#77
Posted: 3/20/05 at 11:48pm
SamOSam--ripullicenz haf no moralds thay chus vode 4 whoever payz them moneys
#78
Posted: 3/20/05 at 11:54pm
george w. bush should george w. "shh!"
and i think tom delay is tom degay
and i think tom delay is tom degay
#79
Posted: 3/21/05 at 12:02am
1992
Aug - Terri awarded $250,000 in malpractice settlement.
Nov - Terri awarded $1.4 million in malpractice trial.
Nov - Michael Schiavo awarded $600,000 in malpractice trial.
Answers my question about why Schiavo doesn't divorce Terri and get on with his life, don't you think?
Aug - Terri awarded $250,000 in malpractice settlement.
Nov - Terri awarded $1.4 million in malpractice trial.
Nov - Michael Schiavo awarded $600,000 in malpractice trial.
Answers my question about why Schiavo doesn't divorce Terri and get on with his life, don't you think?
#80
Posted: 3/21/05 at 12:14am
I am incredibly torn about this issue. Having a potentially terminal illness myself, I don't want the government or anyone else deciding what should happen to me in the event I get to this point. My living will and DNR both state that I do not want heroic measures taken if I'm... I don't remember the exact wording... basically in a position where they believe I can't truly recover. I do not want to be hooked up to a maching that keeps me breathing... however, I do not want a feeding tube removed. I just don't really want to die of starvation. I also believe the husband has the right to make those decisions in lieu of a living will/DNR. My parter knows my wishes... I'd hate for my parents to step in and do what they want... which they would, bless their hearts. Therefore, I have taken steps to prevent that from happening since we can't be legally married.
Like I said... I'm torn. I wouldn't want to starve, but I also respect the husband's position.
Like I said... I'm torn. I wouldn't want to starve, but I also respect the husband's position.
Happy, smile! Sad, frown! Use the corresponding face with the corresponding emotion! - Kate (Meg Ryan), French Kiss
#81
Posted: 3/21/05 at 12:22am
See my post above. The word "starve" is a medical term with emotional connotations that do not accurately refer to what the patient experiences.
#82
Posted: 3/21/05 at 12:33am
Schiavo: 'Come down, President Bush'
By WILLIAM R. LEVESQUE, Times Staff Writer
Published March 20, 2005
PINELLAS PARK - Angered by the latest political developments in Washington, Michael Schiavo said Saturday that it isn't just the Florida governor who should visit his wife to learn about the case.
Jeb Bush's brother, President Bush, should visit Terri Schiavo, too, he said.
"Come down, President Bush," Schiavo said in a telephone interview. "Come talk to me. Meet my wife. Talk to my wife and see if you get an answer. Ask her to lift her arm to shake your hand. She won't do it."
She won't, Schiavo said, because she can't.
He made a similar offer to the governor last week, saying lawmakers interferring in his wife's life know nothing about the case. So far, Gov. Bush hasn't responded to the offer.
President Bush has indicated he will sign any federal legislation to keep Terri Schiavo alive.
Weary after an emotional visit with his wife, Schiavo said he is astonished that politicians want to interfere in such a private matter.
"Instead of worrying about my wife, who was granted her wishes by the state courts the past seven years, they should worry about the pedophiles killing young girls," Schiavo said, referring to a local case. "Why doesn't Congress worry about people not having health insurance? Or the budget? Let's talk about all the children who don't have homes."
He said U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, who is leading a charge to extend Terri Schiavo's life, is a "little slithering snake" pandering for votes.
"To make comments that Terri would want to live, how do they know?" Schiavo said of the members of Congress who want to keep his wife alive.
"Have they ever met her?" Schiavo said. "What color are her eyes? What's her middle name? What's her favorite color? They don't have any clue who Terri is. They should all be ashamed of themselves."
Schiavo said he was going to stay at his wife's side through the entire ordeal and said he wouldn't back down in his fight to have her wishes carried out.
"Terri died 15 years ago," Schiavo said, referring to the collapse and cardiac arrest that doctors say virtually destroyed her brain. "It's time for her to be with the Lord like she wanted to be."
[Last modified March 20, 2005, 01:09:07]
The Terri Schiavo Case
By WILLIAM R. LEVESQUE, Times Staff Writer
Published March 20, 2005
PINELLAS PARK - Angered by the latest political developments in Washington, Michael Schiavo said Saturday that it isn't just the Florida governor who should visit his wife to learn about the case.
Jeb Bush's brother, President Bush, should visit Terri Schiavo, too, he said.
"Come down, President Bush," Schiavo said in a telephone interview. "Come talk to me. Meet my wife. Talk to my wife and see if you get an answer. Ask her to lift her arm to shake your hand. She won't do it."
She won't, Schiavo said, because she can't.
He made a similar offer to the governor last week, saying lawmakers interferring in his wife's life know nothing about the case. So far, Gov. Bush hasn't responded to the offer.
President Bush has indicated he will sign any federal legislation to keep Terri Schiavo alive.
Weary after an emotional visit with his wife, Schiavo said he is astonished that politicians want to interfere in such a private matter.
"Instead of worrying about my wife, who was granted her wishes by the state courts the past seven years, they should worry about the pedophiles killing young girls," Schiavo said, referring to a local case. "Why doesn't Congress worry about people not having health insurance? Or the budget? Let's talk about all the children who don't have homes."
He said U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, who is leading a charge to extend Terri Schiavo's life, is a "little slithering snake" pandering for votes.
"To make comments that Terri would want to live, how do they know?" Schiavo said of the members of Congress who want to keep his wife alive.
"Have they ever met her?" Schiavo said. "What color are her eyes? What's her middle name? What's her favorite color? They don't have any clue who Terri is. They should all be ashamed of themselves."
Schiavo said he was going to stay at his wife's side through the entire ordeal and said he wouldn't back down in his fight to have her wishes carried out.
"Terri died 15 years ago," Schiavo said, referring to the collapse and cardiac arrest that doctors say virtually destroyed her brain. "It's time for her to be with the Lord like she wanted to be."
[Last modified March 20, 2005, 01:09:07]
The Terri Schiavo Case
#83
Posted: 3/21/05 at 6:50am
Of course the Republican Congress wants to stick their noses into this - it takes attention and press away from the fact that they (as well as this disgusting president and his administration) are screwing up this country. Also, shame on the Democrats for sticking their heads in the sand and not stopping them.
#84
Posted: 3/21/05 at 1:11pm
I found this opinion on the internet....obviously having Congress intervene in this issue opens a lot of things:
The GOP just guaranteed every American universal health coverage - Hillary would be proud
by John in DC - 3/21/2005 10:27:00 AM
Robert, a reader over at DailyKos, recently wrote a comment over there regarding Schiavo that is actually quite brilliant (I can't find the link to his post, but will summarize it below).
If the Republicans believe their "culture of life" requires the federal government to intervene and assure adequate medical care any time an American is at risk of bodily harm, then we can assume this "culture of life" applies to other Americans when they too need critical medical care yet something stands in their way.
For example:
- poor people, the homeless, the underemployed, illegal immigrants who can't afford to pay for their medical help
- the elderly who don't have enough money to pay for the kind of expensive medical attention they may need later in life
- parents of newborns facing catastrophic illness
- regular Americans who can't afford health insurance, have no health insurance for any other reason, or who have health insurance that doesn't cover their current major or catastrophic illness.
- any American who ends up facing any kind of major illness or threat to their health and who can't afford to pay for adequate treatment. STRIKE THAT, money is irrelevant, this is the Culture of Life we're talking about. That should read "any American facing any kind of major illness or health threat, period - regardless of ability to pay" - in Schiavo's case, money isn't the issue, yet they're still guaranteeing federal help. And after all, isn't the Culture of Life more important than dollars anyway?
In other words, the GOP just guaranteed every American universal health coverage. And if that's not what they're guaranteeing, ask them why not? Is the Terri Schiavo case about the "culture of life" - or is it simply about Tom DeLay and the radical right grandstanding when they don't really give a damn about anybody's life?
Some enterprising Democrat should write up the Culture of Life Act (Terri's bill) immediately and introduce it, guaranteeing universal health coverage to ensure that every American is guaranteed their "culture of life."
The GOP just guaranteed every American universal health coverage - Hillary would be proud
by John in DC - 3/21/2005 10:27:00 AM
Robert, a reader over at DailyKos, recently wrote a comment over there regarding Schiavo that is actually quite brilliant (I can't find the link to his post, but will summarize it below).
If the Republicans believe their "culture of life" requires the federal government to intervene and assure adequate medical care any time an American is at risk of bodily harm, then we can assume this "culture of life" applies to other Americans when they too need critical medical care yet something stands in their way.
For example:
- poor people, the homeless, the underemployed, illegal immigrants who can't afford to pay for their medical help
- the elderly who don't have enough money to pay for the kind of expensive medical attention they may need later in life
- parents of newborns facing catastrophic illness
- regular Americans who can't afford health insurance, have no health insurance for any other reason, or who have health insurance that doesn't cover their current major or catastrophic illness.
- any American who ends up facing any kind of major illness or threat to their health and who can't afford to pay for adequate treatment. STRIKE THAT, money is irrelevant, this is the Culture of Life we're talking about. That should read "any American facing any kind of major illness or health threat, period - regardless of ability to pay" - in Schiavo's case, money isn't the issue, yet they're still guaranteeing federal help. And after all, isn't the Culture of Life more important than dollars anyway?
In other words, the GOP just guaranteed every American universal health coverage. And if that's not what they're guaranteeing, ask them why not? Is the Terri Schiavo case about the "culture of life" - or is it simply about Tom DeLay and the radical right grandstanding when they don't really give a damn about anybody's life?
Some enterprising Democrat should write up the Culture of Life Act (Terri's bill) immediately and introduce it, guaranteeing universal health coverage to ensure that every American is guaranteed their "culture of life."
#85
Posted: 3/21/05 at 1:28pm
Brilliant! That man (John in DC) should be made a saint.
once again, however, political gain is all-powerful.
I have yet to see any real evidence that Michael Schiavo is trying to money-grub his invalid wife. In fact, he's offered to give her money to charity. He has money of his own. As he is her husband, he's entitled to her money.
To be quite honest, I'm a bit dissatisfied with the parents. Interesting that THEY want custody of their daughter again now that she has a cool mil or two in her bank account.
once again, however, political gain is all-powerful.
I have yet to see any real evidence that Michael Schiavo is trying to money-grub his invalid wife. In fact, he's offered to give her money to charity. He has money of his own. As he is her husband, he's entitled to her money.
To be quite honest, I'm a bit dissatisfied with the parents. Interesting that THEY want custody of their daughter again now that she has a cool mil or two in her bank account.
#86
Posted: 3/21/05 at 3:03pm
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/PollVault/story?id=599622&page=1
Poll: No Role for Government in Schiavo Case
Federal Intervention in Schiavo Case Prompts Broad Public Disapproval
March 21, 2005 -- Americans broadly and strongly disapprove of federal intervention in the Terri Schiavo case, with sizable majorities saying Congress is overstepping its bounds for political gain.
The public, by 63 percent-28 percent, supports the removal of Schiavo's feeding tube, and by a 25-point margin opposes a law mandating federal review of her case. Congress passed such legislation and President Bush signed it early today.
That legislative action is distinctly unpopular: Not only do 60 percent oppose it, more — 70 percent — call it inappropriate for Congress to get involved in this way. And by a lopsided 67 percent-19 percent, most think the elected officials trying to keep Schiavo alive are doing so more for political advantage than out of concern for her or for the principles involved....
...In addition to the majority, the intensity of public sentiment is also on the side of Schiavo's husband, who has fought successfully in the Florida courts to remove her feeding tube. And intensity runs especially strongly against congressional involvement.
Poll: No Role for Government in Schiavo Case
Federal Intervention in Schiavo Case Prompts Broad Public Disapproval
March 21, 2005 -- Americans broadly and strongly disapprove of federal intervention in the Terri Schiavo case, with sizable majorities saying Congress is overstepping its bounds for political gain.
The public, by 63 percent-28 percent, supports the removal of Schiavo's feeding tube, and by a 25-point margin opposes a law mandating federal review of her case. Congress passed such legislation and President Bush signed it early today.
That legislative action is distinctly unpopular: Not only do 60 percent oppose it, more — 70 percent — call it inappropriate for Congress to get involved in this way. And by a lopsided 67 percent-19 percent, most think the elected officials trying to keep Schiavo alive are doing so more for political advantage than out of concern for her or for the principles involved....
...In addition to the majority, the intensity of public sentiment is also on the side of Schiavo's husband, who has fought successfully in the Florida courts to remove her feeding tube. And intensity runs especially strongly against congressional involvement.
#87
Posted: 3/21/05 at 3:12pm
This could backfire on the Republicans and make the Moderate Middle--mostly baby-boomers faced with decisions about aging parents and spouses--think of them as the gutless pandering whores the Republican party has become.
Updated On: 3/21/05 at 03:12 PM
#88
Posted: 3/21/05 at 3:13pm
The important thing is for all those people to get to the polls in four years...
Happy, smile! Sad, frown! Use the corresponding face with the corresponding emotion! - Kate (Meg Ryan), French Kiss
#89
Posted: 3/22/05 at 9:35am
The federal judge has now ruled against the reinsertion of the feeding tube. Lets see what new lows that Bush and the Republicans can sink to.
#90
Posted: 3/22/05 at 10:29am
Bush flew up from his ranch in support of "always erring on the side of life..." You gotta wonder if that smug philosophy informed his many life and death decisions in Texas, where as Governor he presided over a record number of executions. The supposed 'culture of life' this hypocritical administration touts espouses that all efforts to save the innocent should be exhausted before final action is taken. Now that we are painfully aware of the many innocent people who have been put to death after wrongful convictions (remember Illinois???), would W reconsider his stand (and track record) on capital punishment?
"I'm a comedian, but in my spare time, things bother me." Garry Shandling
Updated On: 3/22/05 at 10:29 AM
#91
Posted: 3/22/05 at 10:29am
MasterLCZ,
I just read your long comments on this thread.
To them, I say, "BRAVO!"
Poor Terri is an unwitting puppet in parlour politics of the worst sort.
God IS compassionate and loving. He's also vengeful and will smite those who are against him.
So, in actuality, these people who pray to God for the "life" of Terri Schiavo are definitely praying to this vengeful God, the one who smote Terri Schiavo for hating herself so much (because her body is the Lord's temple) and wore her body out. This vengeful God gave her what she deserved for hurting His temple, so these people ARE doing the Lord's will by praying that her punishment continue.
The kind, loving God would have let Terri come home years and years ago.
So would kind, loving parents.
****
I think it's remarkable everyone is saying Terri's husband only wants her money when he has publicly stated that, if the legal trials will go away and if Terri is allowed to pass, the money will go to charity. Meanwhile, no one's raised an eyebrow at the possibility that Terri's family wouldn't mind having legal custody of her again so they could get their hands on all that dough. My guess is, should they get custody, you'll see a few years of "therapy" before the family, too, will realize it's a hopeless cause. Then she'll die and they'll be rich.
The final thing I have to say about this case is that we're watching the continued invasion into our private lives by the legislative and executive branches of our government. How ABSOLUTELY frightening that they have continued to show an ever-increasing lack of respect for the balance of power in this country...and how even MORE frightening that the only branch of government in our country right now standing between us and totalitarianism is the one branch that is not elected by citizens of this country.
I just read your long comments on this thread.
To them, I say, "BRAVO!"
Poor Terri is an unwitting puppet in parlour politics of the worst sort.
God IS compassionate and loving. He's also vengeful and will smite those who are against him.
So, in actuality, these people who pray to God for the "life" of Terri Schiavo are definitely praying to this vengeful God, the one who smote Terri Schiavo for hating herself so much (because her body is the Lord's temple) and wore her body out. This vengeful God gave her what she deserved for hurting His temple, so these people ARE doing the Lord's will by praying that her punishment continue.
The kind, loving God would have let Terri come home years and years ago.
So would kind, loving parents.
****
I think it's remarkable everyone is saying Terri's husband only wants her money when he has publicly stated that, if the legal trials will go away and if Terri is allowed to pass, the money will go to charity. Meanwhile, no one's raised an eyebrow at the possibility that Terri's family wouldn't mind having legal custody of her again so they could get their hands on all that dough. My guess is, should they get custody, you'll see a few years of "therapy" before the family, too, will realize it's a hopeless cause. Then she'll die and they'll be rich.
The final thing I have to say about this case is that we're watching the continued invasion into our private lives by the legislative and executive branches of our government. How ABSOLUTELY frightening that they have continued to show an ever-increasing lack of respect for the balance of power in this country...and how even MORE frightening that the only branch of government in our country right now standing between us and totalitarianism is the one branch that is not elected by citizens of this country.
#93
Posted: 3/22/05 at 12:31pm
BWS - very true. I would hope for more outrage. I also cannot figure out why someone like Jessie Jackson Jr. voted for the bill in the House?
The NYT editorials were very good.
WCA - love the cartoon.
The NYT editorials were very good.
WCA - love the cartoon.
#94
Posted: 3/22/05 at 3:00pm
http://www.latimes.com/news/opin...omment- opinions <http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-scheer22mar22,0,217670.column?coll=la-news-comment-opinions>
ROBERT SCHEER
Life, Death and Cynical Grandstanding
Robert Scheer
March 22, 2005
I cannot remember a time when Congress and the president have acted with more egregious political opportunism and shameless trafficking in human misery than last weekend, leaping into the 15-year-long Terri Schiavo saga at the last possible moment as grandstanding defenders of the defenseless.
Although Schiavo's relatives on both sides of the issue are assuredly acting in good faith, national politicians certainly are not.
That was clear even before ABC News revealed the contents of a memo circulating among Senate Republicans that trilled over how exploiting this complex case in the most simplistic way would "excite" the GOP base and would be "a great political issue."
Otherwise, they would have taken up this tortuous issue in earnest long ago. Better yet, they should have trusted the Florida state legal system and doctors who have examined Schiavo's case over and over again.
Instead, facing a media storm dominated by heart-rending but inconclusive video clips of Schiavo, Republican demagogues led by Rep. Tom DeLay (D-Texas) — who is battling ethics problems — took the easy, cynical way out. They rushed through a bill, past cowed Democrats, that moves the case to federal court and applies only to Schiavo's parents.
Even more shocking, President Bush did what he would not do in August 2001 when terrorism warnings were "blinking red," in the words of the then-head of the CIA: He returned to Washington from one of his many sacrosanct vacations, in this case to sign this ill-conceived legislation.
Despite the shrill howls of outrage that have been inciting politicians from talk radio, 70% of Americans polled nationally by ABC News called congressional intervention in the Schiavo case inappropriate, with 58% holding that view "strongly."
It seems obvious that such a delicate life-and-death case should not be decided by radio shock jocks hunting for ratings, embattled politicians looking for wedge issues or even majority rule — in this case the 63% of Americans polled who believe that Schiavo's feeding tube should be removed. Instead, it is family members, doctors and, when needed as an impartial arbitrator, the courts that must carefully and dispassionately weigh the extremely complex medical, ethical and legal issues involved.
Which, in fact, is exactly what happened in the Schiavo case. Impartial doctors and judges methodically examined Schiavo and the legal case, respectively, for seven years, consistently backing the guardianship rights of Schiavo's husband and his decision to end artificial life-support treatments that kept her alive in what the Florida courts concluded is "a persistent vegetative state … with no hope of a medical cure."
Further, the federal courts already had the power to act if they believed a fundamental right had been abrogated. On Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court turned down an appeal to intervene — as it had done in 2001 and earlier this year. But that didn't stop the Christian right and the politicians in its thrall from seizing on the Schiavos' plight to advance their "right to life" agenda. If only this agenda were consistent. For example, as governor of Texas, George W. Bush refused to review cases involving mentally retarded death row inmates. Nor can I remember any time Congress rushed back from a vacation to deal with real-time incidents of genocide in the Balkans, Rwanda or Sudan. This is selective compassion of the most pandering sort.
In the end, it is not about who is right in the depressingly ugly battle between Schiavo's parents on one side and her husband on the other. Those of us who have dealt with the slow death of a beloved relative in the hospital are all too familiar with the pain in facing the myriad decisions that can tear us apart.
What this case is really about is keeping politics and state-endorsed religion out of our private lives. Many seniors like me now must dread that our most personal and painful private matters might be turned into political footballs by those cravenly seeking approval from certain voting blocs, or that we could be imprisoned against our wishes inside a dead body because of somebody else's religious beliefs. This is why seniors polled by ABC were the most likely of any age group to support the removal of Schiavo's feeding tube.
The one bright spot in this sad story is that millions of Americans are now talking about how they want to be cared for medically and are writing or reviewing living wills.
As the polls show, while our Beltway politicians are making fools of themselves, those of us in the real world are trying to ensure that our most private moments are not turned into a humiliating circus.
ROBERT SCHEER
Life, Death and Cynical Grandstanding
Robert Scheer
March 22, 2005
I cannot remember a time when Congress and the president have acted with more egregious political opportunism and shameless trafficking in human misery than last weekend, leaping into the 15-year-long Terri Schiavo saga at the last possible moment as grandstanding defenders of the defenseless.
Although Schiavo's relatives on both sides of the issue are assuredly acting in good faith, national politicians certainly are not.
That was clear even before ABC News revealed the contents of a memo circulating among Senate Republicans that trilled over how exploiting this complex case in the most simplistic way would "excite" the GOP base and would be "a great political issue."
Otherwise, they would have taken up this tortuous issue in earnest long ago. Better yet, they should have trusted the Florida state legal system and doctors who have examined Schiavo's case over and over again.
Instead, facing a media storm dominated by heart-rending but inconclusive video clips of Schiavo, Republican demagogues led by Rep. Tom DeLay (D-Texas) — who is battling ethics problems — took the easy, cynical way out. They rushed through a bill, past cowed Democrats, that moves the case to federal court and applies only to Schiavo's parents.
Even more shocking, President Bush did what he would not do in August 2001 when terrorism warnings were "blinking red," in the words of the then-head of the CIA: He returned to Washington from one of his many sacrosanct vacations, in this case to sign this ill-conceived legislation.
Despite the shrill howls of outrage that have been inciting politicians from talk radio, 70% of Americans polled nationally by ABC News called congressional intervention in the Schiavo case inappropriate, with 58% holding that view "strongly."
It seems obvious that such a delicate life-and-death case should not be decided by radio shock jocks hunting for ratings, embattled politicians looking for wedge issues or even majority rule — in this case the 63% of Americans polled who believe that Schiavo's feeding tube should be removed. Instead, it is family members, doctors and, when needed as an impartial arbitrator, the courts that must carefully and dispassionately weigh the extremely complex medical, ethical and legal issues involved.
Which, in fact, is exactly what happened in the Schiavo case. Impartial doctors and judges methodically examined Schiavo and the legal case, respectively, for seven years, consistently backing the guardianship rights of Schiavo's husband and his decision to end artificial life-support treatments that kept her alive in what the Florida courts concluded is "a persistent vegetative state … with no hope of a medical cure."
Further, the federal courts already had the power to act if they believed a fundamental right had been abrogated. On Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court turned down an appeal to intervene — as it had done in 2001 and earlier this year. But that didn't stop the Christian right and the politicians in its thrall from seizing on the Schiavos' plight to advance their "right to life" agenda. If only this agenda were consistent. For example, as governor of Texas, George W. Bush refused to review cases involving mentally retarded death row inmates. Nor can I remember any time Congress rushed back from a vacation to deal with real-time incidents of genocide in the Balkans, Rwanda or Sudan. This is selective compassion of the most pandering sort.
In the end, it is not about who is right in the depressingly ugly battle between Schiavo's parents on one side and her husband on the other. Those of us who have dealt with the slow death of a beloved relative in the hospital are all too familiar with the pain in facing the myriad decisions that can tear us apart.
What this case is really about is keeping politics and state-endorsed religion out of our private lives. Many seniors like me now must dread that our most personal and painful private matters might be turned into political footballs by those cravenly seeking approval from certain voting blocs, or that we could be imprisoned against our wishes inside a dead body because of somebody else's religious beliefs. This is why seniors polled by ABC were the most likely of any age group to support the removal of Schiavo's feeding tube.
The one bright spot in this sad story is that millions of Americans are now talking about how they want to be cared for medically and are writing or reviewing living wills.
As the polls show, while our Beltway politicians are making fools of themselves, those of us in the real world are trying to ensure that our most private moments are not turned into a humiliating circus.
#96
Posted: 3/22/05 at 3:09pm
Please, oh, PLEASE let this backfire on DeLay and his cohorts.
#97
Posted: 3/22/05 at 3:16pm
If not BS, we are all in trouble. Oh, that's right we are in trouble!
#98
Posted: 3/22/05 at 3:19pm
If the Democrats were smart (are they? Please tell me they are), they're currently scrambling to find their own way to get this message out there.
As the Republican party made the first move to use this as a powerplay, I see no moral reason why the Democrats should sit back without shining a light on this tragedy.
As the Republican party made the first move to use this as a powerplay, I see no moral reason why the Democrats should sit back without shining a light on this tragedy.
#99
Posted: 3/22/05 at 3:21pm
Either way the Republicans will use this to whip the Religious Right into a voting bloc. If they keep her alive, she will be living testament to Our Fearless President and if she dies, she will be a martyr.
You rarely hear what led to her coma-like state to begin with? Turns out she was a bullimic. That's how she developed the potassium deficiency that started this.
Her parents are trying to perpetrate the lie that Michael abused her because they don't want to admit that they caused her bullimia.
You rarely hear what led to her coma-like state to begin with? Turns out she was a bullimic. That's how she developed the potassium deficiency that started this.
Her parents are trying to perpetrate the lie that Michael abused her because they don't want to admit that they caused her bullimia.
#100
Posted: 3/22/05 at 3:22pm
Nacy Pelosi said after the election that the Democrats must learn to educate the public that we are also moral. It is so bizarre to think that this education is necessary. If you look at the 1992 electroal map - it is scary to see how many states have been lost since then.
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $95
Tickets From $80
Tickets From $73