Politicians with Dementia/Alzheimers

galdur

hero member

Activity: 616

Merit: 500

Quote from: latinna on September 14, 2014, 01:07:34 PM

Should a serving member of Congress who suffers from Dementia/Alzheimers be forced to step down from their position as them serving while ill does damage to our country or should they be allowed to stay in office no matter how ill they get?

I bring this up because the other night on Bill Maher's show Nancy Pelosi said,

Quote

“Civilization as we know it today would be in jeopardy if the Republicans win the Senate.”

and then a moment later said,

Quote

“Fear is a motivator, and we are not fear-mongers. The Democrats are messengers of hope, and that’s what we will continue to be.”

Giving her the benefit of the doubt, it is pretty clear she is suffering from severe memory loss and possibly has Alzheimers since she completely contradicted herself within a few seconds of speaking.

Not taking into account all the damage Nancy has already done to the United States of America during her years in power, should she be forced to resign to protect the country from further damage due to not being physically/mentally fit to continue?

They´re not fear-mongers? Every time these people mention gun control gun sales spike. Some messengers of hope. No, this is not Alzheimers or dementia, it´s plain old Stupidity.

lifeuptimize

newbie

Activity: 1

Merit: 0

Dementia is big mental diseases and specially for politician. For dementia should treat asap.

umair127

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Quote from: Rigon on September 15, 2014, 11:12:41 AM

Well if nobody expects you to do right by your constituency, outside of being as vocal and as fiery a right-wing lunatic you can be, no amount of pragmatism or good manners from the left will result in good governance.

As a matter of fact, I believe the same sort of thing Charlie Rangel does on this topic. If you want to date someone, it's probably best not to call her a fucking whore. Which is what Pelosi and Obama do quite often. You sow what you reap. Honestly, to not see that is to become totally partisan on your part. I don't particularly support either side, but I do know how to get stuff done. This horrible policy of demonizing the other party is well known to be an administrative failure, no matter how much you may disagree with one side or the other.

zolace

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

Quote from: Rigon on September 15, 2014, 11:12:41 AM

Well if nobody expects you to do right by your constituency, outside of being as vocal and as fiery a right-wing lunatic you can be, no amount of pragmatism or good manners from the left will result in good governance.

It's easier to hate someone and attack them if you don't actually get to know them as an individual but instead view them as nothing more than a faceless part of their political ideology. Schmoozing with the other party at social events is actually an important part of working across the aisle in Washington because it allows them to interact in an arena that isn't purely political, and both parties basically refuse to do it these days.

Rigon

sr. member

Activity: 994

Merit: 441

Well if nobody expects you to do right by your constituency, outside of being as vocal and as fiery a right-wing lunatic you can be, no amount of pragmatism or good manners from the left will result in good governance.

zolace

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

Quote from: Rigon on September 15, 2014, 10:57:38 AM

Quote from: zolace on September 15, 2014, 10:45:08 AM

This is primarily the fault of the Republicans of the early 90s, btw. They're the ones that initiated this modern segregation of social interaction along party lines. The Democrats have embraced what they began, and the nation loses as a result.

I don't know where you are but I'm right in the middle of the country, and I see this every single day. This is what scares me half to death about the GOP and what makes me tend to agree with Pelosi - at this point, there's no expectation that a Republican will go to the state capitol or DC and accomplish anything, there is only the expectation that a person will get elected in order to "take a stand."

And the primary initiator of that behavior was Newt Gingrich back in the early 90s when he and Armey developed the Republican "Contract with America." Part of the internal party politicking of that whole movement was to spend less time "rubbing elbows" in Washington and more time with their constituents back in the home district. Of course they don't really actually do that 2nd part very much, but they embraced the first part and it is a big part of what has led to this polarization.

zolace

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

Quote from: Rigon on September 15, 2014, 10:54:22 AM

Quote from: zolace on September 15, 2014, 10:43:02 AM

Quote from: Rigon on September 15, 2014, 10:39:52 AM

Quote from: umair127 on September 15, 2014, 08:18:09 AM

I don't think it's dementia. She's always been an idiot. I'm not saying the Republicans don't engage in similar inflamed rhetoric, but I have to laugh when Democrats use language like this...Obama included...then say they wonder why Republicans won't work with them.

You don't seriously think that GOP obstructionism really has anything to do with fiery rhetoric on comedy talk shows, do you?

Actually it does. When the parties intermingle socially more gets done. When they stand on their own side and lob rhetorical bombs at each other, less gets done. Seeing the other party as an enemy makes you, and them, less willing to work together on issues. It becomes a game of one upmanship and "beating" the other guys rather than, you know, running the country responsibly.

The GOP is crippled by ideology at this point. The moderate, pragmatic wing of the party is almost nonexistent because everyone is terrified of being primaried from the far right. Thus there is absolutely no room for compromise or cooperation.

I'm in Texas dude, I know all about far-right Republicanism. The fact remains that once they do get into office MOST of them are actually more moderate than what they ran on (aside from the tea party lunatics like Ted Cruz), but the way the two parties interact with each other in Washington has devolved to little more than throwing barbs and hateful rhetoric back and forth. Polarization is a natural result of treating the other party with disdain, and both sides are guilty of doing exactly that.

Rigon

sr. member

Activity: 994

Merit: 441

Quote from: zolace on September 15, 2014, 10:45:08 AM

This is primarily the fault of the Republicans of the early 90s, btw. They're the ones that initiated this modern segregation of social interaction along party lines. The Democrats have embraced what they began, and the nation loses as a result.

I don't know where you are but I'm right in the middle of the country, and I see this every single day. This is what scares me half to death about the GOP and what makes me tend to agree with Pelosi - at this point, there's no expectation that a Republican will go to the state capitol or DC and accomplish anything, there is only the expectation that a person will get elected in order to "take a stand."

Rigon

sr. member

Activity: 994

Merit: 441

Quote from: zolace on September 15, 2014, 10:43:02 AM

Quote from: Rigon on September 15, 2014, 10:39:52 AM

Quote from: umair127 on September 15, 2014, 08:18:09 AM

I don't think it's dementia. She's always been an idiot. I'm not saying the Republicans don't engage in similar inflamed rhetoric, but I have to laugh when Democrats use language like this...Obama included...then say they wonder why Republicans won't work with them.

You don't seriously think that GOP obstructionism really has anything to do with fiery rhetoric on comedy talk shows, do you?

Actually it does. When the parties intermingle socially more gets done. When they stand on their own side and lob rhetorical bombs at each other, less gets done. Seeing the other party as an enemy makes you, and them, less willing to work together on issues. It becomes a game of one upmanship and "beating" the other guys rather than, you know, running the country responsibly.

The GOP is crippled by ideology at this point. The moderate, pragmatic wing of the party is almost nonexistent because everyone is terrified of being primaried from the far right. Thus there is absolutely no room for compromise or cooperation.

zolace

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

This is primarily the fault of the Republicans of the early 90s, btw. They're the ones that initiated this modern segregation of social interaction along party lines. The Democrats have embraced what they began, and the nation loses as a result.

zolace

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

Quote from: Rigon on September 15, 2014, 10:39:52 AM

Quote from: umair127 on September 15, 2014, 08:18:09 AM

I don't think it's dementia. She's always been an idiot. I'm not saying the Republicans don't engage in similar inflamed rhetoric, but I have to laugh when Democrats use language like this...Obama included...then say they wonder why Republicans won't work with them.

You don't seriously think that GOP obstructionism really has anything to do with fiery rhetoric on comedy talk shows, do you?

Actually it does. When the parties intermingle socially more gets done. When they stand on their own side and lob rhetorical bombs at each other, less gets done. Seeing the other party as an enemy makes you, and them, less willing to work together on issues. It becomes a game of one upmanship and "beating" the other guys rather than, you know, running the country responsibly.

Rigon

sr. member

Activity: 994

Merit: 441

Quote from: umair127 on September 15, 2014, 08:18:09 AM

I don't think it's dementia. She's always been an idiot. I'm not saying the Republicans don't engage in similar inflamed rhetoric, but I have to laugh when Democrats use language like this...Obama included...then say they wonder why Republicans won't work with them.

You don't seriously think that GOP obstructionism really has anything to do with fiery rhetoric on comedy talk shows, do you?

Mr.Bitty

full member

Activity: 210

Merit: 100

Like many others in both parties and in both houses, she unfortunately is fairly representative of her constituency, which is why she is there and will likely remain there until she starts uncontrollably drooling.

umair127

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

I don't think it's dementia. She's always been an idiot. I'm not saying the Republicans don't engage in similar inflamed rhetoric, but I have to laugh when Democrats use language like this...Obama included...then say they wonder why Republicans won't work with them.

latinna

newbie

Activity: 14

Merit: 0

Should a serving member of Congress who suffers from Dementia/Alzheimers be forced to step down from their position as them serving while ill does damage to our country or should they be allowed to stay in office no matter how ill they get?

I bring this up because the other night on Bill Maher's show Nancy Pelosi said,

Quote

“Civilization as we know it today would be in jeopardy if the Republicans win the Senate.”

and then a moment later said,

Quote

“Fear is a motivator, and we are not fear-mongers. The Democrats are messengers of hope, and that’s what we will continue to be.”

Giving her the benefit of the doubt, it is pretty clear she is suffering from severe memory loss and possibly has Alzheimers since she completely contradicted herself within a few seconds of speaking.

Not taking into account all the damage Nancy has already done to the United States of America during her years in power, should she be forced to resign to protect the country from further damage due to not being physically/mentally fit to continue?

Topic: Politicians with Dementia/Alzheimers (Read 2609 times)