" 
 :::Sure, I'll explain: because of WP:UNDUE and WP:RS. 
 :::OK, now I'll really explain, in English instead of wikijargon. Our Neutral Point of View policy says that our articles ""should not give undue weight to any aspects of the subject, but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight appropriate to its significance to the subject"". In an article about a concept mentioned in over 100,000 web pages including some from major news organizations, a concept mentioned only in 500 or less blog pages does not make the grade. That's because a blog is basically only a WP:RS for claims about the blogger(s) or the blog content. If a newspaper like the NYT started printing items about CDS, that would be a WP:RS by Wikipedia rules, and would count more for Wiki-notability than all the blog mentions. (Those of us who edit Wikipedia articles about bloggers keep running into this ...um... difficulty. However, I and other long-term editors have noticed that following Wikipedia's rules does produce better articles in the long run.) 
 :::So I've just removed the following text from the article: 
 :::* ""Clinton Derangement Syndrome"" relates to Bill and Hillary Clinton.The Washington Monthly | Political AnimalWhat Caused Bush Derangement Syndrome? 
 :::(Asides: (A) That's good writing. (B) The pwblogs.com link is worth reading.) 
 :::Another problem is that the term CDS has multiple meanings, making it harder to treat encyclopedically: 
 :::#Right-wingers' bizarre/irrational claims about President Clinton (see eg., The Clinton Chronicles). 
 :::#Left-wingers' natural hostility to both Clintons for being too centrist occasionally produces bizarre/irrational claims. 
 :::#Overly-emotional hostility to Hillary's presidential campaign from a variety of people. 
 :::Yet another factor influencing me: I expect use of the terms BDS and PDS to increase over the next year or two, but CDS to fade away (at least as an epithet — and preferably as a phenomenon!). 
 :::So I do have reasons for removing this material. Of course, I could be wrong ... and, as mentioned, one MSM item about CDS would make a big difference. Cheers,  "