I did a google search with the following words because I was not sure if Zerohedge.com was reporting the story of some 70% of the physicians, in an informal survey, had expressed concerns about the lack of transparency surrounding Ms. Clinton’s health, accurately:
‘US PHYSICIANS ASSOCIATION HILLARY HEALTH CONCERN’
You can try the following too but the result is the same:
‘US PHYSICIANS ASSOCIATION CLINTON HEALTH CONCERN’
Not a single hit in the first three pages belonged to any mainstream media news outlet: WSJ, NY Times, LA Times, WaPo, Bloomberg, Reuters, etc., etc.
A good friend who should know a thing or two about the media pushed me back hard. He pointed to the Wiki page on the ‘Association of American physicians and surgeons’. To put it mildly, it is not a surprise that its members are concerned about Hillary Clinton’s health.
It would have been useful for the survey to have had a question whether the respondents thought that all candidates should release their medical records over the previous three or five years. It did not.
My friend rightly defended the media for not having accorded respectability to this survey by an institution that has a bias.
I would be very happy if the same sort of rigorous consistency were applied to coverage of allegations on the other candidate.
Here is a thought experiment:
If the same ‘informal internet survey’ were administered by another partisan organisation and that reported ‘grave concerns’ about, say, Trump’s health, would the American mainstream media have ‘rigorously refrained’ from reporting it and also informed us of the inherent bias of the agency undertaking the survey? I have my doubts.
That is what this story also corroborates:
The sudden, bizarre unwillingness by writers to tolerate figurative language only widens their remove from average joes and janes. It is a willful refusal to understand how regular people talk with friends and family in everyday conversation….
Because their cohort lacks anyone who sympathizes whatsoever with Trump, the least charitable interpretation of everything he spouts gets the maximum amount of play. Subsequently, there is never any opportunity for concerted pushback against the more outlandish allegations against him—such as Mook’s recent “Manchurian Candidate” attack—because nobody who’s mindful of their career security wants to give anything like the impression of going easy on a purported racist, fascist, treasonous demagogue. That’s too much of a PR liability….
… in the case of Trump, not even conservative media elites back him (i.e. National Review, Wall Street Journal, Washington Examiner, Weekly Standard), so there is virtually no elite-level pushback at all when insane anti-Trump criticisms are leveled…
… Trump supporters exist in all walks of life and in every region of the country, but they’ve somehow become these exotic creatures to be analyzed in a pseudo-journalistic lab. On the other hand, supporting Hillary is seen as the height of normalcy, requiring no further interrogation….
… If members of the elite media do not take heed, re-evaluate, and regain a sense of fairness, Trump will mark just the beginning of a long, potentially irreversible American descent into madness and decay.
The highlighted paragraph above is my favourite in the long article. The last paragraph is futuristic but I suspect that it is already here.
Regardless of who wins, I fear that the Republic has weakened and corroded considerably. Even if DJT wins, he won’t be allowed to govern. Much the same will happen with HRC too.
In the global context. American internal political instability risk is vastly underestimated. I think we are heading into a global moral and leadership vacuum or that we are already in it and do not realise it.