politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
That's not what ableism is about, though. A person who can't consent is a person with a disability, sure. But not everyone with a disability is at a disadvantage. If Biden was in a wheelchair, and people said that he shouldn't be president because he can't walk, that's ableism. Biden has a speech impediment, and yet, he can think clearly. If you say that because "he can't talk good" then he can't be a president, then yes, that's ableism.
I'll give you the "Trump" example, but I don't like the "Putin" example, because he was quick to correct himself.
That is 100% what ableism is about. Or do you think it's okay to let mentally handicapped people be first line soldiers in war? Should Forrest Gump have fought in Vietnam? Is it not specifically taking advantage of their cognitive disability to have them perform a dangerous job they can't fully understand?
One of the most abused groups are the disabled, particularly if they cannot communicate well. Making sure people with cognitive decline can actually consent and aren't being taken advantage of is so important, we have special jobs called bioethicists who consult with hospitals about this. It's exactly what ableism is about.
I have no problem if Biden was in a wheelchair. You don't need to walk to be president. It doesn't interfere with his ability to consent. It doesn't interfere with his ability to communicate. Both are essential for the job.
Also I can tell you aren't disabled and don't know anyone who is disabled. Because if you k ew these things, you'd know about reasonable accomodation which already covers this topic. If your disability fully stops you from doing the job, legally you can be fired and it's not considered ableism. I highly recommend you read the various cases and reasonable accomodations workplaces implement. It will help you better understand why you're so blatantly incorrect on multiple fronts.
But the problem here isn't a stutter, IT'S APHASIA. That's significantly worse, and he's gotten NOTICABLY WORSE over time. It's honestly a shocking level of decline in a person who can declare war and has the nuclear football. I would not allow my grandma to drive if she was having that many absent moments and aphasia issues because it implies she has brain damage. It's not that he cannot SPEAK, it's that he cannot COMMUNICATE because he has SEVERE COGNITIVE ISSUES he can no longer hide!!! That's how bad they are!!! It would be totally fine if all he has was a stutter. That's not what he has.
He also didn't fully correct himself - he never stated Zelensky's name. He appeared to have forgotten it. And he's met Zelensky more than once.
Eta: I take that last paragraph back, he does say Zelensky's name
I'll stop you right here. That's a false equivalence, or a weak analogy, whichever you prefer.
Again, you are not a doctor, and I am not one either. When an actual doctor diagnoses him and says that he is not competent enough to be president, in public, I'll come back here and admit that you have a point.
He did say Zelenskyy's name. You either forgot that, or didn't notice, AHA! I don't think you're competent to be a Lemmy commenter (ok, just joking.)
It's absolutely not a bad analogy, it's actually quite apropos since the president's other title is Commander in Chief, and he also could be shot in the line of duty as others before him have been. Why do you want to down play this so bad? You just enjoy abusing the disabled that much? Or do you like gaslighting others?
Again, doctors cannot publicly say he has dementia without losing their license. Either because of HIPPA, or because of doctor/patient laws regarding diagnosing someone who you've never seen. So unless Biden tells his personal doctor it's okay to release this info, you won't get that. And it's an absolutely preposterous standard to have imo but ofc up to you.
You can have a medical condition without being diagnosed. Diagnosis is a description of what's being observed. It's completely observable in Biden in recordings that he has aphasia. If you need to take time to educate yourself about aphasia, go ahead. You seem very confused about it. If you want to wait for an "official" press release, go for it, but this is just like when there was OBVIOUS ELECTION interference happening and people were saying "well idk, let's see what the judge says." LOL we can see it!!! In front of our faces!
If you could kindly time stamp where he says Zelensky's name: https://youtu.be/0WGDsrRUsTc?si=nnDCT4nNisQu7a6T
Eta: nvm! I saw it! I didn't remember that part, my bad. I still think he's having aphasia issues.
Commanders in Chief are not first line soldiers lol
Ah, I didn't know that. But someone who is an expert in the field could chip in. Right now, it's only political pundits, rich people, newscasters and gasp Hollywood stars!
Actually, here's a couple of them:
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/bidens-memory-issues-draw-attention-neurologists-weigh-rcna138135
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2024-03-07/joe-biden-age-memory-alzheimers-cognition
I'll concede that those may be biased, so if you find links supporting your claim from alleged experts in the associated medical field, please do share.
They still get shot at? Do you think people with cognition errors should be in any dangerous job? Why not have our offshore welders all have down syndrome, we could legally pay them less and they'll be easier to convince to go in those deep tunnels. And it benefits society for them to do that, we all need cheap energy, right?
Experts in the field CANNOT speak up without losing their licenses and possibly being sued. They CANNOT diagnose someone they do not have a doctor-patient relationship with, where they've seen the person for that specific condition within the last year. The ONLY reason so many medical experts were speaking out about Trump was because they were so worried and were fine risking their license over it, and because they were not actually "diagnosing" him - most called him 'a narcissist,' not someone with narcissistic personality disorder (the latter being a diagnosis, the former being a character trait arguably).
Use your own eyes. Read about aphasia. I think you can put 2+2 together on this one. You don't really need an expert for this.
Lol!
Why is that funny?
Lol!
Double-comenting because I worked for a Disabilities Office in a college campus long ago. And I'm the one who is always pointing out ADA failures left and right (like when coworkers send e-mail announcements consisting in images of text.)
So..... sorry, you're wrong here.
Was it before the ADA was put in place? If that's actually true, and you weren't some low level receptionist/worker, your opinions are genuinely shocking and do not line up with the disabled communities' general thoughts on ableism. You do not come across as being even slightly educated on this.
Did you have a coworker or person who needed text to voice? If not, why advocate for that? You don't need to accommodate a disability that none of your coworkers have lol. This is different than making public spaces accessible to the general public, eg wheelchair ramps and wheelchair accessible bathrooms.
Nope, I was a teaching assistant. And it's silly (to put it mildly) that you dismiss the role of receptionists/office workers in an Disability Services office. Do you think they'd put just about anyone without being at least trained how to deal with students with disabilities entering the office?
This is an absolutist statement. Did I say "who cares about the disabled lol" or something like that for you to say that I'm not even "slightly educated" on this? and Frankly, you attacking the person and not the argument is starting to get old. You remind me of that other poster that for him, it was his way or the highway, no middle-grounds.
And now I can see why you think the way you think. Given the conversation so far, it seems like for you Biden must either be "100% superman" or else he's useless. No middle ground. The funny thing is that I don't even like Biden!
I don't understand why you said this or how this is relevant to the conversation.
A'aight. Let's just leave it at we disagree and I don't like your way of arguing these matters. You can say I'm an ignorant fuck and feel good about yourself. Awesome! Alright. Have a nice day.
I used to be a receptionist at a medical office. That doesn't mean I understand how to practice medicine. That is specifically what I meant by that.
They hired you, and you are clearly ignorant. What did you teach as a TA? You're the one pulling an appeal to authority here, I'm questioning that completely because your argumentation is so bad. If you said you were a mechanic and told me to swap my engine oil with coolant, I'd be questioning you there too. You haven't been addressing the content of my argument, or perhaps you simply agree to disagree. I will give you a little grace in the sense that you probably were working with disabled students, which is more line working with disabled customers at a job. We are talking about disability and how it applies to workers, not customers/the public. This is likely where your gap in knowledge (and hubris) comes from, because employee rights are different than student rights.
You are openly advocating for a man with cognitive decline to be president as if it's nothing, and then you attempted to gaslight me by saying it's ableist to not let him run. Yeah, that's pretty bad, dude. It's akin to saying "who cares about the disabled," yeah, because it's clear you don't care about Biden's safety and wellbeing as a person. You just want to use his meatsuit regardless of his condition (until a doctor says something or he steps down, per you). That's why what you're claiming is so offensive to me. Any disabled abuse is offensive, and on top of that, he could kill us all or declare war etc. It's bad.
I will vote for Biden, you black-or-white strawmanner, and i never said I wouldn't. I just think it's morally WRONG to have him be president. I've clearly explained why. He doesn't have to be superman - JUST NOT IN COGNITIVE DECLINE. You see there's a huge range between the two right?
Lol because you stated whenever there were images with text in them, you'd complain about the ADA violation in employee emails. Except it's not a violation if you do not have a coworker who needs different accomodation. You'd fully understand this if you understood reasonable accomdations, disability, and the workplace. If you didn't have staff who needed the text written elsewhere (which is used for text to voice, mainly for people who cannot see, sometimes for dyslexia), then you weren't enforcing ADA. And you were actually damaging it and abusing the law, even though you yourself aren't disabled. Cool, dog.
Lol!
the definition of ignorance is lacking knowledge. That's you as it related to disability in the workplace. What class did you TA for?
Lol!