People who are questioning John Fetterman’s fitness to serve in the Senate after having a stroke are being accused of “ableism.” Not only that, but Buzzfeed’s reporting that an MSNBC journo who simply pointed out that Fetterman relied on a computer transcription program during her interview with him will increase violence against the disabled.
However, imagine if the parties were reversed…
If Senate candidate John Fetterman were a Republican the media and his Democrat opponents (I repeat myself) would just steal and then release his medical records to prove he wouldn’t be able to serve if elected. That’s the way they have always played to win. No prisoners. #PASen
— Titan (@BOOB_level) October 13, 2022
There’s actually a real-life example that shows what can happen when the roles are reversed:
We are old enough to remember when The Chicago Tribune endorsed Tammy Duckworth (D) over then-Sen Mark Kirk (R) explicitly because of Kirk’s stroke which the Tribune believed made him unfit to serve as a U.S. Senator. There was no uproar over ableism then.https://t.co/fqqbzCrSM4
— RRH Elections (@RRHElections) October 13, 2022
From the Washington Post:
Back in 2010, the Chicago Tribune endorsed Republican Rep. Mark Kirk for Senate, citing his “expertise and independence.” He won.
But today, as Kirk faces a very tough reelection bid, the paper is endorsing his opponent. And it’s offering a very blunt and likely controversial reason for not backing Kirk again: the stroke he suffered in 2012.
The paper’s endorsement of Rep. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) over Kirk is remarkable for the degree to which it references Kirk’s stroke and his — in its estimation — lack of a full recovery.
A “full recovery” seemed to be the benchmark in 2016, but it would be “ableist” to suggest the same for the Democrat Senate candidate in Pennsylvania.
Chicago Tribune in 2016 said it couldn’t endorse GOP Sen. Mark Kirk because he hadn’t fully recovered from his 2012 stroke. “Kirk no longer can perform to the fullest the job of a U.S. senator. We are unable to endorse him for another six-year term.” https://t.co/IPiJOTTVHw
— Peter J. Hasson (@peterjhasson) October 13, 2022
“But politicians don’t get a free pass to only tell their version of events. And so, if Kirk’s campaign wants to argue that his stroke has changed him for the better, it also seems fair to ask whether it has changed him for the worse.” https://t.co/WjCL6IJwAw
— AustinLeigh (@AustinLeigh15) October 13, 2022
It was “fair to ask” then, but it seems that’s not fair to ask now, at least according to many.
— Chin Fundament (@ProvincialAnima) October 13, 2022