One Week Ago, the Leftwing Propaganda Press Claimed John Fetterman Wasn't Disabled, and Anyone Saying He Was Was a Liar Pushing Disinformation.
Now They're Saying He Is Disabled, and That's Exactly Why You Must Vote For Him.

Before getting to that:

At the Babylon Bee, obviously.

That one got a real LOL out of me.

Fusilli Spock perfectly encapsulates the shifting narrative and movement of goalposts:

Fusilli Spock @awstar11

- He's fine. Shut up Republicans

- He's got hearing loss. Shut up Republicans

- It's temporary. Shut up Republicans

- He's disabled. Shut up Republicans

We've now gone from "He's not disabled, and it's disinformation for you to claim that" to "He's disabled, and it's spectacular."

Of course. Of course. This is the way it always goes.

At Twitchy:

The Washington Post @washingtonpost

The moment John Fetterman began speaking in a debate Tuesday night, social media reaction divided into two camps.

Some applauded him for revealing the auditory processing challenges he faces following a stroke. Others criticized his verbal missteps.

His "challenges" are that he's brain damaged and can no longer process speech, whether hearing it or producing it. The Washington Post euphemizes this as mere "verbal missteps."

The Washington Post @washingtonpost

Whatever voters ultimately decide at the polls, Fetterman's performance marks something of a milestone for the disability community, which remains underrepresented at every level of elected office.

Just last week he wasn't disabled at all. Now he's wrapped in the flag of disability.

What happened, Washington Post? Did Fetterman's debate performance expose the previous lies and thus create the need for a new propaganda line, perhaps?

The Washington Post @washingtonpost

Disability advocates say the debate revealed the ableism inherent in the electoral process and the added scrutiny that candidates with disabilities receive compared with their non-disabled counterparts

An analysis of politicians between 2013 to 2017 found that while the number of elected officials with disabilities went up, they are still underrepresented -- making up 12% of politicians at the local level and about 6% at the state and federal level.

A similar hot-take is aborning on Blue-Tick leftwing Twitter: You know who else didn't elect disabled people to the Senate, don't you?

Seyward Darby @seywarddarby

Good morning. Just a little reminder that ableism is a key component of fascism. See: eugenics.

Yenisey Ernie Ford @FordYenisey

Replying to @seywarddarby

"Fascism is when you don't elect drooling vegetables to legislative bodies." - Giovanni Gentile, 'La Dottrina del Fascismo'

I have that book, it sits comfortably next to my prized copy of Stuff Jefferson Said that DaveInTexas gave me one Christmas.

"Ableism" did boffo business as a meme on the Blue-Tick left yesterday.

This is the Coordinated NPC Update of the day. "@Feminisabulous" wrote a post at MSNBC -- you know this is going to be good, based on those two bits of information -- claiming that Fetterneck won the debate, because he exposed Dr. Oz for being a "bully.

He was a "bully" for debating the disabled man, who should have just been Affirmed and Coddled.

Hey, I agree he should be recovering from his stroke with a nurse -- but that's on his pig-whore fame-chasing powerslut wife.

"Femistabulous's" lunatic (and brief) post consists of going through the debate transcript and finding any instance of Dr. Oz saying that Fetterman doesn't understand Oz's plan or his answer, and then claiming that constitutes a ableist dogwhistle about Fetterman being too brain damaged to understand simple spoken English.

I mean, the latter is true, but it's a lie that any time someone points out you're deliberately misconstruing what you said by saying "you don't seem to understand" you're calling them brain damaged.

Here's the post she's so proud to link to:

Oz bashed Fetterman for not being able to debate him in the immediate aftermath of his stroke, omitting the fact that Fetterman's health would not permit it.

It wasn't the "immediate aftermath" of his stroke, which was five months ago. You little bitch liar. He noted that Fetterman would only agree to one debate, and at a very late date. That's it.

Despite Fetterman showing up and working twice as hard to process the question with captions, Oz went on to dismiss his opponent's ability to understand him. In a rebuttal to Fetterman’s point on education policy, Oz said, "Obviously I wasn't clear enough for you to understand this."

That's it. That's "feministabulous's" evidence that Oz "bullied" this disabled man -- who has to work twice as hard to understand simple, casual English and then produce gibberish non-grammatical English responses.

Earlier this month, this same "feministabulous" pushed the lie that Fetterman's now-confirmed brain damage is just a "hearing issue" -- remember that lie? It was very popular for several weeks -- just as Biden's obvious galloping dementia is just "a stutter."

One brain-damaged imbecile in high elected federal office is enough.

You know who agrees with "feminisabulous's" take that Oz is a big mean bully for daring to debate the disabled Democrat?

Why, the repulsively mercenary transitioning "House Conservative" of the Daily Beast, Matt K. Lewis, who, coincidentally enough, always offers up opinions that perfectly align with the leftwingers signing his paychecks:

Matt Lewis @mattklewis

Contrarian take: I wouldn't vote Fetterman for philosophical reasons. But if I were leaning toward him, last night would make me root for him even more. Dr. Oz risks coming off looking like a bully who is taking advantage of a tragedy. Would love to see some post-debate polling.

If you don't know who this guy is, let me put it like this: He was NeverTrump before Trump even announced his candidacy. He has always been the most leftwing corporate shill fake conservative out there, always working for leftwing sites offering the "conservative position" leftwingers wish conservatives actually held.

Keith Olbermann decided he would weigh via his his highly-rated cable TV show, and by "highly-rated cable TV show," I mean his Twitter account.

Hey, Keith! Congratulations! You're on the same "network" my gam-gam is!

Do you ever see each other in the "green room"?

Keith Olbermann's plan of bullying all of public speakers into compliance with his preferred propaganda has only one flaws: no one pays any attention to this raving lunatic batlady shut-in any longer, because they know he's a mental defective just like his heroes Joe Biden and John Fetterneck.

Here's the problem, Keith: If you want to enter your seventies with a new career as an Influencer, see, you need to actually have influence.

You don't.

Get back in the bath-tub, Shut-In.

Speaking of Keith's heroes Biden and Fetterneck:

I'll bet he does. I'll bet he does, Squire!

I swear, this will be the last time I link the Megyn Kelly/Ruthless podcast guys today. But I want to mention this: Weeks ago, when that actual journalist, Dasha Burns, reported that Fetterman had "trouble" understanding casual conversation when he didn't have his speech-to-text computer running, several leftwing hacks attacked her and swore that when they talked to him, he spoke perfectly with no garbled words or broken syntax whatsoever.

Those hacks were Rebecca Traister, Kara Swisher, and the Belle of The Bulwark, Molly Jong-Fast.

Question: Will the media take them to task for obviously lying, now that we've all seen how John Fetterman speaks even when he's prepared, and recalling memorized, scripted, answers, and reading prompts from a speech-to-text computer aid? They swore he spoke perfectly without these aids.

They're liars. It is now obvious.

Will they be "fact"-checked, I wonder? Will anyone call them out? Will Fake Jake Tapper at least offer them the Furrowed Brow of Journalistic Concern?

Or nah?

Nah, right?

JD Vance called out Kara Swisher, but I don't think Fake Jake will follow his lead.

The brain-damaged "ladies" of The View think Dr. Oz violated his Hippocratic Oath by daring to debate the disabled Democrat.

The View unamimously agrees that Fetterneck, who is running to be one of 100 Senators who dictates the course of legislation in the most crucial nation on the planet earth, was "bullied" by being challenged in a debate.

The NPC Update of the day, then, is "bullied."

"He has ideas."

Yeah.

SOOPAH-DOOPAH ideas.

Ideas like legalizing all drugs, including "hard drugs" like heroin and crack?
Those kind of ideas, Joyless?

Also, as Nick Fondacaro points out -- they previously joked that Herschel Walker might have had a stroke himself.

"What makes the Republicans think that Herschel Walker is coherent and he hasn't had a stroke?" Joy Behar proclaimed on October 13. She then read off some inartful remarks Walker made about climate change and shifting patterns of clean and dirty air. Co-hosts Sunny Hostin and Sara Haines busted out in mocking laughter...

Now they think that mentioning someone's stroke is "un-empathetic."

I think I'll be un-empathetic for a moment:

"What are you sayyyingg...?" -- a very elderly Kirk Douglas

The New Propaganda, 100% Better Than the Previous Propaganda, isn't working this time, thankfully.

Undecided voters were pushed towards Oz by Fetterneck's shit's-all-ret4rded performance.

The five undecided voters were asked "if John Fetterman, based on what you saw last night, is able to serve as a US Senator." Only one raised her hand in agreement.

The Ruthless podcast guys point out that the public was told to ignore their own eyes with respect to Biden's dementia in 2020, and they're not going to be bullied into that bullshit again.

posted by Ace at 03:06 PM

| Access Comments