A Sorry Showing
I'm disappointed that County Executive Doug Duncan won't be able to continue his campaign for governor of Maryland because of clinical depression. He's been a terrific public servant, and I thought he would be a fine governor. For the record, I'd sooner vote for my dog than Bob Ehrlich, who has accomplished precisely nothing except pouting when the General Assembly refused to legalize slot machines. I would have been happy to vote for Duncan.
What disappoints me even more is the reaction on the Washington Post blog usually moderated by Marc Fisher. Many of those who wrote in were convinced that clinical depression was just a cover story. They were quite sure that there was some sinister reason for Duncan's withdrawal. I hate it, but I understand it: We've been through five years of President Chickenheart, constantly exposed to his La-La Land where nothing is what it seems and no statement can be taken at face value. Of course trust is at an all time low.
The other thing that's disheartening is the strong possibility that admitting that he suffers from an eminently manageable disease may end Doug Duncan's distinguished career. One of the boneheads on the Post blog wondered where he would be hospitalized, even though most depression these days is handled with outpatient therapy and medication. But the unfortunate term "mental illness" got thrown around, and that, I'm afraid, will be the kiss of death, as it was for Tom Eagleton in '72. (Of course, President Chickenheart, who doesn't admit to the paranoid schizophrenia and severe Oedipal conflicts from which he suffers, remains in office.) The blog cites a poll that indicates that most people won't vote for someone with a history of depression. Never mind that there's strong evidence that Lincoln suffered from it--undiagnosed and untreated--and led the country through the Civil War. Never mind that a lot of people who would never vote for someone with a history of depression suffer from it themselves.
I guess I think it would have been good for people to take one day off from distrust, spend a bit of time learning about this widespread condition, and trying to be kind.
What disappoints me even more is the reaction on the Washington Post blog usually moderated by Marc Fisher. Many of those who wrote in were convinced that clinical depression was just a cover story. They were quite sure that there was some sinister reason for Duncan's withdrawal. I hate it, but I understand it: We've been through five years of President Chickenheart, constantly exposed to his La-La Land where nothing is what it seems and no statement can be taken at face value. Of course trust is at an all time low.
The other thing that's disheartening is the strong possibility that admitting that he suffers from an eminently manageable disease may end Doug Duncan's distinguished career. One of the boneheads on the Post blog wondered where he would be hospitalized, even though most depression these days is handled with outpatient therapy and medication. But the unfortunate term "mental illness" got thrown around, and that, I'm afraid, will be the kiss of death, as it was for Tom Eagleton in '72. (Of course, President Chickenheart, who doesn't admit to the paranoid schizophrenia and severe Oedipal conflicts from which he suffers, remains in office.) The blog cites a poll that indicates that most people won't vote for someone with a history of depression. Never mind that there's strong evidence that Lincoln suffered from it--undiagnosed and untreated--and led the country through the Civil War. Never mind that a lot of people who would never vote for someone with a history of depression suffer from it themselves.
I guess I think it would have been good for people to take one day off from distrust, spend a bit of time learning about this widespread condition, and trying to be kind.
posted by amsterdr at 11:38 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home