Medical Doctor's Give Opinion on Hillary's Condition

originally posted by: Indigo5
A rational mind would expect Trump to at least pretend to keep up and release actual medical records? That insane letter written by that quack was kind of insulting to everyone, even his followers.

He stated yesterday that he had a physical and medical tests a week ago and would be releasing them and "specific numbers" regarding the medical tests when he has the results.

*gasp* It sounds like you are saying Trump has a "rational mind."


(If he follows through on that, that is. I will be very annoyed if he doesn't, BTW.)

So, to summarize for most of you ...

There's nothing that Clinton can do to prove she's generally healthy.

You're not going to believe anything that the Campaign releases no matter what the source.

It doesn't matter if it's proven that she doesn't have Parkinson's or what-have-you ... you know she's "seriously ill" because ... you just know.

And, last but not least, unsurprisingly, these beliefs make Clinton unfit for the Presidency in your approximation.

Well ... color me shocked.

For the meantime, I'll hold out the hope that the majority of Americans still have a bit more discernment than is on display here.

a reply to: Realtruth

list of Medical Doctor's that have excellent credentials and have voiced their "Opinions and conclusions",

Credentials aside, have you personally sighted their registrations and bona fides; this is the internet...are they even Drs?

en.wikipedia.org...

57% of eligible voters voted in 2008, you get the government you deserve....hahahaha

originally posted by: Gryphon66
And, last but not least, unsurprisingly, these beliefs make Clinton unfit for the Presidency in your approximation.

I have to admit, you summarized me. Except the above -- unless you mean the obfuscation makes her unfit...which it does in my eyes. It's not so much whatever *undisclosed* illness she might be obfuscating as it is the typical character flaws that I can't seem to give my vote over to. Hiding and lying and treating the voters with the same cynicism she complains she gets from them.

She and her handlers seemed, to me, to be more worried about hiding what was going on than responsibly handling the situation with her well-being in mind.

She claimed to be transparent about her health and she got caught not being transparent about her health. She said she merely stumbled, was only "dizzy," and never lost consciousness. That isn't what I believe I saw. She looked unconscious to me.

It's the lies, for me, that make her unfit. Of course, I haven't voted for a winner since Bill, though. So my metrics don't ever point to a winner anymore.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

What you see as obfuscating I see as a normal response of any intelligent person to the kinds of ludicrous BS she's been accused of for years by the right-wing establishment as well as the mainstream establishment that echoes that garbage for ratings when it suits them.

I would very carefully control access to all information associated with me and my campaign. Sadly, the state of the American taste for absurdity has reached an all time maximum, if it hadn't, Donald Trump would already be back in the Tower sulking (or finding a new model to marry.)

Look at the blatant nonsense that has now creeped over from the wingnut media to all media.

I saw the same thing you and others saw ... but apparently, we're looking through different lenses. She was wan and drawn at the Memorial, she looked thin, she had to hold herself up rigidly waiting for the van which probably took the last of her resources, and when she took a step, the weakness and dizziness that results from dehydration took over for a minute.

If I weren't going to vote for someone who lies ... I would never be voting in this country or any other.

What is lied ABOUT is the telling factor for me.

Sorry if you took my previous post personally ... it certainly wasn't directed at you.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
If I weren't going to vote for someone who lies ... I would never be voting in this country or any other.

What is lied ABOUT is the telling factor for me.

Sorry if you took my previous post personally ... it certainly wasn't directed at you.

Believe me, I am still not certain if I will vote or not.

I think if you are going to lie to people, then you cannot complain when they speculate about what the lies mean. As a leader, she should serve as an example if she doesn't want speculation.

I didn't think you meant your comment for me personally, I just thought you did summarize me while generalizing.

The neat part about being a "Hillary health skeptic" is that we won't have to do a damned thing.

She have another "episode" in public. Or she'll back out of the election.

As for the truth? We'll probably never know.

At sixty eight years old, she isn't in too bad of shape. I don't know why people think she can't be like many other sixty eight year old women, taking three or four prescriptions every day. Since when has being perfectly healthy been a necessity to get elected to that office.

Her dishonesty should qualify her for that position. Only good deceivers need apply.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye



She and her handlers seemed, to me, to be more worried about hiding what was going on than responsibly handling the situation with her well-being in mind.

She claimed to be transparent about her health..... She said she merely stumbled, was only "dizzy," and never lost consciousness. That isn't what I believe I saw. She looked unconscious to me.

I think her dizziness spells...or dehydration factors ... are not really 'lying'... I believe that I experience similar symptoms from the brain damage I had from a May 1997 brain hemorrhage...
the episodes are easily called Dizziness or in my case 'Vertigo' which I take meclizine for every day
some instances I lose all equilibrium, my eyes haze over, the world spins around and I either have enough composure to drop to one knee for a brief spell or fall over

whenever I get too dehydrated... I get visual hallucinations of Angular Geometry, dots & hash-marks... that overwhelms my normal panoramic background of mostly the lawn/gardens at my residence

perhaps HRC is too tight-lipped to disclose her damaged brain episodes as it would surely alienate her from POTUS consideration...

She is most likely incontinent & also wears 'depends' which itself is something to not reveal to the 'great-unwashed' voters

(me, I learned in +20 years to work around my incontinence problems.... I do not work at a desk situation for my workday...I do all outside work where there are plenty of trees & sheds around to void-the-bladder instead of wearing diapers or any forms of catheters

HRC is filled with hubris and is focused on grabbing the Brass-Ring as she rides thru life...I think that kind of purpose-of-life stinks and she needs to redirect her life to Live-Long-&-Prosper as a humble person

I do hope one of HRCs aids or attendants reads this... relates...and tells HRC about how I worked around my disabilities and just how she should approach the requirements of her demands of a leadership lifestyle... if she needs a resource or life-coach I am worth $10K a month

Her and I are both the same age by the way

originally posted by: rickymouse
At sixty eight years old, she isn't in too bad of shape. I don't know why people think she can't be like many other sixty eight year old women, taking three or four prescriptions every day. Since when has being perfectly healthy been a necessity to get elected to that office.

Her dishonesty should qualify her for that position. Only good deceivers need apply.

I've made that argument before, half jokingly, half seriously ... if she has done all that is attributed to her in the public eye for all of these years and yet somehow has never been found guilty of anything?

She's just the kind of criminal mastermind that I want running the syndicate that the USA has become.

She sure beats the egomaniacal blowhard that can't even speak in full sentences without repeating the same words over and over.

There's enough footage to make an armchair diagnosis of just about anything that's severe at this point. She's not well, and it's not pneumonia. I think if you've got enough health problems to dwindle down significantly in the last couple years of your life, your condition can appear to be .... just about anything severe. That's what it looks like to me. Not any one thing, but perhaps a few major illnesses and then you add on the spotlight, and the feedback that gets worse every time you try to make a strong public appearance and something else pops out for the public to analyze.

Sucks to be in her position. Getting old and falling apart is a #ty enough ticket to take, but having billions view it as it's happening? That's a whole other level of #ty.

So, to summarize for most of you ... There's nothing that Clinton can do to prove she's generally healthy. You're not going to believe anything that the Campaign releases no matter what the source. It doesn't matter if it's proven that she doesn't have Parkinson's or what-have-you ... you know she's "seriously ill" because ... you just know. And, last but not least, unsurprisingly, these beliefs make Clinton unfit for the Presidency in your approximation.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Right, Right, and hmmmmm…right!!!!! After all, she hasn’t been very forth coming with anything else, so what on Earth would make us believe her now. Sorry, not buying uh, uh no way!

originally posted by: StarsInDust

So, to summarize for most of you ... There's nothing that Clinton can do to prove she's generally healthy. You're not going to believe anything that the Campaign releases no matter what the source. It doesn't matter if it's proven that she doesn't have Parkinson's or what-have-you ... you know she's "seriously ill" because ... you just know. And, last but not least, unsurprisingly, these beliefs make Clinton unfit for the Presidency in your approximation.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Right, Right, and hmmmmm…right!!!!! After all, she hasn’t been very forth coming with anything else, so what on Earth would make us believe her now. Sorry, not buying uh, uh no way!

And before Sunday, were you on the fence about voting for Clinton and what happened changed your mind?

Let me make a small wager in advance and say "No."

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: rickymouse
At sixty eight years old, she isn't in too bad of shape. I don't know why people think she can't be like many other sixty eight year old women, taking three or four prescriptions every day. Since when has being perfectly healthy been a necessity to get elected to that office.

Her dishonesty should qualify her for that position. Only good deceivers need apply.

I've made that argument before, half jokingly, half seriously ... if she has done all that is attributed to her in the public eye for all of these years and yet somehow has never been found guilty of anything?

She's just the kind of criminal mastermind that I want running the syndicate that the USA has become.

She sure beats the egomaniacal blowhard that can't even speak in full sentences without repeating the same words over and over.

You have to remember, only someone who is insane would want a full time job with a lot of responsibility after sixty five years of age. We work all our lives so we can retire and enjoy the little we have left. She is a little crazy, so is Trump. Both have already left their mark in history already, they are obsessed with power.

a reply to: rickymouse

My goodness ... yes of course ... I had the greatest hope after she left State that she would retire and enjoy those grandchildren.

But no, you're absolutely right. There is a very literal psychosis that drives anyone to exert power over others.

I almost think, at points, that this is some kind of bet between them ... as they have apparently been convenient acquaintances in the past. I'm not sure if you've seen it but there's an interview from NBC News with Trump just after Hillary left State. Trump is going on and on about what an amazing job she did as SoS "above and beyond everybody else".. in his opinion.

You have to see this one to believe it ...



And then he does basically the same thing on Fox News ... except to say she'd make a Terrific President ...

a reply to: Gryphon66

Why do so many people not know what psychosis is? Being power hungry doesn't bring out a state of psychosis. That's just not what it is.

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
a reply to: Gryphon66

Why do so many people not know what psychosis is? Being power hungry doesn't bring out a state of psychosis. That's just not what it is.

Thanks for your opinion. It is my opinion that what I described "the desire to exert power over others" and those that exhibit this desire (politicians, specifically) certainly does qualify as a "very literal psychosis."

Here's a few basic observations that corroborate that opinion ...

Psychosis is generally the term given to noticeable deficits in normal behavior (negative signs) and more commonly to diverse types of hallucinations or delusional beliefs, particularly with regard to the relation between self and others as in grandiosity and pronoia or paranoia.

Normal behavior involves working together with other people, cooperatively in groups, rather than exhibiting the delusional belief that one is better suited to direct or command others because one is "destined to lead" etc.

Psychosis may involve delusional beliefs, some of which are paranoid in nature. Put simply, delusions are false beliefs that a person holds on to, without adequate evidence. It can be difficult to change the belief, even with evidence to the contrary. Common themes of delusions are persecutory (person believes that others are out to harm them), grandiose (person believing that they have special powers or skills), etc.

I'd say two of our favorite "persons looking to have power over others" right now, Trump and Clinton both exhibit pretty obvious paranoia, and even delusions, regardless of evidence to the contrary.

So, ah ... perhaps it's you that doesn't know what psychosis is? Seems to be right in line with my musing on the topic.

/shrug

Reference: Psychosis - Wikipedia

a reply to: Gryphon66

To them this is all a big act. If we are preoccupied arguing which is best, one of them will get elected when neither should be allowed to run for that job. Picking the lesser of two evils has been what it has been all about for decades now.

I hate when they call Hillary Secretary yet when she quit because she was being investigated. She isn't a Secretary anymore and nobody seems to be complaining about that. Since when does a person keep their title like that. That is impersonating a government official. Right now she is Mrs Clinton, not Secretary Clinton. Maybe she is a secretary for the campaign manager, getting a salary from the campaign fund. MSM parrots the Secretary thing.

a reply to: rickymouse

Sort of like Sarah Palin is referred to as Governor Palin even though she quit to avoid ethics charges?

It's common to refer to someone by their highest title reached I guess, all the previous Presidents are still referred to as "President ______"

Etiquette, perhaps?

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: rickymouse

Sort of like Sarah Palin is referred to as Governor Palin even though she quit to avoid ethics charges?

It's common to refer to someone by their highest title reached I guess, all the previous Presidents are still referred to as "President ______"

Etiquette, perhaps?

If she would have not resigned, she probably would have been canned.