Questioning Biden’s Mental Ability

Pinny Bugaeff, who submitted this article exclusively to the New York Analysis of Policy and Government, served as a psychiatric Social Worker. She was employed by a large corporation as the primary therapist in a geriatric day treatment program. Part of the job involved screening new patients for dementia, and other cognitive impairments. One test which was used then and is still used today was the Folstein Mini Mental Status Exam.

I recently read an article in The Atlantic—Jan/Feb. -2020, an interview where the writer, a self – identified stutterer-who interviewed Biden. Biden offered that the reason he falters when speaking is that he was a stutterer. Interesting. I have known a few folks who stutter. Stuttering may be a neurologically influenced communication disorder-with a genetic and behavioral component but stuttering does not explain either inappropriate behavior nor memory loss of basic facts and figures such as I have been seeing and which seems to be to be getting progressively worse. The Stutterer Gambit seems to be only one of the most recent attempts to explain away his apparent growing senility.

Biden is 77, the same age as I and I know that my cognition is not as sharp or speedy as it once was –what I see in Biden isn’t the run of the mill kind of thing we have as a result of normal aging. I spent two full years working 8 hours a day with gentlemen who were in their 70’s,80’s and a few in their 90’s. Some of them were still pretty sharp and other than speed of recall and forgetting people’s names, they fell well within the range of appropriate behaviors for their age. Those with various types of early dementia were in a different category altogether, very like Biden in their behaviors.

Biden has had surgery for two brain aneurysms in 1988 but according to his neurosurgeon:

“The two brain aneurysms Biden suffered in 1988 were fully treated and he showed no signs of mental trouble as a result, said Dr. Neal Kassell, who performed the surgery on Biden three decades ago.” Nor did Biden suffer any brain damage that could come back to haunt him in old age, Kassell said.”

Really? Two brain aneurysms, two surgical repairs and his surgeon says he has nothing that will haunt him in old age. That may not be the whole picture.

A review of a small website has a good collection of Biden gaffs and a good summation on the subject of what appears to be the candidate’s increasing senility.

It is not an enchantment wand that will provide you with the best surgery with the minimum of the State-required hours, or maybe even a few shy, cheating the teen out of valuable experiences usually achieved in proper cialis cipla 20mg driver training. Since 1976 the International Olympic Committee banned the use of steroids, cheap tadalafil pills unhealthy lifestyle, adverse effects of certain medicines, etc. However, ClamCase always looked for raindogscine.com generic sildenafil uk various ways to serve its discerning clientele even better. As a result, a previously taboo subject was transformed into one of the most talked about topics, levitra prescription even in conservative communities of Asia.

One could forgive anyone enduring the rigors of a hectic primary campaign to occasionally misstate the state he is visiting, or an occasional name or two. But a careful examination of the former Vice President’s debate performances clearly reveals considerable cause for concern. He seems to struggle to stay on topic, other than touting or exaggerating his past role in various issues.

Voters should be increasingly concerned about this. There is, of course, a long-standing social taboo against suggesting a diagnosis of someone without seeing them or having a proper degree. Nevertheless, when an individual seeks to become President of the United States, clearly the most challenging position in the world, the most intense scrutiny by all voters is totally appropriate.

If there is reasonable cause for concern, and there truly is, why does the Democratic Party leadership seem so eager to support his candidacy?

Partially, it is because the clear surviving alternative, socialist Bernie Sanders, with his hard-left beliefs, enthusiasm for unworkable solutions, and, above all, his bizarre but sincere admiration for Communist leaders, would be a disaster in the general election. For traditional Democrats, a Sanders Administration would be beyond their control as he established a wholly new paradigm.

But there are other reasons as well. It is evident that Biden can and would be manipulated. What President Trump calls the “Deep State” would have a feast within his potential administration. It would be a presidency-by-committee of unaccountable, unpublicized advisers, interest groups, party leaders and top bureaucrats.

A few examples of Biden gaffes can be found at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wH-y_w0O5Bw, https://www.businessinsider.com/biden-bites-wifes-finger-in-bizarre-campaign-stop-moment-2019-11, and https://nypost.com/2019/08/05/biden-completely-flubs-where-mass-shootings-occurred/

Photo: Official White House picture

Quick Analysis

Ukraine’s Frozen Conflict

As we approach winter in the northern hemisphere, the war in Ukraine is beginning to resemble a “frozen conflict” from many perspectives. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently told the media he hopes the war will end faster once President-elect Trump takes over in January. Opinions in Moscow, however, differ from that of the Ukrainian leader. Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) needs to exclude Ukraine from joining in “exchange” for peace. If it does not, he says, then no end to the war is in sight. So far there is no Christmas solution. Several NATO countries, according to Vladimir Socor of the Jamestown Foundation, are tentatively considering “coalitions-of-the-willing” to provide security for Ukraine outside of the formal NATO framework. There is, however, no collective mechanism today under which such an arrangement is viable. According to the NATO Charter, while Ukraine is a NATO partner country, it may not join as a full member since it has not fulfilled the requirements for membership. That has not stopped NATO and allies from continuing “to provide Ukraine with unprecedented levels of support, helping to uphold its fundamental right to self-defence,” according to the organization. Socor says that keeping Ukraine out of NATO will not advance peace with Russia. Waiting for a peace settlement, he suggests, would only serve to encourage Moscow to continue the war indefinitely. Although the Biden Administration officially withdrew its support for Ukrainian membership in 2021, NATO maintains an “open door” policy toward membership-seeking countries. The current White House position led the way for European states to oppose Ukraine’s membership saying that a decision should be delayed until “conditions are met.” Biden pushed for changing “open door” to a “bridge” metaphor. It is not intended as an across-the-board NATO policy and has been implemented in the past on a case-by-case basis, says Socor. “The alliance’s open-door policy was not fully insulated from Russia’s non-statutory blocking power, and NATO-aspirant countries’ path toward membership was not always irreversible.” Russia has successfully blocked states like Georgia from joining, first in 2008 and again after the war in Ukraine began in 2014. Russia recognizes the value add of Ukraine to NATO is enormous and that Kyiv has a better case than some other nations. Putin’s invasion was, in part, intended to foreclose that option. By 2021, Moscow was pushing hard to maximize its war objectives, which included further annexations of Ukrainian territory. A main goal for Putin was, and is, to ensure there is no Ukraine left to join NATO. As President-elect Trump prepares to assume office in January, he is faced with the historical challenges presented by the war. Post-conflict security guarantees were the center of several proposals made during the 2023 military stalemate. The incoming Trump Administration has yet to outline how it intends to handle the Russia-Ukraine war. Analysts in Washington believe that the new Administration will expect its European allies to guarantee the majority of Ukraine’s security needs. As we approach 2025, several European nations have acknowledged that they do not view Ukraine as eligible for NATO membership as it would draw the organization into the middle of the conflict. Others want to wait until the war is over or pending a “peace” settlement before considering Ukrainian membership. Socor reports that some “influential voices” are suggesting that “Kyiv should join NATO after “freezing” the war along a stable armistice line, de facto accepting Ukraine’s partition, with NATO security guarantees applying de jure to the government-controlled territory only.” This would mean starting accession talks soon with the actual talks to commence only after a ceasefire is in place. Trump arrives in Washington at a time when Putin’s hybrid strategies of war in Ukraine have eviscerated commonly-held differences between war and peace. “Absent a political consensus in NATO over Ukrainian membership, certain European allies, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron, are holding informal consultations about post-conflict security guarantees to Kyiv by NATO members outside of NATO’s framework,” according to the Jamestown Foundation. The Biden Administration downplayed the discussions on possible forms of military assistance and defense industry cooperation by sending only an Assistant Secretary of State. For a European peace to hold the Trump Administration would need to formally extend the United States’ nuclear deterrence to Ukraine. Options under discussion in Europe include a “coalition of the resolute” to deploy forces to Ukraine as part of a possible armistice package, deterring further Russian attacks, says Secor. European officials are also debating, without any agreement, whether its military forces could perform non-combat logistical roles to free Ukrainian forces to fight. None of the possible courses of action has moved forward as all eyes are waiting on the incoming Trump Administration for clues about its intended level of support for a NATO framework and other non-NATO proposals. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.