- Joined
- Jun 20, 2008
- Messages
- 111,874
- Reaction score
- 109,295
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Considering the subnarrative that has been floating regarding this particular evaluation, I believe that while you can intellectually do it, I don't believe that's been the thrust of it thus far.
The President's press office had to bat off any insistence for a mental health exam in *this examination,* which got the press typing ledes and the pundit class especially riled.
Do I think a reasonable person could look at this examination with thought and curiosity at the results? Yes. Do I believe most people (including the President's supporters or fellow-travelers) had that in their heart? Certainly not.
Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
As I said, I'm not approaching this with the kinds of motives you've suggested. If he's mentally unfit for the job then his behavior is perfectly satisfactory evidence of that. And if I'm making the point that a determination of "excellent health" is in direct contrast to observable evidence (and I most certainly am), I'm doing it for its own sake, except insofar as that this is just one more example of an administration that feeds us a steady diet of untruth. What I will not do, as at least one person in this thread has suggested with the "pick your battles" theme of response, is deprioritize an obvious lie just because it should be considered less important than other, more important lies. What I find so offensive is the suggestion that what we're told is more real than our own lying eyes.
We've already burned our way through one Democratic firewall in the beginning of 2018, and if a new narrative is erected that our own senses are to be doubted compared to the administration's determination of reality, then that is another disturbing development.