Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
and then

Why is Clinton's health being ignored?

644 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

and then

First, I realize that no Democrat will see this video as anything but a hit piece.  Far from making it unworthy of your time though, I'd say it could be the most important info you'll get on her condition anywhere.  She has been shown to have all the physical issues any woman her age might have, PLUS a distinct issue with physical weakness.  Many email references by her staff citing needs for naps at odd hours and even commenting on herself about chronic fatigue.  She even asks in some - "have I responded already?"  Reagan was 73 and had survived an attempted assassination and STILL had more energy than HC when he ran for a second term.  A second term - after all the grueling trials of the first four years...

The video is well worth watching.  I can just imagine some critical moment where time is of the essence in dealing with an attack and she has to be awakened - or worse - her minders have to be CONVINCED to awaken her.  

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leonardo
4 minutes ago, and then said:

First, I realize that no Democrat will see this video as anything but a hit piece.

I'm no Democrat, but I still see it as a "hit piece".

Clinton's health is often discussed, but as much of what is speculated about her health is just that, speculation, the discussion tends to go nowhere except for becoming a soapbox for the anti-Hillary brigade to shriek out their hate.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome

Because there's a Vast Right Wing Conspiracy against her. So vast, in fact, that any potentially negative news about her is completely ignored by the mainstream media. :unsure2: 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome
19 minutes ago, Leonardo said:

I'm no Democrat, but I still see it as a "hit piece".

Clinton's health is often discussed, but as much of what is speculated about her health is just that, speculation, the discussion tends to go nowhere except for becoming a soapbox for the anti-Hillary brigade to shriek out their hate.

Can you really look at her and not feel anything other than fear and hatred?  

Edited by Grand Moff Tarkin
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor

Ultimately her health is irrelevant.  The constitution only has three requirements to be president and good health isn't one of them.  

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Claire.

How we feel towards a candidate is no excuse for propagating uninformed theories about their health. Peddling the same few videos over and over in no way makes something a reality. If there are real concerns about Hillary's health, then the public should press for a full medical report. Indeed, they should insist that all presidential candidates pass rigorous medical tests to ensure they are both physically and mentally fit for office.

As for Reagan and other past Presidents, a full disclosure of their medical conditions might have kept some of them from office. Reagan started fumbling his speeches about three years into his eight year presidency. He was later diagnosed with Alzheimer's. How is that any less worse than fatigue, a few coughing fits and trip ups?

Is there a possibility that Hillary might have serious medical issues? Maybe, maybe not. But the same holds true for Trump. We just don't know for certain what either candidate's health status truly is.

The following article from CNN discusses this issue on a broader scale, and provides some interesting information on the health of past Presidents. It's well worth a read.

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/09/16/health/presidential-age-too-old/

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leonardo
31 minutes ago, Grand Moff Tarkin said:

Can you really look at her and not feel anything other than fear and hatred?  

I hate neither Clinton nor Trump, I just feel that for differing reasons neither are suitable for the office of President.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome

 

1 minute ago, Clair said:

If there are real concerns about Hillary's health, then the public should press for a full medical report.

And since we know how transparent and open the Clintons and the "Democratic" Party are, that's going to happen. :yes: 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Claire.
1 minute ago, Grand Moff Tarkin said:

And since we know how transparent and open the Clintons and the "Democratic" Party are, that's going to happen. :yes: 

The same holds true for the Republicans.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leonardo

I seem to recall a President who was in a wheelchair. Didn't seem to bother people, though, so long as he could effectively be President.

Clinton looks to have back problems, which would not be unusual for someone of her age - but having a bad back doesn't mean a person can't be President.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aquatus1

Roosevelt had polio, Lincoln had smallpox and depression, George Washington had pretty much every disease under the sun. 

Illness is not and never has been a disqualifier for the presidency.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
2 hours ago, Gromdor said:

Ultimately her health is irrelevant.  The constitution only has three requirements to be president and good health isn't one of them.  

 

I assume that is because it was written during a time when a certain degree of common sense was in force.  The job was no where near as stressful at that time either.  If she is suffering, in her OWN words - "chronic fatigue" - I think voters should be aware of who's hands they are placing their lives in.  Indications of confusion, months after a documented head injury - irrelevant is it?

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
2 hours ago, Clair said:

How we feel towards a candidate is no excuse for propagating uninformed theories about their health. Peddling the same few videos over and over in no way makes something a reality.

I assume that you did not watch the video.  I am referring to the emails (released ONLY after a lawsuit was lost) that explain - in the words of Abedin, Clinton and others - that paint a picture of a chronically tired, confused 68 year old woman too frail to even use traditional aircraft for travel - needing a full size bed.  There's no doubt the video is not meant to be flattering.  Politics ain't beanbag as they say, but the words are Clinton's and her staff's alone.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
crookedspiral

There is no solid evidence that Clinton is in poor health. Clearly the Republicans are grasping for straws. If they want to defeat Hilary then they should have presented a better candidate (which wasn't hard to do...) But hey, americans have a third option in Gary Johnson.

Edited by TruthSeeker_
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Claire.
Just now, and then said:

I assume that you did not watch the video.  I am referring to the emails (released ONLY after a lawsuit was lost) that explain - in the words of Abedin, Clinton and others - that paint a picture of a chronically tired, confused 68 year old woman too frail to even use traditional aircraft for travel - needing a full size bed.  There's no doubt the video is not meant to be flattering.  Politics ain't beanbag as they say, but the words are Clinton's and her staff's alone.

I always read/watch sources before commenting, so yes I watched it. Those symptoms could be a result of many things, some or all of which may or may not impair her ability to be POTUS. We don't know for certain one way or the other. But I do agree with you that the physical and mental health of candidates is important given the nature of the job. Complete medical examinations for all presidential candidates (including the vice presidents) should be mandated, and if anything problematic is found, the candidates should be excluded from consideration. i don't think it reasonable that it's left as guesswork on the part of the voters.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor

We could always introduce a constitutional amendment requiring good physical and mental health as a prerequisite of being president.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MWoo7

I'm in the camp with Gromder and Leonard. HEY very insightful reads there Clair, quite wise kitten years, now we just need to bottle that and make a billion or two 18921e50f1a6f147f09afa9febaca58c.jpg

 

okay ready to ship !

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ouija ouija

Perhaps the 'coughing fits' are simply a ruse to give her time to think what she wants to say next.

The alleged 'seizure' video ................ :hmm: It so obviously isn't a seizure! She's just having a joke with the people around her.

As for having naps, I don't see what the big deal is about this. What woman of her age has such an incredibly busy schedule? I would have thought it was only common sense to grab a power nap whenever she can so that she's refreshed to face the next speech or press conference. I bet there are men almost half her age who do that!

What does concern me is whether or not her brain was damaged during the concussion and resulting blood clot. If memory serves me correctly, it was considered a serious event when it happened and there was speculation that she might end up in a vegetative state.

I'm also intrigued by the 'big boned' guy at her side, with the paramedic badge on his lapel and a syringe in his hand! What's that all about?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Big Jim

The voters are not the only ones interested in Clinton's health.  There are other leaders and people around the world who would be more than willing to exploit any sign of weakness in the American President.  Considering that our currently most active enemies already have a dim view of women, a woman President with any obvious frailty or impairment is perhaps more likely to be tested.  The cough doesn't really concern me.  That is a side effect of some blood pressure medications and given her age and history of blood clots she is probably taking both blood thinners and meds to lower pressure.  That could also lead to sleep disruptions and that is nothing to be taken lightly.  I know from personal experience that sleep problems can make it almost impossible to adhere to a schedule, or to be at your best if forced to.  Fortunately for me, being retired, I have no schedule.  On the other hand the President has a schedule that would be daunting to the Energizer bunny.  Other President's have had medical issues, FDR's polio and JFK's back, for example, but the effects were strictly physical.  They still retained the qualities most important to running a country which are mental clarity and stamina. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leonardo
2 hours ago, Clair said:

I always read/watch sources before commenting, so yes I watched it. Those symptoms could be a result of many things, some or all of which may or may not impair her ability to be POTUS. We don't know for certain one way or the other. But I do agree with you that the physical and mental health of candidates is important given the nature of the job. Complete medical examinations for all presidential candidates (including the vice presidents) should be mandated, and if anything problematic is found, the candidates should be excluded from consideration. i don't think it reasonable that it's left as guesswork on the part of the voters.

Should that also include psychological evaluations, Clair? And what should happen if the evaluation concluded some condition such as sociopathy or narcissism, should the candidate be excluded in that case?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
2 hours ago, Leonardo said:

Should that also include psychological evaluations, Clair? And what should happen if the evaluation concluded some condition such as sociopathy or narcissism, should the candidate be excluded in that case?

I agree with the idea of rigorous physicals for general health and stamina.  The idea of testing for general mental capacity otoh would open a real can of worms.  People with a record sufficient to stand for the job have already been vetted for sanity I think.  The whole purpose for our modern campaigns is to test the candidate's ability to motivate a following for their ideas as well as proving they have the stamina for the grueling work of the job.  She takes a lot of time off DURING the campaign.  Does anyone remember another candidate in the modern era that did this?  I can't remember one who took more than a day or two a couple of times during the season.  She practically STAYS out of public sight.  It isn't unreasonable to want such behavior reasonably explained.  I get the avoidance of press conferences - I don't agree with it but I understand it.  Why run the risk of a verbal gaffe if you can avoid it but to stay out of the public eye MOST of the time?  That isn't normal behavior for a presidential candidate.  In fact I think it's unprecedented.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Claire.
2 hours ago, Leonardo said:

Should that also include psychological evaluations, Clair? And what should happen if the evaluation concluded some condition such as sociopathy or narcissism, should the candidate be excluded in that case?

No I do not, with the exception perhaps of neuropsychological tests.

As for narcissists and sociopaths, if we excluded them we might not have any candidates left to consider.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Claire.
1 hour ago, and then said:

I agree with the idea of rigorous physicals for general health and stamina.  The idea of testing for general mental capacity otoh would open a real can of worms.  People with a record sufficient to stand for the job have already been vetted for sanity I think.  The whole purpose for our modern campaigns is to test the candidate's ability to motivate a following for their ideas as well as proving they have the stamina for the grueling work of the job.  She takes a lot of time off DURING the campaign.  Does anyone remember another candidate in the modern era that did this?  I can't remember one who took more than a day or two a couple of times during the season.  She practically STAYS out of public sight.  It isn't unreasonable to want such behavior reasonably explained.  I get the avoidance of press conferences - I don't agree with it but I understand it.  Why run the risk of a verbal gaffe if you can avoid it but to stay out of the public eye MOST of the time?  That isn't normal behavior for a presidential candidate.  In fact I think it's unprecedented.

Hillary had a grueling schedule as Secretary of State and she kept up with it. I imagine campaigning is just as taxing and stressful, so taking time off makes sense. Trump has also taken weekend and other breaks. Personal feelings on the candidates aside, let's be fair.  I think it unfortunate that Hillary has been dogged by conspiracy theories about her health. Some of the attacks have been outright ludicrous, and even Trump has fueled some of them. Her physician released a medical statement during the campaign indicating that Hillary was in good physical health.

As for Trump's medical doctor, his medical statement indicated that Trump showed only positive results. Positive for what? AIDS? Herpes? What? See how easy it is to go off the rails with speculation?

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.