On 24 Mar 2005 08:18:34 -0800, wrote:

I seldom have anyting positive to say about GWB. I admit it.

In the case of Terri S, Bush is doing what he thinks is right despite a
great political cost to himself and his party.
That's commendable.

According to a credible poll, about 2/3 of the people who self-identify
as conservatives and evagelicals (Bush's base) *oppose* congressional
intervention in the situation. As Bush cut short his vacation and flew
in his pajamas to sign the Sciavo bill at 1 AM, he rather obviously
supports federal intervention. Partially as a result, Bush's approval
rating has nosedived 6 points (from 49 percent to 43 percent). Good for
Bush, he's upholding his principles. When he does something admirable,
it should be noted just as much as his many screw-ups.



(March 24) -- More than two-thirds of people who describe themselves as
evangelicals and conservatives disapprove of the intervention by
Congress and President Bush in the case of the Terri Schiavo, the
brain-damaged woman at the center of a national debate.

A CBS News poll found that four of five people polled opposed federal
intervention, with levels of disapproval among key groups supporting
the GOP almost that high.

Bush's overall approval was at 43 percent, down from 49 percent last
month.

Over the weekend, Republicans in Congress pushed through emergency
legislation aimed at prolonging Schiavo's life by allowing the case to
be reviewed by federal courts. That bill was signed by the president
early Monday.

Most Americans say they feel sympathy for family members on both sides
of the dispute over the 41-year-old Schiavo, according to a CNN-USA
Today-Gallup poll.

More than eight in 10 in that poll said they feel sympathy for Bob and
Mary Schindler, parents of Schiavo, who want to keep her alive. And
seven in 10 said they're sympathetic for Michael Schiavo, the husband
of Schiavo who says she should be allowed to die.

The CBS News poll of 737 adults was taken Monday and Tuesday and the
CNN-USA Today-Gallup poll of 620 adults was taken Tuesday. Both have
margins of sampling error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.


03/24/05 08:32 EST

The only intervention was allowing the case to be reviewed by federal courts. To
me this is only providing due process of law.

It is surely not the 'family matter intervention' that the liberal media and
individuals are calling it. Hopefully the public will hear the correct story one
day without all the liberal hype.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

Gould,
I have been trying to find medical information concerning Terri S. All
I
can find is info about why she should not be removed from feeding
tubes,
which seems to be based upon emotion, not medical facts.


Do you have any links?


*********

I doubt that you will find many medical records on line while she is
still (sort of) "living".

The medical case has been presented at least 20 times now, in various
state and federal courts, and judges who have been presented with the
medical evidence and implored by advocates for Terri S to find some
reason to keep her dead body breathing have all, without exception,
agreed that medical evidence supporting the possibility of recovery is
not available.

You sort of have to side with the doctors on the medical issues, and
the judges on the legal issues in cases such as this.

wrote:

Gould,
I have been trying to find medical information concerning Terri S. All
I
can find is info about why she should not be removed from feeding
tubes,
which seems to be based upon emotion, not medical facts.


Do you have any links?


*********

I doubt that you will find many medical records on line while she is
still (sort of) "living".

The medical case has been presented at least 20 times now, in various
state and federal courts, and judges who have been presented with the
medical evidence and implored by advocates for Terri S to find some
reason to keep her dead body breathing have all, without exception,
agreed that medical evidence supporting the possibility of recovery is
not available.

You sort of have to side with the doctors on the medical issues, and
the judges on the legal issues in cases such as this.


References re the Terri Schiavo Case

http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/infopage.html -- Best summary IMHO

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4358877.stm

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Schiavo...=531907&page=1

http://www.topix.net/news/terri-schiavo

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7231440/

Persistent Vegetative State --- not specific to TS

http://www.thalidomide.ca/gwolbring/pvsilm.htm

http://healthlink.mcw.edu/article/921394859.html

http://www.xenos.org/ministries/cros.../donal/pvs.htm

wrote in message
oups.com...
Gould,
I have been trying to find medical information concerning Terri S. All
I
can find is info about why she should not be removed from feeding
tubes,
which seems to be based upon emotion, not medical facts.


Do you have any links?


*********

I doubt that you will find many medical records on line while she is
still (sort of) "living".

The medical case has been presented at least 20 times now, in various
state and federal courts, and judges who have been presented with the
medical evidence and implored by advocates for Terri S to find some
reason to keep her dead body breathing have all, without exception,
agreed that medical evidence supporting the possibility of recovery is
not available.

You sort of have to side with the doctors on the medical issues, and
the judges on the legal issues in cases such as this.


Why? What is the rush? If there is a question about Michael Schiavo
possibly abusing her (scans previously noted broken bones) what is the hurry
in letting her die? Why did Michael Schiavo note her wishes not to be kept
alive some 10 years after her hospitalization and only after he received his
share of the punitive damage award from a jury trial?

Something is rotten in Denmark, especially since the court has blocked any
possibility of an autopsy.

Jim,
Thanks that is exactly what I was looking for.

Hopefully everyone will now realize the importance of a Living Will. If you
don't have a Living Will, you leave yourself open for this mess.


"Jim," wrote in message
...
wrote:

Gould,
I have been trying to find medical information concerning Terri S. All
I
can find is info about why she should not be removed from feeding
tubes,
which seems to be based upon emotion, not medical facts.


Do you have any links?


*********

I doubt that you will find many medical records on line while she is
still (sort of) "living".

The medical case has been presented at least 20 times now, in various
state and federal courts, and judges who have been presented with the
medical evidence and implored by advocates for Terri S to find some
reason to keep her dead body breathing have all, without exception,
agreed that medical evidence supporting the possibility of recovery is
not available.

You sort of have to side with the doctors on the medical issues, and
the judges on the legal issues in cases such as this.


References re the Terri Schiavo Case

http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/infopage.html -- Best summary IMHO

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4358877.stm

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Schiavo...=531907&page=1

http://www.topix.net/news/terri-schiavo

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7231440/

Persistent Vegetative State --- not specific to TS

http://www.thalidomide.ca/gwolbring/pvsilm.htm

http://healthlink.mcw.edu/article/921394859.html

http://www.xenos.org/ministries/cros.../donal/pvs.htm

JimH,
You would have to believe all the medical doctors and courts are involved in
this cover-up. If you read the judges decision, it appears to be based upon
medical information and the wishes of Terri.

http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/trialctorder02-00.pdf



"JimH" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
oups.com...
Gould,
I have been trying to find medical information concerning Terri S. All
I
can find is info about why she should not be removed from feeding
tubes,
which seems to be based upon emotion, not medical facts.


Do you have any links?


*********

I doubt that you will find many medical records on line while she is
still (sort of) "living".

The medical case has been presented at least 20 times now, in various
state and federal courts, and judges who have been presented with the
medical evidence and implored by advocates for Terri S to find some
reason to keep her dead body breathing have all, without exception,
agreed that medical evidence supporting the possibility of recovery is
not available.

You sort of have to side with the doctors on the medical issues, and
the judges on the legal issues in cases such as this.


Why? What is the rush? If there is a question about Michael Schiavo
possibly abusing her (scans previously noted broken bones) what is the
hurry in letting her die? Why did Michael Schiavo note her wishes not to
be kept alive some 10 years after her hospitalization and only after he
received his share of the punitive damage award from a jury trial?

Something is rotten in Denmark, especially since the court has blocked any
possibility of an autopsy.

No rush at all. This case is already YEARS too long. No matter what day it
finally gets over - I'tll be spun as a "rush".

-W

"JimH" wrote in message news:ds6dnZAp1JkOk97fRVn-

Why? What is the rush?

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Clams Canino" wrote in message
ink.net...
I'll bet Bush wished that Congress had stayed totally away from Schiavo.
Passing that bill merely cornered him, he could not refuse to sign it
for
fear of ****ing off the Christian Right. Had he refused, he might have
taken
a bigger approval hit the other way. His last comments indicates he just
wants this to go away.


He's not running for anything. Why should he care about how the Schiavo
case affects his poll ratings? The man is standing on principle, as is
his
brother (who *may* be running for something). Republicans (at the state
and
the federal level) who voted against any life-sustenance bill have sold
out
to insurance companies and hospital administrators.

I dissagee..... when Bush is standing on principle, he's adament and "on
about it". Best we got out of him here was "If we're going to err, we
should err on the side of life." That's hardly an "activist" position on the
matter. And just today he was quick to come out with a set of comments that
more or less equels "well that's that then" today when the Supreme Court
shot it down.

I'll bet like a lot of people, Bush is unsure exactly how to feel about
this, except that it sucks all around. While I personally feel that she's a
breathing cadaver, I don't (too much) care if they leave her hooked up as a
living science project for the next 10 years either. I don't think he has a
real adament horse in this fight, anyone with 1/2 a brain knows that she has
none at all. He just can't go against the parties general "right to life"
dogma when it runs up and bites him in the ass (like this case).

There's a difference between the Christian Right - and the Radical Christian
Right. And this case kinda shows who's vocalizing where. Bush has a couple
agendas (like the SS reform bill) that's he wants to move on - Terry Schiavo
is a side show he does not need when he has chosen his battles to fight. He
understood that his election bought him some "political capitol" to spend.
And he seems to know it's limits. I don't think he wants to squander it on
high profile circus issues like this.

-W

Clams Canino wrote:

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Clams Canino" wrote in message
hlink.net...

I'll bet Bush wished that Congress had stayed totally away from Schiavo.
Passing that bill merely cornered him, he could not refuse to sign it

for

fear of ****ing off the Christian Right. Had he refused, he might have
taken
a bigger approval hit the other way. His last comments indicates he just
wants this to go away.


He's not running for anything. Why should he care about how the Schiavo
case affects his poll ratings? The man is standing on principle, as is

his

brother (who *may* be running for something). Republicans (at the state

and

the federal level) who voted against any life-sustenance bill have sold

out

to insurance companies and hospital administrators.


I dissagee..... when Bush is standing on principle, he's adament and "on
about it". Best we got out of him here was "If we're going to err, we
should err on the side of life." That's hardly an "activist" position on the
matter. And just today he was quick to come out with a set of comments that
more or less equels "well that's that then" today when the Supreme Court
shot it down.

I'll bet like a lot of people, Bush is unsure exactly how to feel about
this, except that it sucks all around. While I personally feel that she's a
breathing cadaver, I don't (too much) care if they leave her hooked up as a
living science project for the next 10 years either. I don't think he has a
real adament horse in this fight, anyone with 1/2 a brain knows that she has
none at all. He just can't go against the parties general "right to life"
dogma when it runs up and bites him in the ass (like this case).

There's a difference between the Christian Right - and the Radical Christian
Right. And this case kinda shows who's vocalizing where. Bush has a couple
agendas (like the SS reform bill) that's he wants to move on - Terry Schiavo
is a side show he does not need when he has chosen his battles to fight. He
understood that his election bought him some "political capitol" to spend.
And he seems to know it's limits. I don't think he wants to squander it on
high profile circus issues like this.

-W

Sure does take the heat off DeLay for a few days though.

Perhaps no one expected it to get to this point. After all she was living
with a feeding tube without problem for years. And news of possible
physical abuse by her husband Michael, thus causing her condition, was only
recently discovered.

One does have to ask why her husband wants it now removed, especially since
he never brought up what her *wish* was until 10 years after the
hospitalization and after he received his part of the financial settlement
from the original court case.

One has to wonder why her husband will not allow an autopsy. What harm is
there in that.

Broken bones and an uncaring, money grabbing husband.....the smoking gun
being Terri. How best to get rid of the evidence than to let her die and
deny an autopsy.

It is too late to save her. I only hope she is without pain.

Michael won. I hope he can live with his *victory*.


"Clams Canino" wrote in message
ink.net...
No rush at all. This case is already YEARS too long. No matter what day
it
finally gets over - I'tll be spun as a "rush".

-W

"JimH" wrote in message news:ds6dnZAp1JkOk97fRVn-

Why? What is the rush?