Posted on 01/13/2011 6:08:01 AM PST by Libloather
I love your sub-caption “funerally”. Brilliant!
I do believe we have a brand new word, “Funerally.”
So that people understand it, it should be spelled "FunerRally"
That word goes back to Wellstone's "memorial".
expect very soon we will learn that she was actually in a permanent vegetative state and, after the One passed his hands over her, she stood up and walked, saw and spoke.
___________________________________________________
and voted Republican
expect very soon we will learn that she was actually in a permanent vegetative state and, after the One passed his hands over her, she stood up and walked, saw and spoke.
___________________________________________________
and said, “Show us your birth certificate”
expect very soon we will learn that she was actually in a permanent vegetative state and, after the One passed his hands over her, she stood up and walked, saw and spoke.
___________________________________________________
and said, “You’re not eligible”
No need to post a thread. Just post it on this thread. I'd be interested to see how he spins this, because my understanding is that the new story is that they're differentiating between opening her eyes when asked and spontaneously opening her eyes. Not much of a difference to my mind and certainly not the way it was presented by Obama and the Dem Congresswomen who supposedly witness it.
There are websites out there pointing to this article as evidence that Congresswoman Giffords had opened her eyes before.. and they charge that the President was LYING in the speech by saying that it was the first time she opened her eyes. That is nonsense according to doctors at the hospital.
Here's how Steve Hayes with the Weekly Standard is writing it (below).. I have since made two calls.. and can confirm Hayes' characterization… Doctors say last night WAS THE FIRST TIME.. Congresswoman Giffords opened her eyes on her own.. and raised her arm… responding to lawmakers and friends who were in the room.
From Hayes:
Perhaps the most powerful moment of President Obama's moving address yesterday came when he announced that Representative Gabrielle Giffords had opened her eyes for the first time during a visit from some of her colleagues in Congress.
Now, some on the right are questioning whether that moment happened as he described it. They point to news articles suggesting that Giffords had opened her eyes before yesterday and, in quite a leap, are accusing the president of lying.
http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/2011/01/did-obama-lie-about-giffords-opening-her-eyes-for-the-first-time-video/
Skeptics point to an article that appeared Sunday in the Sonoran Chronicle, which reported: "Giffords can open her eyes, but because she is on a ventilator she can't speak, said Rhee." That article has since been pulled from the website. But there are several other examples of reports that Giffords could open her eyes - including one from Reuters and another from a Canadian wire service. None of them quote doctors directly making the claim.
Where the doctors are quoted, they say that Giffords did not open her eyes. Dr. Randall Friese, who examined Giffords when she arrived at the hospital, told CNN on Sunday "When I examined her, she did not speak. She did not open her eyes. She did squeeze my hand very aggressively."
And Dr. Peter Rhee, in a televised news conference on Sunday morning, also said that Giffords was unable to open her eyes.
Question: Has she -- you said it has been simple commands. Has she verbalized at all? And we were also told that there was a reviewing of sorts with her husband last night? And she did recognize him. Can you talk about that?
RHEE: No, we can't get into too much more detail than what we already have. But I can tell you right now with the type of surgery, her eyes, she can't open her eyes at this point, mechanical standpoints, and she's also on the ventilator, so she can't speak at this time.
So where do the conflicting claims come from? It's hard to say exactly, but a Sunday news release from the University of Arizona might be the source of the confusion. That release reported that Giffords had been able to follow simple commands and, contradicting the doctors' on-the-record accounts, implied that she had been able to open her eyes.
Dr. G. Michael Lemole Jr., a leading authority on skull base surgery and section chief of neurosurgery at the UA department of surgery, performed surgery on Giffords with Dr. Martin Weinand, professor of surgery in the neurosurgery section.
Lemole described the sequence of events that helped create the circumstances that resulted in the "cautiously optimistic" outlook of UMC physicians. Giffords was shot in the left side of her head, was responsive to voice commands and was in the operating room within 38 minutes.
The medical team was able to control her breathing and remove pressure in the brain.
"Gabrielle Giffords can follow simple commands this morning, but we know that brain swelling can take a turn, so we remain cautiously optimistic," said Lemole. He described simple commands as: "can you open your eyes" or "can you raise two fingers." While these seem like simple tasks, these tell doctors much about her condition.
Subsequent reporting, however, confirmed the original accounts from the doctors. On Monday, the Los Angeles Times reported that Giffords "is not able to open her eyes." And the New York Times added some detail: "Ms. Giffords is unable to speak because she is connected to a ventilator and unable to open her eyes, which doctors have covered with patches."
If those miracles occurred, her eyes were truly opened!
I believe in miracles
:)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.