The article examines the parallel responses to Joe Biden's and John Fetterman's mental health concerns. It critiques the selective dismissal of evidence of unfitness based on partisan alignment, regardless of the actual evidence presented. The author points to a New York Magazine profile highlighting staff concerns about Fetterman's behavior, including erratic driving and potential non-compliance with his recovery plan.
Conservative outlets are accused of dismissing this evidence, instead focusing on the perceived political motivations behind the article and portraying it as a response to Fetterman's recent rightward shifts. They argue that this narrative is a response to his 'defections' from the left and conflate the effects of his stroke with his hospitalization for depression.
The author challenges the conservative argument, highlighting the objective evidence of Fetterman's erratic behavior, such as his near-fatal car crash, as well as staff concerns about medication adherence and medical appointment cancellations. It's argued that the idea that 'woke' staffers are fabricating concerns is undermined by the fact that the most substantial evidence comes from a letter written by a former chief of staff who has publicly criticized progressive politics.
The article concludes by highlighting the broader issue of partisan bias and the dangers of dismissing evidence based solely on political affiliation. The author argues that both the left and the right have shown a tendency to downplay or ignore negative information about their favored politicians, creating a self-reinforcing cycle of distrust and lack of accountability.