The W
Views: 97777048
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
29.7.07 0758
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - GOP Bill to Reinsert Schiavo Feeding Tube Signed by Bush
This thread has 4 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next(336 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (101 total)
spf
Scrapple
Level: 132

Posts: 3149/5401
EXP: 26892998
For next: 239006

Since: 2.1.02
From: The Las Vegas of Canada

Since last post: 17 days
Last activity: 5 days
AIM:  
#1 Posted on 21.3.05 0053.54
Reposted on: 21.3.12 0057.36
Well, the GOP, showing their willingness to let states decide issues as long as the state decides the way they agree with continues. Personally, I hope that if there is an afterlife that Terri Schiavo spends all eternity bitching at her parents for letting her life become a political pawn when she told the man she lived with that she didn't want any of this done to her. Story on the issue from Yahoo (news.yahoo.com)
Promote this thread!
Jaguar
Knackwurst
Level: 106

Posts: 2779/3273
EXP: 12657832
For next: 14152

Since: 23.1.02
From: Phoenix, AZ

Since last post: 112 days
Last activity: 112 days
#2 Posted on 21.3.05 0119.13
Reposted on: 21.3.12 0120.43
    Originally posted by Tom DeLay
    "Time is not on Terri Schiavo's side," DeLay said. "The few remaining objecting House Democrats have so far cost Mrs. Schiavo two meals already today."


    Originally posted by Yahoo!
    The measured was backed by 156 Republicans to 5 who voted against it and 71 who did not vote; 47 Democrats voted in favor, 53 against and 102 did not vote. The lone independent in the 435 member house did not vote.


Hey, Tom DeLay! You forgot Poland! Err, I mean those few remaining objecting House Republicans. Let's all sing the "Fucking with peoples' lives in the name of Partisan Politics" song!

-Jag

I firmly believe that you should be able to throw any manner of rotten fruit at your elected representatives.
vsp
Andouille
Level: 87

Posts: 1929/2042
EXP: 6251450
For next: 141349

Since: 3.1.02
From: Philly

Since last post: 2947 days
Last activity: 161 days
#3 Posted on 21.3.05 0623.53
Reposted on: 21.3.12 0623.56
    Originally posted by Jaguar
    I firmly believe that you should be able to throw any manner of rotten fruit at your elected representatives.


My "representative," or at least the clown who represents the right-wing Christians in my neighborhood, is Joe Pitts. Throwing rotten fruit is definitely on my daily to-do list.

Remember, Republicans stand for STATES' RIGHTS. Er, unless state courts repeatedly and consistently uphold rulings that you dislike, in which case it's time to throw them out and go FEDERAL, baby!
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 124

Posts: 4564/4700
EXP: 21375727
For next: 460935

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1183 days
Last activity: 980 days
#4 Posted on 21.3.05 0631.33
Reposted on: 21.3.12 0631.52
I'm glad that my party has decided to fall on the sword for THIS issue. [/sarcasm]

I really do not understand this. This is federal overreach at its worst and, frankly, most unncessary. The only way this is even remoteley constitutional is the fact that Congrress gave the courts jurisdiction, which is a congressional power. But that doesn't make it right.

What frustrates me most is that the far right decided to make THIS case, where nobody is wearing a white hat, the test case for federal involvement in such an issue.
bash91
Merguez
Level: 55

Posts: 409/711
EXP: 1284562
For next: 29636

Since: 2.1.02
From: Plain Dealing, LA

Since last post: 712 days
Last activity: 15 hours
#5 Posted on 21.3.05 0755.33
Reposted on: 21.3.12 0756.10
The only good news I can see in this is that it appears almost certain that the court will slap Congress down and hard on any of about 4 or 5 different grounds. I just don't understand why the GOP leadership decided to be this blatantly stupid since there is no doubt that there is no role for them in this dispute and there is, I think, no doubt that they know it. As a rule of thumb, when both adult voting members of a family who are in the GOP core demographic find themselves agreeing with the likes of Henry Waxman, Barbara Boxer, Cynthia McKinney, and Carl Levin, it really produces some cognitive dissonance.

Tim
redsoxnation
Scrapple
Level: 152

Posts: 4570/7534
EXP: 43317860
For next: 983902

Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 393 days
Last activity: 393 days
#6 Posted on 21.3.05 0806.20
Reposted on: 21.3.12 0806.24
I can't believe the Republican Party walked so blindly into opening pandoras box. This is the type of federal intervention that is abhorrent to the true core beliefs. The overreaching to placate the religious right just crippled state sovereignty, as precedent has now been set for federal involvement in issues that the federal government has ZERO business even considering. When the Republican collapse occurs, this date should be marked as its beginning.
eviljonhunt81
Pepperoni
Level: 66

Posts: 1070/1084
EXP: 2417041
For next: 44823

Since: 6.1.02
From: not Japan

Since last post: 2901 days
Last activity: 2898 days
#7 Posted on 21.3.05 0925.32
Reposted on: 21.3.12 0925.43
    Originally posted by bash91
    I just don't understand why the GOP leadership decided to be this blatantly stupid since there is no doubt that there is no role for them in this dispute and there is, I think, no doubt that they know it.


Oh, the GOP has its reasons.

I'm eagerly awaiting the day Congress holds a special session to pass legislation telling me I can't call in sick to work.
Von Maestro
Boudin rouge
Level: 47

Posts: 296/512
EXP: 719438
For next: 46771

Since: 6.1.04
From: New York

Since last post: 138 days
Last activity: 19 hours
#8 Posted on 21.3.05 0933.02
Reposted on: 21.3.12 0936.56
    Originally posted by eviljonhunt81
    I'm eagerly awaiting the day Congress holds a special session to pass legislation telling me I can't call in sick to work.


I don't understand the analogy here.

The basis of this case is that Schiavo's husband is the only word that she would want to end her life at this point. Her parents say otherwise & since Schiavo did not have a living will there is no real way to know what her true wishes would be.

Political implications aside, the actions of Schiavo's husband are just so fishy here that I'm personally not comfortable with him being the person empowered with her right to live or die.

He did not want to have her life ended until after receiving a large cash settlement on her behalf, & had started a family with another woman. I know that if this was my kid in that hospital, I would not want this man deciding whether my child should live or die...
sweetroll
Cotechino
Level: 21

Posts: 35/82
EXP: 49873
For next: 71

Since: 23.3.02
From: Fort Lauderdale, Fla.

Since last post: 245 days
Last activity: 59 min.
#9 Posted on 21.3.05 1007.54
Reposted on: 21.3.12 1008.11
I don't know the Schiavos or the Schindlers, and I could care less what happens to that poor woman. She most likely feels no pain, so if either side wants to keep her alive/dead, it's fine with me

What's so ridiculous is that two trial courts decided by clear and convicing evidence (and two appellate courts affirmed), that this woman would want her husband to pull the plug "like he's starting a lawnmower." (The court's verbiage, not mine.) The courts also found clear and convincing evidence that she was a vegetable, with no hope of recovery. The Florida Supreme Court declined review on those issues, and Florida's "Terri's Law" was ruled unconstitutional by the Fla. Supremes. The US Supremes declines review. In a nutshell, the parents have lost in every courtroom they've entered (give or take an injunction). It's absolutely baffling that the legislators who abhor "legislation from the bench" want to make judicial decisions from the Capitol. No matter where you stand on pro-life/right-to-die/whatever, you can't ignore the judicial process because it makes a good "cause."

    Originally posted by Von Maestro
    (Michael Schiavo) did not want to have her life ended until after receiving a large cash settlement on her behalf


That money's long gone. It was "only" $1 million, which was exhausted about three years after Terri won a malpractice claim against her doctor, who failed to diagnose her bulimia. I've heard anecdotally that several groups have offered Michael upwards of $5 million to walk away, and he has repeatedly turned them down.

When it was a local story, I covered this case for over a year and a half, and am baffled by the amount of disinformation out there as it has gone national. And once again, I don't have a horse in the race here.

On a side note, does anyone see the irony in Terri now starving to death, considering her eating disorder is what got her in this mess in the first place?

(edited by sweetroll on 21.3.05 1115)
StaggerLee
Scrapple
Level: 139

Posts: 2350/6222
EXP: 32245370
For next: 222157

Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 17 hours
Last activity: 3 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#10 Posted on 21.3.05 1155.43
Reposted on: 21.3.12 1156.19
If the husband didnt come accross like a complete fucking asshole, perhaps I would side with him a bit. BUT, when you see the video and Terri can track objects, hear her name, look around a room, etc, I doubt she is a "vegatable". She may not be able to effectively communicate, but she also hasnt had any sort of physical, occupational or speech therapy since she was put in the hospice either. All of which would help her lead a somewhat more normal life.

If the Husband doesnt want to stay her HUSBAND and love her in sickness and in health, then divorce her, let her parents get gaurdianship and let them decide what is best. But, to go on Larry King, with his little crocidile tears, talking about how much he loves her, with a girlfriend and TWO kids, to me, makes me wanna punch him in the face.
oldschoolhero
Knackwurst
Level: 103

Posts: 2036/3059
EXP: 11463622
For next: 7823

Since: 2.1.02
From: nWo Country

Since last post: 1901 days
Last activity: 1835 days
#11 Posted on 21.3.05 1201.10
Reposted on: 21.3.12 1202.42
Nice piece of character assassination on a guy whom you know nothing about there. Jesus christ...no offence, but I'm sure you have NO idea how the guy's feeling. None of us do, I'd imagine.
StaggerLee
Scrapple
Level: 139

Posts: 2353/6222
EXP: 32245370
For next: 222157

Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 17 hours
Last activity: 3 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#12 Posted on 21.3.05 1210.05
Reposted on: 21.3.12 1211.17
character assassination?

The guy didnt speak up about her "wishes to die" for seven years. SEVEN YEARS.

The guy is living with a woman with whom he fathered two children.

Not a whole lot of "character" to assasinate.

CarlCX
Salami
Level: 33

Posts: 125/217
EXP: 213757
For next: 15425

Since: 1.5.02
From: California.

Since last post: 211 days
Last activity: 14 hours
AIM:  
#13 Posted on 21.3.05 1211.18
Reposted on: 21.3.12 1211.22
Words can't quite properly express how upset I was while watching the debate. I try to keep out of the party stereotyping, but for once, the schism was pretty blatant; most of the Democrats would come up and trot out the facts of the case, and most of the Republicans would respond with the Schlinder videotape/testimony, emotional pleas, and the "culture of life" stance. I mean, come on; some of them actually argued that she wasn't disabled, she simply needed a feeding tube to live. Sensenbrenner comparing the whole thing to the civil rights movement made me throw something at the television (mind you, it was a piece of paper).

The problem is that at this point, Michael Schiavo has much more credibility than the parents. Schiavo turned down individual offers of $1 million and $10 million to drop the case, for the first half-decade of Terri's coma he provided her with comprehensive rehabilitation--stopping based on doctor's advice. Hell, the doctors who worked with Terri have testified that he provided her with aggressive and substantial care until finally petitioning for this in 1998.

And the Schindlers, on the other hand, have been lying all the way. When Michael Schiavo won the malpractice suit in 1993--$1 million, $700,000 of which went to Terri--they demanded a share, and it was only once he refused that they sought to remove him as guardian-at-litem. They testified in court that they didn't know what Terri's wishes were, but even if they did, they would still take action against letting her go. This is also disregarding the "funeral testimony": Michael's brother and sister-in-law testified that Terri told them at a funeral that she wouldn't want to be kept alive by artificial means.

So the Schindlers claimed that the Schiavos had a conspiracy to kill her for sake of money. And then claimed that Michael Schiavo was abusive and neglectful, due to her bulimia, and morally in the wrong, having moved on. They've cast aspersions on his character without foundation, they've changed their story--agreeing that Terri was PVS, then arguing that she wasn't vegetative when the status didn't present the protection they wanted, then switching back and back again. And now, the infamous video--endless hours (and, it's suspected, years) of reflexive movements and random noises, spliced together into one big ongoing segment. It's the biggest bullshit tactic in this entire debacle.

And the only reason I bother retreading the details of this sad affair and the endless misinformation that's been thrown about?

Because damn near all of the arguments last night were centered around it; congressman/doctors making medical judgments based on the doctored video, notes about Terri being directly responsive to her environment, the depiction of her as a regular person who just needed help eating, etc.

It's disgusting, and it's infuriating, and it's making me lose what little faith I had left in our elected officials. The woman hasn't moved from her bed in almost fiteen years, numerous courts and doctors have ruled on her state and chances of recovery--her cerebral cortex is gone. She's not getting back up. There has never been a more blatant display of the moral hegemony in our power system right now.

edit: okay, I have no idea how to code.

(edited by CarlCX on 21.3.05 1012)
StaggerLee
Scrapple
Level: 139

Posts: 2354/6222
EXP: 32245370
For next: 222157

Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 17 hours
Last activity: 3 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#14 Posted on 21.3.05 1224.37
Reposted on: 21.3.12 1225.26
Perhaps I should clarify. I support anybody's right to choose what happens if they are terminally ill, or, on life support.

That being said, I do not think that in this case, LIFE SUPPORT is what we are talking about. Her heart works, she breathes on her own. Is she able to communicate? No more so than an adult with Cerebal Palsy.

As far as her husband taking her out of therapy and put into a home goes, on "doctors advice" I would suggest that there are probably a couple hundred thousand doctors who would disagree with the advice to stop therapy and to let her become vegatative. Doctors disagree on things all teh time, and not all of them can be right.

If it was so apparent that her brain was gorked out after she became unconscious, why did it take over half a decade for him to bother to mention the fact that she once said she wouldnt want to be on life support?

Its all too fishy for me, and I just can't imagine what the angle is in all of this.
Jaguar
Knackwurst
Level: 106

Posts: 2780/3273
EXP: 12657832
For next: 14152

Since: 23.1.02
From: Phoenix, AZ

Since last post: 112 days
Last activity: 112 days
#15 Posted on 21.3.05 1235.21
Reposted on: 21.3.12 1238.18
Maybe it's just me, but this doesn't seem to be a very hard path to follow. For seven years he tried therapy. It didn't work. It didn't work for SEVEN YEARS as you put it. He finally decided that the doctors were right. It'd been SEVEN YEARS without any signs of her getting better. Maybe it was time to let her go?

And now it's been another SEVEN YEARS. What does this man stand to gain from having his wife taken off life support? There's no money. There's just court battle after court battle. Not a one of which he's lost. If the man didn't care about his wife, why wouldn't he have walked away by now? Why not just get a divorce, get on with his life, and let her parents do whatever they want with her? Instead of fighting for SEVEN YEARS.

-Jag
Guru Zim
SQL Dejection
Administrator
Level: 138

Posts: 3310/5994
EXP: 31524041
For next: 139019

Since: 9.12.01
From: Bay City, OR

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 8 hours
AIM:  
#16 Posted on 21.3.05 1237.27
Reposted on: 21.3.12 1240.34
    Originally posted by StaggerLee
    Perhaps I should clarify. I support anybody's right to choose what happens if they are terminally ill, or, on life support.

    That being said, I do not think that in this case, LIFE SUPPORT is what we are talking about. Her heart works, she breathes on her own. Is she able to communicate? No more so than an adult with Cerebal Palsy.

    As far as her husband taking her out of therapy and put into a home goes, on "doctors advice" I would suggest that there are probably a couple hundred thousand doctors who would disagree with the advice to stop therapy and to let her become vegatative. Doctors disagree on things all teh time, and not all of them can be right.

    If it was so apparent that her brain was gorked out after she became unconscious, why did it take over half a decade for him to bother to mention the fact that she once said she wouldnt want to be on life support?

    Its all too fishy for me, and I just can't imagine what the angle is in all of this.


StaggerLee,

Do you think all of the courts were easily fooled? Do you believe that all of the doctors lied under oath? Do you feel that this is a massive conspiracy to murder Terri?

Why would anyone - let alone all of them - do this?
StaggerLee
Scrapple
Level: 139

Posts: 2356/6222
EXP: 32245370
For next: 222157

Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 17 hours
Last activity: 3 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#17 Posted on 21.3.05 1242.36
Reposted on: 21.3.12 1242.49
You missed my point Jag, he never mentioned her wishes for seven years. Does that not sound a bit fishy to you? Does that not sound a bit odd, that he is so adamant about her wanting to not be on 'life support' that he would allow it for seven years, but then somehow it's his life mission to let her pass away?

As far as "If the man didn't care about his wife, why wouldn't he have walked away by now? Why not just get a divorce, get on with his life, and let her parents do whatever they want with her?" is that what you call him having a fiance and two kids since all of this has happened? Is that what a caring husband does?

Sincerely though, if she had a living will, I would totally, 100% support him in his fight. However I find it hard to support him when it took so long to mention her wishes. I especially find it hard to believe he cares so much about her, that he started a new family while she lay in a hospital bed.

If anything, this should be a wake up call to everybody to get thier living will done, signed, notarized, and let everybody in your family know EXACTLY what your wishes are.

EDIT: No Guru, I dont think its a huge conspiracy, and that people lied under oath or anything of that nature. I just don't personally, believe the guy is honest about what was said while she was able to talk, and have an issue with her having her nourishment withheld on his word alone. Thats all.

(edited by StaggerLee on 21.3.05 1245)
CarlCX
Salami
Level: 33

Posts: 126/217
EXP: 213757
For next: 15425

Since: 1.5.02
From: California.

Since last post: 211 days
Last activity: 14 hours
AIM:  
#18 Posted on 21.3.05 1254.00
Reposted on: 21.3.12 1259.02
    Originally posted by StaggerLee
    That being said, I do not think that in this case, LIFE SUPPORT is what we are talking about. Her heart works, she breathes on her own. Is she able to communicate? No more so than an adult with Cerebal Palsy.


She can't swallow. She's failed three swallow tests; if she attempts to eat regular food, she will aspirate, and most likely die. (which made the protesters breaking into the hospital to feed her bread and water especially hilarious.) Her feeding tube is the only thing keeping her alive; if it's removed, she has no way of getting food, and she will die. Does that not sound like life support to you? Does that sound like someone in a physical state that can be rehabilitated?


    Originally posted by StaggerLee
    As far as her husband taking her out of therapy and put into a home goes, on "doctors advice" I would suggest that there are probably a couple hundred thousand doctors who would disagree with the advice to stop therapy and to let her become vegatative. Doctors disagree on things all teh time, and not all of them can be right.


This is a matter that's come up repeatedly in the actual court decisions on this case; the Schindlers have numerous doctors and consultants who are willing to testify that Terri Schiavo is perfectly normal. The problem is, almost all of these doctors have never been in her physical presence, nor even interacted with doctors who were. The latest list of doctors the Schindlers used to petition the court included optometrists whose only sight of Terri Schiavo had been the Schindlers' doctored video. Meanwhile, the doctors and nurses testifying for Michael Schiavo are--big surprise--those that actually worked on Terri. Yeah, it's fair to say that doctors regularly disagree--but there's such a thing as a credibility difference.

(image removed) This is a CAT scan of Terri's brain. Once again, I reiterate: her cerebral cortex is gone. The part of her brain that primarily deals with sensory information--isn't there. It suffered in the anoxic attack, and the space where it once was is filled with spinal fluid. Her motions, her sounds, etc. are all coming from the brainstem--which controls basic reflexive movement, respiration, regulation of heart rhythms, and sound localization.

    Originally posted by StaggerLee
    If it was so apparent that her brain was gorked out after she became unconscious, why did it take over half a decade for him to bother to mention the fact that she once said she wouldnt want to be on life support?


Why is it easy to believe that her parents want to hang onto her life now, but it's impossible to believe that he wanted to hang onto her, but came to terms with the fact that for all intents and purposes, she's dead?

(edited by CRZ on 21.3.05 1328)
policus
Loukanika
Level: 8

Posts: 8/9
EXP: 1627
For next: 560

Since: 17.8.04

Since last post: 3353 days
Last activity: 3330 days
#19 Posted on 21.3.05 1317.03
Reposted on: 21.3.12 1317.03
    Originally posted by Guru Zim

    StaggerLee,

    Do you think all of the courts were easily fooled? Do you believe that all of the doctors lied under oath? Do you feel that this is a massive conspiracy to murder Terri?

    Why would anyone - let alone all of them - do this?



So courts are infallible. The courts were right when they said slavery was a state right. The courts were right when they said civil rights was a state issue. The courts were right when they said abortion is a state issue.

On the larger scale this issue points out a big problem in the American political machine. The balance of power is broken. The courts have way to much power and this is just legislature trying to take its power back. Have you seen how many lawyers are in this country?

Classic wisdom (King Solomon) says if two people lay claim to someone and one is willing to let the person(child) die and the other sacrifice anything to see the person live then the person willing to sacrifice to see the person live should be the caretaker of said person.

This case is a failure of our court system plain and simple. That's why congress and that federal government are getting involved.

As far as people thinking this is a state right issue. last I checked the right to live liberty and the pursuit of happiness is one granted to all American's by the federal government not the states. If you want to argue whether she is alive or not IMO if one doctor thinks she's alive then she's alive.
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator
Level: 212

Posts: 5947/16106
EXP: 138850311
For next: 2185475

Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 14 hours
Last activity: 5 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#20 Posted on 21.3.05 1325.51
Reposted on: 21.3.12 1326.25
    Originally posted by policus
    So courts are infallible. The courts were right when they said slavery was a state right. The courts were right when they said civil rights was a state issue. The courts were right when they said abortion is a state issue.
Oh come on.

    If you want to argue whether she is alive or not IMO if one doctor thinks she's alive then she's alive.

This is usually where someone would make the "So doctors are infallible." repeat of YOUR post, but I'm hoping this'll nip that in the bud.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 NextThread ahead: Last Rites given to Pope John Paul II
Next thread: Sandy Beger to Plead Guilty Today
Previous thread: Some Pharmacists Refuse to Fill Birth Control Prescriptions
(336 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - GOP Bill to Reinsert Schiavo Feeding Tube Signed by BushRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.223 seconds.