|
0 members (),
3
guests, and
0
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums59
Topics17,089
Posts313,787
Members6,305
| |
Most Online294
Dec 6th, 2017
|
|
|
There are no members with birthdays on this day. |
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 47,286 Likes: 351
Member CHB-OG
|
Member CHB-OG
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 47,286 Likes: 351 |
If it is true that he actually was in the early stages of Alzheimers, does that mean he was not capable of carrying out the duties of his office? If so, perhaps it demonstrated that the president is superfluous to the running of the state (not to be conflated with the government). Just musing. There were rumors that GHW Bush was actually running the show - and even Nancy Reagan herself. ...so who really knows?  We never get honest answers from our government. Not even to queries I posted in my post on page one. It all just gets ignored and swept under the carpet. 
Contrarian, extraordinaire
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,010
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,010 |
If it is true that he actually was in the early stages of Alzheimers, It appears that he has a manifestation of Alz. that grows up slowly. Typically, this happens over a very long term... with initial symptoms being barely noticeable and sporadic. Assuming this was true, then it is likely that Pres. Reagan was at least somewhat compromised during his term of office. does that mean he was not capable of carrying out the duties of his office? No, it means that his ability may have been progressively reduced If so, perhaps it demonstrated that the president is superfluous to the running of the state (not to be conflated with the government). Just musing.
Yours,
Issodhos As I am sure you are aware, the "state" is a massive apparatus.... in which lots of people do things, hopefully based upon direction from above... and direction from above also depends upon the leader's ability to comprehend inputs form alls sorts of people... including his subordinates. For the purpose of discussion, let us assume that a president was at some point significantly compromised by Alzheimers... the most likely result would be that his subordinates would continue running the apparatus.... and, most likely , that they would report to the leader in a way that would lead the leader to giving the direction they thought was appropriate. None of this has anything to do with the degree to which an an uncomporomised leader may or may not impact the governance of the state. Come what may. I think we can be well assured that the Iran Contra affair did happen under Pres. Reagan, and would not have happened under Pres. Carter. So, yes, it does seem that the president is not superfluous. On the other hand, the president is also not able to exercise extreme power in all things. A president cannot wave his hands, issue a decree, and create a million more private sector jobs. Nor can the president arbitrarily decide how the Chinese, or north Koreans, or Iranians will behave. So, the president is neither superfluous, nor massively powerful.
Last edited by Ardy; 01/16/11 07:22 PM.
"It's not a lie if you believe it." -- George Costanza
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves. --Bertrand Russel
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,426
member
|
|
member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,426 |
During one of his public reminiscences, he confused one of his movie roles with an actual personal experience. That's when I knew for sure.
The final war will be between Pavlov's dog and Schroedinger's cat. --Robert Anton Wilson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,972
member
|
|
member
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,972 |
Young Ron, stated that had his father had any notion of his mind in trouble he would have declined to stay another day in the White House. I believe that!
AKA Sandy Price
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,853
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,853 |
' Well, at least we seem to have survived Reagan's non compos mentis state. Always bearing in mind, of course, what Zhou En-lai said when asked whether the French Revolution was a good thing or a bad thing: It's still too early to tell. · · · 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 12,581
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 12,581 |
Reagan should have retired for health reasons at the end of his first term, if not before that. We have a system in place that will keep up a facade even when a president is incapacitated, dismissing anyone protesting as partisan. Hmmm.... Throughout his years in Washington, Mr. Reagan had been portrayed by many pundits and political opponents as absent-minded, inattentive, incurious, even lazy. And his Presidency was marked by a succession of very public mental stumbles -- most notably his dismal performance in the first debate of the 1984 campaign, and his confused and forgetful accounting of his role in the Iran-contra affair.
But even with the hindsight of Mr. Reagan's diagnosis, his four main White House doctors say they never detected any evidence that his forgetfulness was more than just that. His mental competence in office, they said in a series of recent interviews, was never in doubt. Indeed, they pointed out, tests of his mental status did not begin to show evidence of the disease until the summer of 1993, more than four years after he left the White House. Yours, Issodhos
"When all has been said that can be said, and all has been done that can be done, there will be poetry";-) -- Issodhos
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,010
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,010 |
Throughout his years in Washington, Mr. Reagan had been portrayed by many pundits and political opponents as absent-minded, inattentive, incurious, even lazy. And his Presidency was marked by a succession of very public mental stumbles -- most notably his dismal performance in the first debate of the 1984 campaign, and his confused and forgetful accounting of his role in the Iran-contra affair.
But even with the hindsight of Mr. Reagan's diagnosis, his four main White House doctors say they never detected any evidence that his forgetfulness was more than just that.
Yours,
Issodhos There are several points to make.... The understanding of Alzhiemers has has progressed considerably since that time I suspect that none of these doctors was a specialist in degenerative brain disease.... and so not well situated to do that evaluation. Given that all of thew Doctors would have been close to Reagan, they would likely be defensive about him. And, also in retrospect would be defensive about their own judgments. And last [quote]Alzheimer's Disease: Progressing through Three Stages In people with Alzheimer's disease, changes in the brain may begin 10 to 20 years before any visible signs or symptoms appear. Some regions of the brain may begin to shrink, resulting in memory loss, one of the first signs of Alzheimer's disease. So, if Alzhiemers begins 10-20 years before the diagnosis is made... and Reagan was diagnosed in 1994....well, you do the math. That said, the affliction is progressive, not binary... and so there is no reason the Reagan could not be fairly adequately functional while he was president.
"It's not a lie if you believe it." -- George Costanza
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves. --Bertrand Russel
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,201
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,201 |
Everyone progresses at a different rate, Rita Hayworth managed to keep working with her early onset of the disease. It was not easy though and she struggled to learn her lines. We will never know the extent of Ronald Reagan's progression while in office. I am glad to read he would have left and I do truly believe that when he stated "he could not remember" during Iran Contra he meant it. I'm not a fan of his presidency because I think he did great harm. I don't place any blame on him for getting Alzheimer's but the truth should have been reported and the journalist that covered the white house and knew had a job to report it.
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I�
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 12,581
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 12,581 |
That said, the affliction is progressive, not binary... and so there is no reason the Reagan could not be fairly adequately functional while he was president. WHich has been the main thrust of this thread -- suggestions that he was incapacitated by an illness for which there is no evidence of him having had during his presidency. Yours, Issodhos
"When all has been said that can be said, and all has been done that can be done, there will be poetry";-) -- Issodhos
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 12,581
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 12,581 |
I'm not a fan of his presidency because I think he did great harm. I don't place any blame on him for getting Alzheimer's but the truth should have been reported and the journalist that covered the white house and knew had a job to report it. He was also not my favorite cup of tea, Redheat, but I know of no "great harm" that he did and actually was happy to see him avoid being drawn into Lebanon after the Marine barracks was blown up. That said, who where the reporters that covered up and failed to report the illness he apparently showed no signs of having? Yours, Issodhos
"When all has been said that can be said, and all has been done that can be done, there will be poetry";-) -- Issodhos
|
|
|
|
|
