Many of us watched the debate of John Fetterman (D) and Republican Mehmet Oz (R) last night and it was at times very difficult to watch. Fetterman is clearly still experiencing serious problems in cognitive processing and communication after his stroke five months ago. However, when some raised disconnected or incomprehensible responses, commentators like MSNBC’s Liz Plank objected to such criticisms as discriminatory “ableism.” The Philadelphia Inquirer wrote that these questions only reflect our “discomfort” with disabilities.
I felt an enormous amount of sympathy in watching Fetterman struggle last night. This is terribly difficult for any stroke victim and I give him credit for soldiering on with his campaign. However, Plank and others suggest that recognizing a serious question over the incapacity of a politician is now considered discriminatory and hateful.
There have been allegations that Democratic operatives hid the extent of the stroke from voters, which occurred shortly before Fetterman was given the Democratic nomination. Since then, Fetterman has been closely protected from reporters seeking to ask him questions. Not only was the extent of the damage not revealed before the nomination, but this debate did not occur, according to the Wall Street Journal, until after roughly half of the mail-in ballots were submitted.
Before the debate, NBC reporter Dasha Burns was attacked for merely noting that Fetterman did not appear to be able to process questions or comments before one of his relatively rare interviews.
Fetterman’s wife demanded an apology as others piled on Burns as an “ableist.” Gisele Fetterman told the Independent “I would love to see an apology towards the disability community from her and from her network for the damage they have caused.”
From the outset, it was clear that Fetterman has continuing residual damage from the stroke when he started by telling the audience “Hi goodnight.”
There were also glaring contradictions on his record, including a strikingly false statement on his opposition to fracking. Fetterman repeatedly opposed fracking in prior years but categorically denied that past opposition in the debate:
This debate was all the more important due to the fact that Fetterman will not agree to anything more than a single one-hour debate with closed captioning technology. He has also limited any ability of reporters or voters to ask him questions at events. The voters have a legitimate interest in seeing how their senator will response to issues and opposing views.
Politico reporter Natalie Allison stated the obvious that “the ability to process conversation in real time and respond is a lingering challenge, and that was absolutely a real issue tonight for Fetterman.”
Yet, Plank denounced critics as engaging in discriminatory “ableism.”
Such charges are common on college campuses where the term is defined as “the privileging of ability and results in the oppression of disabled people based upon real or perceived impairments. It ‘others’ disabilities, chronic illnesses, and neurological or mental illness.”
The question, however, is whether a senatorial candidate’s difficulty processing or communicating is discriminatory. It is clear that a senator can use closed captioning in hearings to understand questions. The same is true for communicating with staff in the office or some other forums.
Two U.S. senators recently suffered strokes.Sen. Ben Ray Luján of New Mexico suffered a stroke and required physical therapy in his recovery. Sen. Mark Kirk of Illinois returned to the Senate a year after suffering a stroke. Staff stated in a 2015 article in the Atlantic that the stroke caused continuing difficulties for Kirk who lost his 2016 bid for reelection.
I agree that a diminishment of speaking abilities from a stroke victim should not be treated as a de facto barrier to public service. This issue has come up in EEOC cases dealing with the exception for Bona Fide Occupational Qualifications (BFOQs) under federal law. These cases may offer some insight into the balancing of interests.
The EEOC defines a “qualified individual with a disability” as “a person with a disability who meets all of a position’s legitimate job requirements and can perform the essential functions of the position with or without reasonable accommodation.”
The EEOC posts a letter on this issue as instructive:
“[T]here is no BFOQ defense in the ADA. Accordingly, an employer may not defend a disability-based employment action by asserting that the absence of disability is a BFOQ. An employer, however, may assert other defenses under the ADA. For example, an employer may defend the use of a qualification standard that screens out an individual on the basis of disability by showing that the standard is job related and consistent with business necessity. In that respect, the employer must show that the standard is an accurate measure of the individual’s ability to perform the essential functions of the position at issue. An employer may justify a safety-based standard by showing the existence of a direct threat, i.e., a significant risk of substantial harm that cannot be reduced or eliminated through reasonable accommodation.”
A stroke is a disability and there should be reasonable accommodations in the workplace. In most cases, such reasonable accommodations can and should be made.
Yet, according to Plank and some others, pundits and voters who question the ability of Fetterman to be effective as a senator are engaging in ableism. I do not agree as a general matter. The ability to process information and to communicate are clearly essential functions in representing a state in Congress. The problem is that we do not know the extent of the damage from this stroke and whether reasonable accommodations in the workplace are possible.
There was an EEOC settlement in 2013 with an employee who was thought to have suffered a stroke due to facial paralysis. The facial appearance was due to Bell’s Palsy. The EEOC lawyer stated:
“The ADA requires that all employees be given equal opportunity to do their jobs regardless of an actual or perceived disability, and employers should not make decisions based on perceptions about someone’s supposed impairment. This case should remind all employers that the ADA requires employers to make an individualized assessment about an applicant or employee’s ability to do the job instead of acting out of speculative fears or biases.”
The EEOC has also sued on behalf of a truck driver who was not accommodated after a minor stroke.
There is also the difference presented by this issue being part of a political debate on the overall fitness of a candidate to serve in Congress. This is obviously not an ADA-covered matter on the campaign trail. Communicative and cognitive ability are core criteria for voters. An analogous comparison can be drawn to cognitive questions raised about former president Ronald Reagan or President Joe Biden due to their advanced years. Is that “ageism” and also deemed discriminatory?
At a minimum, last night’s debate should make the disclosure of Fetterman’s medical records an imperative for the media. The question is whether this is just a speech problem as opposed to a more serious comprehension or mental processing issue.
This shows that the job of Democrat US Senator doesn’t require you to be able to think. No cognitive capacity needed. Just show up, vote Yay or Nay as directed, and enjoy the many perks of the job.
The Leviathan that is the US government bureaucracy is similar. Just show up, collect benefits and perks, receive endless accommodation, no thinking required.
“Politico reporter Natalie Allison stated the obvious that “the ability to process conversation in real time and respond is a lingering challenge,”
Assumes facts not in evidence. Due to the lack of public exposure, we only have what Fetterman’s handlers are claiming. No Supporting evidence.
This might be Fettermans condition 3 days after the stroke and no improvement has happened.
Democrats elected a President that did not campaign, because he is suffering from dementia. It has only got worse since the election. Now Democrats are doing the same with Fetterman.
To the Philadelphia Inquirer and rest of the media: You’re damn right we have a discomfort with disabilities when it comes to governing our country! The Dems have already turned the White House into the most expensive and exclusive Assisted Living/Memory Care facility in the country…..and now they want the Dirksen Office Building turned into a Rehab unit for stroke victims………while victims of crimes are offered NOTHING, and often receive NO mention in the media, except for Fox News! Disgraceful!
Just look at how the Commie Dims are busy again in Pennsylvania/elsewhere Disenfranchising the rest of us voters .
There’s only 100 US Senate seats & we can see they are cheating us our percentage of them.
*********
BREAKING: Pennsylvania Democrat Officials Mailed Out 240,000 Ballots to Unverified Voters! …UPDATE: Now at 255,000 Unverified Voters!
By Jim Hoft
Published October 26, 2022 at 7:45am
359 Comments
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/10/breaking-pennsylvania-democrat-officials-mailed-240000-ballots-unverified-voters/
Thank you, Oky1…..good to see you!
Good to hear from you also…..
The leafs turned recently & are peaking now.
I planted a few oak trees but none of them took hold. I’ll have to Ck back on a Pin Oak we planted a couple years back, like the JFK/Dallas Oak.
With this treed acreage here we do not suffer the lack of leafs , like the ones blowing into the garage every time the door is opened. 😉
Oky1…. How I would welcome gorgeous colored leaves blowing around! 🙂
The dogs love crashing into the leaves when I pile them up.
BTW: My wife’s 5 years test come back clean. That’s good news. I’m glad for her.
Now if we can just keep those DC Polecats from Nuking us all. 😉
Oky1…Fantastic news about your wife!!! Congratulations to both of you!
It’s been a bit of an amusement park of rides passing through hell to say the least. I’m glad I switched her docs/hospital right the bat & had the legal paper work to do so.
btw, I can’t much of anything to this below but I wanted to mention it to you. A gal friend of my wife & I, she graduated from Oklahoma Baptist University.
She’s somewhere in between our ages. Plus her mom was a teacher there for sometime & her dad worked maintenance. I don’t know her mom’s name & wouldn’t be bold enough to ask it & post it on line.
While in that neighborhood, my wife’s mom grew up just a few mile South of OBU.
her dad was working oil leases in the area. They had Pretty Boy Floyd at dinner one night.
Wow…that’s wild…Pretty Boy!
Well, if your friend went to OBU, she’s alright!! 🙂
Pretty Boy, lots of stories floating around from back then, it was wild then.
The question is is it any less wild now?
OBU, Okies & US Senators, Prairie Rose posted this below last night: 😉
Fetterman has brain damage. Opening the debate with, “Hi, goodnight,” should, in a sane world, be disqualifying for the job of United States Senator representing the interests of the people of Pennsylvania. In the left-wing insane Democrat world it was “brave and courageous” and he won the debate!
IF the people of PA vote for this guy, then they are just as brain damaged and deserve what they get.
Sure, just like rejecting a guy who is 5 foot 6 and can’t jump from 0laying in the NBA. Foolish to even ask the question.
Question: If the voters (the employers) of Pennsylvania do not vote (hire to protect the interests of the CommonWealth) John Fetterman for Senator, is it possible for his handlers (who would apparently be running his senatorial office if he should become senator) file a lawsuit under the ADA because they feel that he lost because of the bias of the voters and/or media reports?
Having watched much of the debate, I find it hard to imagine Fetterman functioning effectively as a Senator. The most that can be expected is that he will vote as directed by his party leader and/or wife and/or staff, or as dictated by his leftist ideology (regardless of what he just said about his new position on fracking). I doubt he will be able to do much more than vote when called upon to do so. This is likely enough for some Democrat party voters; I hope it is not enough for most voting Pennsylvanians, who should expect more of their Senator.
Unfortunately I did not find Oz as incisive as I had hoped. Too often, he spoke too fast and avoided direct answers. For example, why could he not simply have said that he would vote against Graham’s abortion bill, since that is the clear implication of his opposition to federalising the abortion issue? Nonetheless, as between Oz and Fetterman, there is no contest, either on the issues or on competence.
RE:”Too often, he spoke too fast..” This an observation I’ve made regarding Dr. Oz since long before his entry into politics. That’s his style and only intense public speaking re-conditioning efforts might be a successful remedy. I’m surprised that he got as far in broadcasting as he did, but he’s not the only one in that field.with that shortcoming. I imagine sitting and listening to him give a clinical lecture might be a chore.
If Dr. Oz were laboring under the same infirmities, Saturday Night Live would be making skits about it.
The question I have is, how long will Fetterman serve before he resigns due to his obvious health problems and Shapiro appoints a mystery Democrat in his place?
Is this just a fake election? Somebody should put Fetterman and Shapiro on record about this.
Telling us we are disability-phobes is in the same line of thinking as calling us transphobes. A man CANNOT become a woman, no matter how much positive thinking on his part, nor can a one-legged man win in the 500 meter dash against men with two healthy legs.
All the shouting by those who support Fetterman has absolutely nothing to stopping people from ‘dissing” the disabled — it is purely a tactic to shutdown all discussion around the fact that Fetterman can’t process basic information. Ss such, it is insulting to be criticized for making a rational observation about a factual reality. Fetterman needs to PROVE he’s capable of doing the job and right now, he can’t make that showing.
My instincts tell me that if the stroke had been suffered by a Republican candidate, Liz Plank would not have any objections. Getting back to the point of the question, I say no. The inability of someone to understand spoken words because their brain has been damaged, not hearing loss, is not the same as needing a hearing aid to hear, glasses to see or a wheelchair to get around. Fetterman’s refusal to release his medical report strongly suggests that his injury is more serious than we thought.
I do not think much of the debate HERE matters.
Voters saw what they saw. If they think Fetterman is capable or do not care they can vote for him.
If not they can vote against him.
I did not watch the debate.
I think Fetterman should have withdrawn after the stroke.
But he did not, and voters can decide.
Debate at times painful to watch. Moderators were reasonably fair, at times one did seem to try to aid Fetterman in responding but as debate progressed appeared to realize he could not be aided. His responses were generally poor defense of terrible policies. The most telling was the final 90 second summary. This is a standard in political debates, both sides had to know it was the conclusion of the debate where striking points to be made. Would have expected that Fetterman’s team should if it were possible have had him practice this final statement so that it was coherent. They either did not do a good job or Fetterman does not have the ability to even remember or repeat a 90 sec campaign speech when stressed. His policies should disqualify him, his inability to verbally defend them even with assistance indicates he is not up for the position. One can have sympathy for a relatively young man with both cardiomyopathy and related stroke who appears to have plateaued in his recovery but that is not entitle him to be a US Senator from PA. Attacking one brief inarticulate sentence from Dr. Oz when his intention was to point out a decision should be between woman and her doctor within the scope of state law does not obviate the inarticulate failures of Fetterman including I always supported Fracking despite obvious statements to the contrary, inability to counter potential for small business destruction from policies he supports and his extremely poor policies on crime. His policies preceded his stroke, he perhaps could have used more polished words prior to the stroke but many of his policies are damaging regardless of language skills.
After Fetterman’s performance last night, anyone from this point on that votes for Fetterman (outside of his immediate family) would vote for a blathering parrot as long as it has a (D) for Democrat after it.
Speaking of blathering parrots…I bring you Witherspoon. Don’t see your name on any ballots. Get in the ring if you can do better.
Look in the mirror.
That’s your rebuttal. Weak sauce. You can do better.
Wen Bars,
Try not to feed the trolls.
Take it up with the management pogue…You say troll when it is actually rebutting your idiocy.
Facts are facts..when someone has a mental disability such as he has, they cannot and do not make good decisions. The part of their brain that controls behavioral restraints and reasonable thinking are affected. In his case, I think he was a thug before the stroke..his issue was only enhanced further now. And yes, I speak from actual experience as I have a son who suffered a very severe aneurysm almost 19 years ago.
Does the job entail verbally communicating…
Fettermans political positions are a greater disability to PA and the nation not his physical disability.
RE:”Fetterman is clearly still experiencing serious problems in cognitive processing and communication after his stroke five months ago” So now it’s ‘ableism’, is it?? Have the Woke deemed it inappropriate to assess whether or not an individual possesses the required skills/assets to carry out a specific task? Were Fetterman a cardiothoracic surgeon, how might they view him as a provider of their own care? Having made that observation, it is the decision of the voters of Pennsylvania as to whether or not Fetterman’s deficits are desirable in an individual seeking to serve as a Senator representing their state. Regardless of party affiliation, he would not have my vote.
My question for the Democratic Party is: Why is winning a Senate seat more important than a man’s health? It appears to me that he is wanted to simply rubber stamp their agenda.
The answer to Turley’s rhetorical question is No. We have a right to know the health of those we jire to do important work, whether it’s a babysitter for our children or a member of congress. They, in turn, have an obligation to inform us of their health and ability to do the jobs we assign. If it’s privacy they seek, then they should not apply for the job. We have an obviously sick person running the country at the present because we didn’t demand answers to obvious questions two years ago. Let’s not repeat this same mistake with Fetterman. The people of PA deserve better and someone able to debate colleagues in the Senate without a teleprompter and someone else feeding it words with little or no meaning.
According to the WSJ, more than 48% of mail-in ballots have already been received.
So the efforts of the Fetterman campaign and the lefty media to mislead voters has already been partially successful.
Ugly, manipulative people.
Like to see a court case where a mail in voter wanted to change their vote.
Could be interesting on several levels.
Like to see even a poll of how many who have already voted, after seeing the debate, had voters remorse.
“Like to see a court case where a mail in voter wanted to change their vote.”
One 24 hour voting period should be sufficient. Extending it diminishes transparency and permits gaming.
There should be an election month, rather than an election day. In many states there exists one with early voting. The only reason to limit it to 24 hours is to try to limit voting opportunities…
On top of that, every state’s senatorial election should be a federal election. And the House elections should be statewide.
Why? How does that ensure election integrity. It makes it more likely for cheating to occur. Everything can limit voting opportunities so that is a lousy argument.There is no proof that voting would be increased or suppressed, but there is proof that early voting of one month decreases transparency. Look at all those who voted for Fetterman not knowing he had a stroke. It increased gaming. The Democrat party probably pushed early voting so his condition wouldn’t be revealed to early voters.
“On top of that, every state’s senatorial election should be a federal election. And the House elections should be statewide.”
That statement can be read in multiple ways and seems to make little sense.
The reason to keep the voting period short is to keep elections trustworthy.
The longer an election takes they greater the odds of fraud.
I would not the myriads of complexities of US elections are UNIQUE to US elections.
If you want the greatest trust in elections – absentee voting ONLY for cause. with a narrow window for accepting absentee ballots.
And inperson voting with ID on a single day., with ballots counted within 3 hrs of the polls closing.
Most of the world manages that. France manages it entirely with HAND counting of ballots.
Ease of voting is a value.
Trust in voting is a requirement.
Every single thing that you do that complicates elections increases the probability of fraud – and particularly large scale fraud.
I will be happy to discuss with people how to do mailin voting better, how to do early voting better, howto make voting easier.
But every single one of these comes at a significant cost to election integrity and trust.
You can NEVER get mailin voting to even a fraction of the trustworthyness of in person voting.
Everything that slows vote counting – and early voting and mailin voting ALL slow vote counting as thy increase the need to check for multiple votes from the same person – though as we learned from 2020, many states or cities just do not check.
Regardless, delays in vote counting increase the likelyhood of fraud.
I will suggest that there is a very real possibility that if Republican precincts in GA, PA, MI, WI, AZ, NV had delayed reporting results 24hrs Trump might have won. When the votes from one party come in significantly ahead of another – that allows the 2nd party to KNOW exactly how many votes they must make up. And that is a major election fraud problem – the larger the number of fraudulent votes you must inject the greater the odds of getting caught.
This is also one of the problems with the rising polling error that is favoring democrats.
Accurate polling gives us a signal as to whether there is fraud. The less accurate polls are the greater the oportunity for fraud. Especially when we KNOW the polls are inaccurate.
I believe in the KISS rule. Therefore voting only at the polls with the exception of the military, embassy employees and perhaps a few limited exceptions. A maximum of 24hours perhaps starting and ending at the same time in all states. Voter ID. Secret Ballot. Paper ballots with machine use limited to quick counting as long as the paper ballots are secure. Auditing elections and Jail terms for those violating the law including poll workers.
Local precincts no larger than 15,000 citizens each. Large scale operations are a requirement for large scale fraud.
Full transparency.
Short time window from close of voting to publishing results.
All results published at once.
I hear a report on local radio from Allegheny County, where Pittsburgh is located, that 80% of all mail in ballot requests have come from Democrats. I’m sure those numbers are similar for the entire state. Presumably very few, if any Republicans will be voting for Fetterman. That leaves the Independents. Hopefully most of them were as shocked and appalled as I was last night.
“discomfort with disabilities” — somehow the Democrats always manage to turn a practical matter into a morality play. I wonder if Liz Plank would have a “discomfort with disabilities” if she needed brain surgery and her surgeon had a mental or motor disability similar to Fetterman’s? Democrats think they have sealed off all the rhetorical exits: Hate crime? You’re obviously a racist. Don’t like gender grooming of 5-year-olds? Clearly you’re transphobic. Concerned that your US Senator might not be up to the job since he can’t put together a coherent sentence? You’re an ableist. And that’s why the dimwit Dems don’t seem to mind the walking disaster they put in the WH. After all, how could anyone not feel good about a president who talks to dead people, shakes hands with an imaginary friend, can’t remember what state or century he’s in, lies constantly, imagines he’s signed laws that aren’t, and fantasizes about his past?