Posted on 02/02/2007 3:49:53 AM PST by 8mmMauser
I would throw my hat in the ring, but a horse would step on it or worse. That is all I would need, a hatfull of horse biscuits, just like a liberal.
Lots of folks in that other thread signed off on Mitt because of his view of Terri. I'm one of them. Not that I had any particular enthusiasm for the man, he just seemed a little less contaminated than Giuliani or McCain. But he's just as bad. I guess I'll stick with Cal Coolidge.
A reminder for the locals -- Haleigh Poutre's nearly fatal encounter with Massachusetts bureaucrats was on Mitt's watch.
On Mitt's watch, DSSpool thrived.
{groan}
Kindly cess and DSSist.
In the other two suits (failure to diagnose the bulimia that did not exist), Michael was awarded $686,700 for loss of consortium (but wasted no time not losing any consortium!). Terri was awarded $1.56 million. I believe these sums were later rounded to a total of $2 million, $600,000 for Michael, $1.4 million for Terri.
Michael rejoiced in Terri's assurance of care and therapy for life by buying himself a new sports car and refusing to provide Terri any therapy. You can pick up a lot of consortium with a new sports car. "I'm going to be rich!" he exclaimed out loud to Terri's nurses. He'd ask, "When is she going to die?" "Has she died yet?" "When is that bitch going to die?" (Translation: "the bitch" is worth a lot of money to me dead.)
With a month or so -- Valentine's Day -- Michael flew into a rage at the Schindlers when they asked when he would begin Terri's therapy. After that, they never spoke again. Michael's hatred was such that he admitted in court he was using Terri to hurt the Schindlers.
Within a few months more, he tried to kill Terri by ordering the facility to withhold antibiotics when she developed a urinary tract infection. Ladies, take notice. Don't we just love our husbands when they try to let us die in agony from a UTI? (Terri most certainly could feel pain, too.)
One other little detail. Michael never contributed his own money to the noble cause of carrying out Terri's purported wish to die. Oh, it was his sacred promise, but not so sacred that he'd spend any of his own money on it. No, sir, he nobly used her money to pay the attorneys and all other costs of killing her, including some of his own expenses. What was his was his. What was hers was his too, if only the bitch would hurry up and kick off.
Michael claimed that Terri's money was exhausted at the end. But only hours after she died, before her body was cold, he and attorney Deborah Bushnell raced to court to file a claim for Terri's estate. Couldn't wait even one day. I guess he was too busy with his banking to grieve.
Here is another Doctor that agrees with Hammesfahr and Cranford that she can see, too.
I think you have begun a very useful list of physicians whose hands-on clinical examinations disprove Thogmartin. There will be others, I'm sure. More or less in chronological order:
Baras
Hammesfahr
Maxfield
Cranford
Also needed, text of closing arguments by Michael's lawyers in the bulimia trials... where they portrayed Terri as worth $20 million, precious, having limited capacities but not vegetative, and needing rehab.
I don't mean to be a distraction from the official reports : )
I think most of the litigation stuff got destroyed, t'wit. Standard procedure for some reason.
This little piece of it must be out there somewhere 'cuz I read it once. Not a big deal, but it does show how lawyers and ideologues twist words and distort the truth.
When Michael was out to win malpractice money from Terri's injury, naturally his lawyers portrayed her as precious, alert and capable of rehab. But then, after Terri was awarded the money and he stood to inherit it from her -- if she would kindly go push up daisies -- his lawyers said she was a houseplant and wanted to die.
Fish gotta swim, birds gotta fly :-)
Yet the rise of secularism isnt remarked upon in the mainstream media, which prefers mega-church scaremongering (evangelicals are coming to get you!), or condescending articles on virginity balls and the like. So why does the growing secular minority feel besieged by the shrinking religious majority?
This mixture of fear, disdain, and incomprehension might be a legacy of recent (until 2006) electoral defeats, butin defiance of popular myths Americans arent eager to impose religion via the ballot box. Most voters say that religion seldom or never influences their voting decisions, and voters are far more concerned about officials who pay too much attention to religion than those who pay too little (51 vs. 35 percent in a 2004 CBS/New York Times poll), as the Schiavo backlash reflects.
Even within the most religious groups of voters, such as born-again Christians, religious beliefs only have a limited relationship to political beliefs. For example, according to Barna Group research, one-third of born-again Christians believe that abortion is morally acceptable behavior. Nor does the religious right vote as a monolithic bloc. In 2000, 10 million white evangelicals, and almost half of all voters that self-identify as religious right but go to church less than once a week, voted for Gore over Bush.
A Post-Christian America... The supposed religious revival is mirage: Americans are becoming godless
8mm
I notice at the end she won't be holding her breath so I guess she doesn't puff the stuff either.
.............................
McKnight went down so that the anti-choice movement could gain ground on meshing multi-pronged attacks on womens rights, reproductive rights, and civil liberties.
As was the case with McKnight, this ruling ultimately communicates the reality that female bodies still to other entities: to the government and the men who write most of these laws criminalizing our choices. (Not to take anything away from the impact of the bible-thumping, crazed hordes of anti-choice women. )
As women, we must keep asking the question of how far have we come in our right to control our own bodies, in the context of the cultures and societies in which we live.
~Snip~
I, for one, want to see how interested the media would be in pursuing the kind of intensive coverage we saw devoted to a woman who had already lost all of her ability to function and live without life support. Both womens stories revolve(d) around the governments intervention in a persons right to live or die. In this case, Raichs loyal husband and lawyer is fighting for her right to live just as strongly as Schiavos loyal husband fought for her right to die. For that, he was made the subject of spectacle, and the Schiavo story drew national headlines. The sad, almost surreal media frenzy surrounding her death was also chronicled, sometimes minute by minute, on pro-life blogs everywhere.
To all the anti-choice folks out there talkin all that smack about wanting to make sure human life is sacrosanct So, show me what youve got.
Members of the 4th Estate, I want to see you throw the same kind of effort into covering Raichs case as Schiavos.
I wont be holding my breath, but Im still giving it a shot. Show me what youve got.
Schiavo vs. Raich coverage: Where's the outrage?
8mm
Shhhhh, Mikey lost his last name in some circles too and more, while Terri regained her own. It may even become a verb or infinitive "to schiavo someone".
That goes for newscasters, headline writers, well-wishers, gawkers and everyone else. If we're not calling her husband "Steve," isn't it demeaning to call her "Tara"? And hasn't she been demeaned enough?
Unfortunate circumstance has already made a public figure of a private person, much as it did two years ago with Terri Schiavo, who also lost her last name in the process.
There's an air of cheap celebrity to one-name appellations -- Britney, Whitney, Rosie, K-Fed. The memory of Tara Grant, or Ms. Grant, or Grant, or whatever you care to call her besides Tara, deserves better.
What happened to respect in the Tara Grant case?
8mm
........................
Post-abortion e-cards are in the news.
Thanks to Exhale which "believes abortion can be a normal part of the reproductive lives of women and girls" you can now send a woman (or girl) who procured an abortion a nice, supportive e-card.
Ain't that sweet?
Post-abortive women can also call Exhale's "After-Abortion Talkline," which "is available to women and girls who have had abortions and to their partners, friends, allies and family members. All calls are completely confidential and counselors are non-judgmental."
Yes, and did you know that Exhale provides links to other "non-judgmental" organizations such as Planned Parenthood and the National Abortion Federation?
Imagine that.
Woman Who Regrets Abortion Upset by New Post-Abortion Email Cards
8mm
(A tiny Excerpt...)
Now why would any true blue conservative who honestly respects the right to life of every human being join the Giuliani camp?
Giuliani and the pro-life vote
8mm
Two years ago today on National Review Online, an article by Senator Mel Martinez:
This Friday, after a long and protracted legal struggle, a Florida woman named Terri Schiavo will be starved to death by court order.
Legal Refuge... Congress aims to protect Terri Schiavo.
8mm
We might have to paraphrase a famous Chesterton observation: Those who will not believe in God will have to believe in public opinion polls. Worse, they'll have to get their principles from polls. We see it right here often enough -- visitors arguing that it's all right to kill disabled patients because polls say most people think it is.
Now there is a fact that Michael Schiavo and the DNC don't want anyone to har.
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.