein Medical Center, Boston General). The study’s question was the incidence of health-harming errors committed at those hospitals. The study found that in any of those hospitals, a patient had a greater than 50% chance (my memory says about a 65% chance) of suffering health-harm because of medical error or errors committed there.
 
 
+1 # WBoardman 2016-08-16 18:26
Capro-Lupo suggests that Clinton's July 28, 2015,
medical report might be a forgery because it "feels suspicious."

That is indeed a fascinating speculation,
and one I had not considered.
Looking at the July 28 letter again, it strikes me
as all too similar to the reports on other candidates.
They all read like promotional documents, in part because
they are all promotional documents.

Too bad Capro-Lupo didn't offer a more persuasive
analysis of why the July 28 letter might be a fake.
The possible rationale is enticing, something along the lines of:
the earlier letters (not fake) were leaked because the later
letter (fake) falsely portrayed Clinton's health and
someone was a whistleblower. Hmmmm....

As for Capro-Lupo's speculation on the MRI that
I called "strikingly omitted" from the follow-up letter –
not knowing any reason for the omission, I chose not
to guess – as as Freud should have been fond of saying:
sometimes an omission is just an omission ;-)))
 
 
-3 # Capro-Lupo 2016-08-16 20:16
Yours, Mr. Boardman: "Capro-Lupo suggests that Clinton's July 28, 2015,
medical report might be a forgery because it "feels suspicious."

That is not all I said. Convenient to your agenda, you disregard the facts & logic that constitute my actual argument, which does not depend on my feeling.

You say also: "Too bad Capro-Lupo didn't offer a more persuasive analysis of why the July 28 letter might be a fake." False.

Partly my argument is the probability that the other two documents are not fake, a probability that is the contrapositive of your bare ASSUMPTION that the 28 July letter is authentic AND truthful.

Partly also my argument is: (a) that the 28 July letter reads like a promotion, not a medical document; (b) that the MRI matter implies, itself, the contrapositive of your patently illogical suggestion that because the 20 March document did not mention the proposed MRI, that document and the 5 February one must be fake.

Again, Mr. Boardman, your treatments and arguments are either specious or false and depend on false premise, false implication, and snide innuendo.

Shame.
 
 
-3 # Capro-Lupo 2016-08-16 21:49
I have perceived that RSN readers and writers react to RSN articles and comments near-exclusivel y per force of their political biases. No evidence or logic, however strong, can move more than few to reconsider an initial belief (and mostly, their positions are beliefs, not thoroughly well reasoned, very well evidenced conclusions). But, so what else is new?

In this election year, though, the problem augurs terrible effect — growing support of Hillary Clinton, who would wreak immense, wide disaster for the bulk of our people and the population of the rest of the world: rising poverty and disease, more environment-deg radation, choking oppression, further suppression of civil liberty, "enhanced" invasion of privacy, greater government secrecy, more regime changes and U.S. military wars of aggression, more thefts of resources, more torture of "terrorists," more unjust imprisonments, and, not very unlikely, atomic war.

As Edward R Murrow said myriad evenings, good night, and good luck.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN