Kevin

look at this

http://www.glennbeck.com/news/03292005.shtml

Terri's obituary was already published by CBS

RE: sherry's post (March 30, 2005 01:46 AM)
Terri's obituary was already published by CBS

SOP. Nothing unique here as many "celebrities" have their obits templated for timely release. Ravenous readers/viewers expect realtime updates, so this is one of the end results. We ask for it and the market delivers.

No, we're not asking for it. They expect her to die tonight. You ghoulies can barely hide your excitement.

RE: too sedated to spell my own name correctly's post (March 30, 2005 02:07 AM)
You ghoulies can barely hide your excitement.

Riiight.

It is immediate information. Try reducing your dosage.

Wellll, that CBS article "originally appeared on Monday, March 28, 2005..."

I'd say that CBS is clamping at that bit.

Did anyone hear O'Reilly's dissing (this day, Tuesday, March 29) of Paul Krugman's piece? O'Reilly really, really didn't care for what Krugman expressed. I have to admit, I felt conflicted...by both perspectives.

RE: -S-'s post (March 30, 2005 02:35 AM)
I'd say that CBS is clamping at that bit.

Oh, I don't doubt that, but it is not one of morbid excess. They are competing in a highly demanding environment and need to scoop as many media entities as possible. It's a business model that tries to maximize profits as well as inform. If they can get the spread out first, they'll get more readers.

I have my own critiques of the MSM but I understand why they do what they do in this regard. To assign to it some nefarious plot with ghoulish glee from a liberal bastion is unfair and biased in and of itself. In fact, it would probably be quite inefficient for them to conduct business such as this in any other way. News archiving is more likely to approach Wikipedia-like form in the future because it is so efficient. Such a dynamic system is perfect for obituaries.

Just goes to show that people know absolutely nothing about this issue and the govt should stay the hell out of it.

And so should those who keep sending me hate mail.

Cindy

Do you absolutely have to do this every friggin day?

Cindy

RE: thfirstbrokenangel post (March 30, 2005 02:54 AM)
Do you absolutely have to do this every friggin day?

Don't you know this is www.blogsforterritoo.com? ;)

Actually, this topic is great for driving up web traffic and readership. Call it "priming the pump".

Finally, it remains a news story whether we choose to ignore it or not. Wizbang is choosing not to ignore it.

No one is forcing you two to read the posts or the threads. In fact, if you dislike what Kevin posts or the way he runs his blog, there are plenty of other blogs you can go read. What's stopping you?

RE: julie's post (March 30, 2005 04:12 AM)
In fact, if you dislike what Kevin posts or the way he runs his blog, there are plenty of other blogs you can go read. What's stopping you?

Thank you for your concern regarding my reading habits and your kind suggestion. Nothing stops me and I do read plenty of other blogs. I just enjoy posting here exclusively for you. I'm glad you appreciate the effort and soak up every last word. Again, thanks.

Krugman is off base. For one thing he appears to think that religious people are the enemy and dems should attack. This isn't going to help in the red states.

Also, while Randall Terry is a mouthpiece here (and I admit I don't know why anyone would want him for a mouthpiece) this isn't as clearly a political divide, or even a religious one. It definitely has moral implications, but I think politically this case is one that you just can't use for political purposes well.

oh-oh...I sense nitpick of the day coming,,,,,

And now I know the world is coming to an end, Rev. Jackson and I agree on something...

CBS News - "Fake but Accurate."

I sincerely fail to see where this is a partisan issue. I mean, disregarding the House and Senate vote counts, in which both parties stood solidly on the side of life for Terri, you have Tom Delay and Jesse Jackson on the same side of an issue.

I have wondered why the ACLU hasn't even uttered a peep about this case, even if to say that their attorneys see no reason to intervene. I suppose starvation doesn't rate at the same level as having panties put on one's head.

As to the CBS obituary deal--everyone should know by now that high-profile obituaries are pre-written. All they have to do when that person dies is change the dates and slap the link on their main page. I seem to recall several of these "pre-need" pieces being leaked a few months back. Nothing more than a goof by a (likely underpaid) behind-the-scenes tech guy. Nobody gains credibility by making a big deal of this type of slip.

Spare me the drivel. You two obviously enjoy whining and acting put upon. Maybe, you missed this part:

If the case doesn't interest you move along - there's plenty of other material here...

Your snarky little comments about what's written here just make you look like an ungrateful twit.

ps: You have found yourself a great ally in cindy. If that doesn't scare you, nothing will.

No flags, no tiny little crosses, no baby diddlers, no psycho-rapist-killers = No ACLU.

Fucking hell people. This has been news for long enough. there are more important things going on in this world than one vegetable and what should be a private affair yet is all too public family bickering over what is kindest for her.

Either kill Terri and put her out of her misery...

Or kill the goddamn husband and let her parents get custody and take care of her.

Nuff said.

I don't give a shit about the left wingers. All they talk about is hippy garbage.

But I'm sick of hearing about this. It shoulda been a private matter from day one. I don't need it in my life until it comes time for MY family to deal with putting me out! ( Which is sooner than I'd like I think since this old dog aint getting any younger lemme tell you.)

Do you absolutely have to do this every friggin day?

Cindy

Are we going to have to read this in the comments section every friggin day? Move on Cindy.

I was waiting for Terri to wake up last Sunday myself. Would have been the day for it!

But since that didn't happen, it's not news anymore in my book. Like her parents, people really need to move on now.

In war, I never dwelled much on a fallen comrade, you gotta pull your socks up and move on, or it ends up hurting you or getting you dead real fast.

You're another one, Hackney. If you don't like what you read on this blog, don't read it and go elsewhere. I'm sick of reading that you are sick of reading about it.

You, too, seemed to have overlooked this:

If the case doesn't interest you move along - there's plenty of other material here...

Either shut up or move along. Don't bite the hand that feeds you, you ingrate.

Bo: Last night I heard various local commentators talking about how Schiavo had deterioted greatly and that they expected her to die within hours. I suspect cbs bet on her dying and deliberately released the obit. What a scoop - Woman denied food and water for 12 days dies!

Posted by: Rob Hackney at March 30, 2005 10:00 AM:

Either kill Terri and put her out of her misery...

Or kill the ... husband and let her parents get custody and take care of her.

I think we have our first nominee for the Bad Solomon Impressions contest. And I think Cindy and Rob H are bots. I sleep better at night if I do.

As to the CBS obituary deal--everyone should know by now that high-profile obituaries are pre-written. All they have to do when that person dies is change the dates and slap the link on their main page.

You're correct. However, this is the issue, in my view:

Michael Schiavo, who was at the bedside of his wife Terri when she died, told Larry King that he lives now with another woman with whom he has two children.

Republican Witch:

Reminds me of last summer when the msm were critiquing Bush speeches and the reaction of the crowd to them -- weeks before he actually gave them.

Love your name.

An aside (or maybe not), but...

I was long ago taught the "rule of threes" for survival under conditions of extreme deprivation. It goes like this: An average person can survive

* Three minutes without air
* Three hours without heat
* Three days without water
* Three weeks without food

Terri is now on her 12th(?) day without water. Are there any doctors in the house? Is this remarkable?

I believe I'm actually voicing a valid opinion about this case when a hell of a lotta people actually think this one should have been left out of the public arena instead of turning it into the 3 ring circus media frenzy it has become.

Sorry having an 'opinion' gets on your nerves there Julie.

Being annoyed this is still going on is still comment worthy in a country with FREE SPEECH, well, that's the one I fought for at least.

Rob Hackneyed, March 30, 2005 12:00 PM:

Being annoyed this is still going on is still comment worthy in a country with FREE SPEECH

Actually, Rob, it's not free. Kevin is paying for it. With comments like yours, Joser's and cindy's, I'd say dearly.

RE: julie's post (March 30, 2005 09:24 AM)

Spare me the drivel. You two obviously enjoy whining and acting put upon...

You should probably reread the initial post and scan to sentence four. You'll note that I take several positions in that post. At any rate, would you like to be the pot or kettle in this thread? You can be both if you like.

Your snarky little comments about what's written here just make you look like an ungrateful twit.

No. I appreciate any forum where opinions may be exchanged (even yours) and where hosts don't panic at the signs of social commentary even from stragglers such as myself. Wizbang doesn't do that and the hosts are to be commended for their restraint. You may want to look that word up once in a while, not that I don't enjoy the charming banter.

ps: You have found yourself a great ally in cindy. If that doesn't scare you, nothing will.

cindy, bless her, has an opinion and is as equally entitled to share it as you are to share yours. Nevertheless, I'm not here to recruit allies though they can be useful in serious debate since everyone has the opportunity to bring something to the table. Table manners aside, the knights of this round table can actually reach some conclusions despite the odd flung peas. What say you Ms. Leseur?

Besides, to some extent, food fights can be quite instructive and entertaining and a nice diversion from the mundane. If it dosen't get too messy, it actually draws readers into the room... kind of like boxing matches or car wrecks. So in essence, the contrarian view and a subsequent exchange livens the show and draws more readers and traffic. I'm guessing Kevin, Paul, and Jay Tea love your trolling. Me? I just like peas... but not with every meal.

Now who's for fruit salad?

RE: Cousin Dave's post (March 30, 2005 12:00 PM)
survival under conditions of extreme deprivation

That's the operative phrase if those rules still apply. Survival conditions out in the field are different from conditions in the hospice. Not sure I can account for the three day to twelve day disparity but the environment would certainly account for some of it.

Not meaning to interrupt the personal attacks by referring back to what is supposed to be the subject of the thread but I do believe the Florida ACLU at least, perhaps not the national, has come out in support of the "husband." That is, they have stated that they see this as a Right-to-Die issue and apparently believe every word uttered by Michael Schaivo, at least those uttered after he received the insurance settlement.

Nevermind that his words before receiving the settlement were the exact opposite and he was awarded money for Terri's care and rehab for fifty years, the lifespan that all parties agreed likely in calculating the expenses for sustaining her. So the pre-settlement Terri had no such death wishes and it was only after receiving the money for use over the next fifty years that suddenly he remembered. Had he voiced her wishes to die in just this circumstance in that trial we all know what the outcome would be. Why would he need money for her care for fifty years if she was going to be allowed to die and even helped along like this?

Is this not insurance fraud? Morally, he should return the proportional amount not used for her care and for the vastly shortened lifespan he has created. We all pay insurance premiums and I for one resent this man being given money for one purpose, using it for another and then proceeding to kill her off long before the time for which the money was to have been alloted.

The horror of killing her in this brutal and cruel manner is bad enough but on top of that, we all pay increases in insurance based on pay-outs and this is one that was not used as agreed and I think should be returned to the company.

He either lied to the company to get the money to use for fifty years or he is lying now saying she wanted to die. It cannot be both ways. But whichever the case, he is morally obligated if not legally to return the money. I wonder if the insurance company will try to recover it. I surely hope that they do.

The fact that he has now squandered it does not relieve him of the moral obligation to return what was not used as intended for her care and rehab which is just about all of it. It was not awarded to him to do with as he pleased as has happened. He should return every penney he has spent on himself (new car) and all the attorneys he has hired for the opposite purposes than awarded.

Maybe I will write to the insurance carrier and suggest that they at least attempt to recover this. Can't hurt but surely they have already considered this. Has anyone heard anything about their trying to recover the misappropriated funds?

How can you tell this topic is starting to get stale?

When the debate and dicussion in the comments is all about whether or not the post should have been made in the first place.

And the ACLU did join this case, at least in protest of the law written the last time she had the tube in place

Yes, as mentioned by Amelia and Just Me, the ACLU has been co-litigant in at least a couple of courts:

ACLU Joins With Schiavo Legal Team to Ask a Pinellas Judge to Strike Special Law That Reverses Court Order, Violates Patient’s Privacy Rights
October 29, 2003