Terri Schiavo

Deward · Post by **Deward** » March 21, 2005, 11:05 am

This whole thing is becoming just one big political thing for the right wingers. The parents of this woman are delusional and just refuse to let go. I saw an article a while ago that said half of her brain was effectively liquid. There is no way to recover from this. Now they are saying that because the husband is in another relationship with kids that he shouldn't have a say in the matter. I say the husband realized years ago that she was gone and went on with his life.

Someone above stated that the government should take over care. Why should the taxpayers be forced to do this? Let the parents pay her bills and see how long they stay solvent.

I really feel for Terry in this. She is probably pretty oblivious to everything but can you imagine if she was even the tiniest bit aware. I know I would be long insane by now.

*~*stragi*~* · Post by ***~*stragi*~*** » March 21, 2005, 11:51 am

dibs on winnows projector

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » March 21, 2005, 12:25 pm

no blood flowed to her higher brain for several months according to one article i read.

that's it. she's dead. what makes "you" "you" is the neuroarchitecture of the cortex. those neurons and the connections between them are "you". when they die - and they die rapidly, within minutes of being deprived of oxygen, hours without oxygen to the brain is extremely difficult to recover any functionality - when they die. that's it. you are gone.

Siji · Post by **Siji** » March 21, 2005, 12:55 pm

One more example of the government butting in where they shouldn't be. When they overrule the decisions of the courts, what's the purpose of the courts?

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » March 21, 2005, 1:07 pm

never let the Constitution get in the way of an opportunity for political grandstanding.

at any rate, this is a great opportunity for the Republicans to act like they did something for the Religious Right that has no real cost for them.

then they can get back to business as usual of working against the financial interests of the people of the South and Middle America, who so eagerly vote them into power.

Niffoni · Post by **Niffoni** » March 21, 2005, 2:40 pm

Voronwë wrote:at any rate, this is a great opportunity for the Republicans to act like they did something for the Religious Right that has no real cost for them.

We have a winner.

Moonwynd · Post by **Moonwynd** » March 21, 2005, 3:00 pm

All politics aside...

I cannot fathom how a civilized society could let someone starve/thirst to death instead of providing them with a painless way to end their life. I am a Christian and I am for the most part pro life...but what happened to compassion? We would not even let our pets go through something like this. That is my issue.

Respectfully,

Moon

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » March 21, 2005, 3:02 pm

If she is persistent vegetative and no consciousness, it doesn't really make much difference...

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » March 21, 2005, 3:06 pm

-kill me if I become a veggie (stuff Natalie Portman's panties in my mouth and suffocate me)

Holy crap I have to second Winnow for once!

Badabidi · Post by **Badabidi** » March 21, 2005, 3:13 pm

Moonwynd wrote:All politics aside...

I cannot fathom how a civilized society could let someone starve/thirst to death instead of providing them with a painless way to end their life. I am a Christian and I am for the most part pro life...but what happened to compassion? We would not even let our pets go through something like this. That is my issue.

Respectfully,

Moon

Uh if they keep her drugged out she won't feel anything while she starve/thirsts to death. Or would you just want them to shoot her with a few painkillers then blow whatever's left of her brains out?

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » March 21, 2005, 3:20 pm

well, the pro-Life movement has made it impossible for doctors to give lethal injections to persons like this so they can die painlessly.

yet another feather in their cap. starvation it is!!!

*~*stragi*~* · Post by ***~*stragi*~*** » March 21, 2005, 3:30 pm

Lohrno wrote:If she is persistent vegetative and no consciousness, it doesn't really make much difference...

Except that it is a giant financial drain on her husband. If her parents are hell bent on keeping her alive, I say let them foot the fucking bill.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » March 21, 2005, 3:38 pm

some of her expenses are paid out of a trust fund established from a malpractice verdict in her favor following her brain damage.

the husband got offered like $10 million dollars to drop his support for her death, so i think that says something (positive) for his motives. he certainly could have walked away from the whole thing a wealthy man.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » March 21, 2005, 3:41 pm

Stragi wrote: Except that it is a giant financial drain on her husband. If her parents are hell bent on keeping her alive, I say let them foot the fucking bill.

I agree 100%.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » March 21, 2005, 3:45 pm

Voronwë wrote:some of her expenses are paid out of a trust fund established from a malpractice verdict in her favor following her brain damage.

the husband got offered like $10 million dollars to drop his support for her death, so i think that says something (positive) for his motives. he certainly could have walked away from the whole thing a wealthy man.

Yes he probably wants to be over with it. The thing that gets forgotten here is the emotional stress of having someone alive who is on the verge of dying yet isn't dead. People need conclusion... He very well might love her so much and thinks that that is the best thing to do.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » March 21, 2005, 4:19 pm

heard an interesting interview a few minutes ago w/ Dr. Sanjay Gupta (who is a neurosurgeon) that answered some of my questions. I wanted to know why no fMRI or PET scan had been done on her.

According to him, there is no conclusive scan for "Persistent Vegitative State".

Additionally, it is standard to diagnose somebody who is in a "Persistent" state to "Permanent" after 1 year. She has been like this for 12+ years. There is no documented case ever of somebody coming out of a "Permanent Vegetative State" according to Gupta. It was also interesting to hear his take on the fact that no doctors are involved in re-diagnosing her in this current state.

Originally, 5 court appointed (presumably independent) doctors previously examined her (maybe in 2001 if not earlier). 3 diagnosed her as in a Vegetative State, and the other 2 were not 100% positive.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » March 21, 2005, 4:25 pm

Voronwë wrote:heard an interesting interview a few minutes ago w/ Dr. Sanjay Gupta (who is a neurosurgeon) that answered some of my questions. I wanted to know why no fMRI or PET scan had been done on her.

According to him, there is no conclusive scan for "Persistent Vegitative State".

Additionally, it is standard to diagnose somebody who is in a "Persistent" state to "Permanent" after 1 year. She has been like this for 12+ years. There is no documented case ever of somebody coming out of a "Permanent Vegetative State" according to Gupta. It was also interesting to hear his take on the fact that no doctors are involved in re-diagnosing her in this current state.

Originally, 5 court appointed (presumably independent) doctors previously examined her (maybe in 2001 if not earlier). 3 diagnosed her as in a Vegetative State, and the other 2 were not 100% positive.

I'd think no doctor would want to touch this with a ten foot pole atm except Dr K but he deals with people that can consciously state that they wish to expire.

Your note about the offer of 10 million to the husband does speak volumes about his intentions being honorable.

Homercles · Post by **Homercles** » March 21, 2005, 5:02 pm

I just had a side question pop into my mind.

Is she an organ donor? And if so, will starvation/dehydration cause damage to her organs? Wont they basically shut down from lack of nurishment, thus rendering them useless and unharvestable?

Siji · Post by **Siji** » March 21, 2005, 5:05 pm

Could be wrong, but I think it was only 1 million not 10. Either way, I agree that it says he's not after some payout. People saying he wants his wife dead so he can remarry his girlfriend.. his wife has basically BEEN dead for 15 years. It says a lot that he didn't just divorce her, let her parents worry about her, and go on with his life.

Kargyle · Post by **Kargyle** » March 21, 2005, 5:30 pm

I believe he said in an interview that he has had two offers, one for 1 million and one for 10 million.

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » March 21, 2005, 5:36 pm

What is going to happen when she is 90+ years old and still on a machine? Is it still murder if you take her off?

Badabidi · Post by **Badabidi** » March 21, 2005, 6:34 pm

According to God it is

Moonwynd · Post by **Moonwynd** » March 21, 2005, 8:11 pm

Badabidi wrote:
Moonwynd wrote:All politics aside...

I cannot fathom how a civilized society could let someone starve/thirst to death instead of providing them with a painless way to end their life. I am a Christian and I am for the most part pro life...but what happened to compassion? We would not even let our pets go through something like this. That is my issue.

Respectfully,

Moon
Uh if they keep her drugged out she won't feel anything while she starve/thirsts to death. Or would you just want them to shoot her with a few painkillers then blow whatever's left of her brains out?

Don't be an ass. You know damn well I wasn't referring to blowing her brains out. If they decide she should not live in this state then they should be willing to give her a painless shot that ends her life quickly. They do it for animals...and they give lethal injections for even the most heinous criminals...why not show compassion and do it for this person.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » March 21, 2005, 10:33 pm

read up on the people who opposed Jack Kavorkian to find the answer to that question.

interesting interview i just heard.

I was driving home from work and heard Hannity on his radio show interviewing a doctor that was chosen by Schiavo's parents to testify on their behalf in court (he did not identify this guy that way - I just happened to know it already). This guy basically says she can regain language and motor function with therapy.

Anyway i was kind of blown away by that statement.

i get home, make dinner, watch Anderson Cooper 360, and Dr Gupta has a segment where he interviewed the same doctor AS WELL as a doctor who testified on behalf of the husband. That doctor says of course said the opposite.

anyway, so the courts had appointed 5 doctors, as i posted earlier to determine Schiavo's state. 2 from the parents recommendation, 2 from the husband, and one chosen independently by the courts.

That is why the split was 3-2 on the side of the husband. The "independent" doctor declined to be interviewed, but in his statement to the court said her chance of recovery is "virtually nonexistent". he said she was not at all responsive to her surroundings and was in a "permanent vegetative state".

It is strange though how presumably qualified doctors could come to such different conclusions about a patient. It did really make me wonder if there were motivations one of them might have beyond the case that would influence their decision, or if the situation was simply that difficult to determine.

O'Reilly and i finally agreed on something tonight. He said that he thought the federal court would uphold the state court in this case, and that this issue would be through in a matter of days (when she expires).

edit:

reading about the Federal court hearing today, and it seems that the judge really shot down the main argument that Republicans have been using in their talking points in television appearences today.

CNN.com wrote:He {Schiavo's parents' lawyer} said her right to due process has consistently been denied by lower courts -- a statement that drew intense questioning from the judge.

Pressed by {Judge} Whittemore to cite any case law to support his argument, Gibbs admitted he could not think of any.

Niffoni · Post by **Niffoni** » March 22, 2005, 2:06 am

Is it just me or are the parents really fucking creepy? I think they need serious help. They've been through a lot, and it seems that they've snapped under the pressure.

The republicans are preying on their already fragile psychies just so they can have their pathetic little dick-waving contest with the courts. And I bet the democrats would salivate at the chance to do the same.

They're like the people who offer to stuff your dead pets so you can keep Mr. Sphincter with you always.

It's so sad watching the major political parties use the people they supposedly serve to enable them to fling feces at one another like a bunch of stupid chimps.

Hesten · Post by **Hesten** » March 22, 2005, 4:57 am

Brotha wrote:
She's 41 now, so he's saying when she was 26 or under they happened to have this conversation. What 26 year old do you know of that has this type of conversation?

Well, my family have known how i feel about this issue since i was 19. Its never too early to prepare. You can be hit by a car, or get a stroke tomorrow, its in no way age decided.

Brotha · Post by **Brotha** » March 22, 2005, 2:31 pm

Just to preface this, I heard most of this from Bobby Schindler (Terry Schiavo's brother) on the Glen Beck Program. So take it with a grain of salt...

In 1992 when he was suing for 20 million dollars he told them he needed the money so he could take care of Terri for the rest of her life, EVEN if her quality of life didn't improve. Also, 20 mil was needed because she might live longer than the doctors expected. In court he recited the "till death do us part" part of the wedding vows and he never mentioned anything about Terri not wanting to live in the state she's in. It wasn't until 1997, when he was engaged to another woman, that he actually told a court about this conversation he had with Terri and petitioned to have the feeding tube removed.

Bobby Schindler also said that just MONTHS after the 2 million dollars was awarded to Terri's trustfund, Michael told the doctors not to treat an infection she had and she would have died. Till death do us part, right...

They even put forth the idea that Michael tried to choke Terri, and that's what caused the brain damage, not a heart attatck. That definently seems more than a little far fetched to me...

There's just so much propaganda going on I'm not sure what to think. It's entirely possible Michael is a loving husband that wants nothing more than his wife's wishes carried out so she can rest in peace, but from everything I've heard and read I have doubts about that. Not to mention the fact that WHILE he was suing the court for 20 mil to "bring his wife home till death do us part," he was sleeping with another woman.

His latest refusal of the money that was offered him doesn't really impress me. After fighting so long to get the plug pulled, I can't see him suddenly reversing himself, even if he is just a moneygrubber.

Given all the circumstances I really have my doubts about Michael Schiavo. Even if 90 percent of the things I've read about him are false, he's still a creep who I really doubt has Terri Schiavo's best interests in mind.

If you want to hear the interview with Bobby Schindler here's the link (the top interview, from the 22nd of course):

http://www.glennbeck.com/audio/free-audio.shtml

*~*stragi*~* · Post by ***~*stragi*~*** » March 22, 2005, 3:16 pm

Voronwë wrote:some of her expenses are paid out of a trust fund established from a malpractice verdict in her favor following her brain damage.

the husband got offered like $10 million dollars to drop his support for her death, so i think that says something (positive) for his motives. he certainly could have walked away from the whole thing a wealthy man.

According to him (he was on larry king last night) that trust money dried up 2 to 3 years ago.

Brotha · Post by **Brotha** » March 22, 2005, 3:32 pm

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic ... E_ID=35304

That's pretty right-leaning but has some info from Michael Schiavo on Larry King last night and has Terri's family's reponses.

Siji · Post by **Siji** » March 22, 2005, 4:01 pm

Husband and parents aside, the woman is dead. The feeding tube is forcing her body to remain alive. She's been gone a long time now. Let her fucking go.

I'm just as over this as I was with the stupid cuban kid who wouldn't go the fuck home.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » March 22, 2005, 4:03 pm

Just let the poor thing die already. It's bullshit that this guy has had to hold off on getting on with his life for this godamn long. End the fucking misery.

We need more vigilantism(sp?). The same brave souls who assassinate waste of life like that scum bag in Florida last week, can kill this poor woman and end the misery for everyone. I getting sick of seeing her veggie face on TV every 5 minutes.

Animale · Post by **Animale** » March 22, 2005, 4:35 pm

The parents can't seem to be able to let go of their doll, because that's all their daughter is now... a living, breathing doll to dress up for the cameras. One thing though, the husband has a huge pair to stand up to this kind of pressure when the easy thing to do would be to divorce her and let the parents deal with it.

I also found it interesting that the first thing out of the Republican congressfolks mouths when they were debating this bill was to bash the husband. Not a plea for life, not a compassionate word about the parents, but instead directly went into ripping the husband for spending a large amount of money on lawyers in the case. Oh well, don't expect anything better from any side on most issues anymore I guess.

Animale

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » March 22, 2005, 4:43 pm

Animale wrote:
I also found it interesting that the first thing out of the Republican congressfolks mouths when they were debating this bill was to bash the husband. Not a plea for life, not a compassionate word about the parents, but instead directly went into ripping the husband for spending a large amount of money on lawyers in the case. Oh well, don't expect anything better from any side on most issues anymore I guess.

Animale

It's just political maneuvering. The Republicans need to keep the radical right happy. The radical right is a necessary evil that I wish the republicans could rid themselves of but right now I don't see that happening. The next best thing is to appease them by showing an effort but have it be halfhearted and not intended to actually be successful.

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » March 22, 2005, 6:09 pm

Winnow wrote:
Animale wrote:
I also found it interesting that the first thing out of the Republican congressfolks mouths when they were debating this bill was to bash the husband. Not a plea for life, not a compassionate word about the parents, but instead directly went into ripping the husband for spending a large amount of money on lawyers in the case. Oh well, don't expect anything better from any side on most issues anymore I guess.

Animale
It's just political maneuvering. The Republicans need to keep the radical right happy. The radical right is a necessary evil that I wish the republicans could rid themselves of but right now I don't see that happening. The next best thing is to appease them by showing an effort but have it be halfhearted and not intended to actually be successful.

you say it as if "the radical right" and "the republicans" are two different factions, unfortunately now the majority of republicans ARE composed of the radical right

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » March 22, 2005, 6:10 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:Just let the poor thing die already. It's bullshit that this guy has had to hold off on getting on with his life for this godamn long. End the fucking misery.

We need more vigilantism(sp?). The same brave souls who assassinate waste of life like that scum bag in Florida last week, can kill this poor woman and end the misery for everyone. I getting sick of seeing her veggie face on TV every 5 minutes.

you voted for bush and a reinstatement of religious fanatics in washington DC, if you didnt see this, or other religiously driven political acts comming with a 2nd bush term you are a moron.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » March 22, 2005, 6:31 pm

Brotha: I read the worldnet article that you linked, and I read your post. I understand that you're not necessarily advocating the parents position but rather are critical of Michael Schiavo. You also mention that it's a complex situation. You, and the article you linked to, make many mentions of financial issues involving Michael Shiavo, and I don't deny that these issues exist.

However, I did not see anything in the worldnet article or in your post which in any way refutes Michael Schiavo's claim that he does not stand to benefit financially from his death. Can you provide me a piece of evidence which indicates that he would receive money or anything of that sort? Considering that no evidence to that effect exists, Bobby Schindler himself admits that Schiavo offered to donate the money to charity twice, and Schiavo has been offered more money more recently, I find it totally unwarranted to believe that he's motivated by money.

Brotha · Post by **Brotha** » March 22, 2005, 7:16 pm

Sueven, first off I hope I don't sound like I feel really strongly about this. Until today I hadn't really read anymore than the headlines and an article here and there. If the plug stays pulled I don't think anyone is a murderer and should be arrested or punished or anything like that. I have my doubts about Michael Schiavo but, like I said, I'm really not sure what to think.

The money motivation angle goes like this, from the WorldNet article:

"In June of 1993, eight months after he got the malpractice money, he tried to kill Terri by withholding antibiotics needed to treat an infection. There was $800,000 in the fund at the time," Bobby Schindler said.

According to court records, the caregivers at the nursing home overruled Schiavo's order and treated Terri for her infection.

I'd really need to hear more information on this before passing judgement, but if this is true it certainly supports the moneygrubber argument. At that time he could have wanted the money, but he wasn't able to get it. Since then the parents have been on his case, and he became deadset on pulling the plug, more intent on that than on money.

And don't you think it's a little inconsistent that while suing for 20 mil he said "till death do us part," asked for a full 20 mil because she might live longer than expected, said he wanted to "take her home and care of her for the rest of her life," and never mentioned this conversation he had with Terri? I haven't read the court transcript myself so, again, I'm not positive if this is 100 percent true or not, but I'm pretty sure it is. Even if you don't buy the moneygrubber angle this atleast demonstrates a discrepancy in his argument.

I'll be the first to admit it's really murky, but all of these and other things cast doubt. If there's reasonable doubt at a trial the verdict is not guilty. Should pulling the plug require less certainty?

One other thing. Some wonder why people turn away from Larry King and watch Bill O'Reilly, this interview is a perfect example. If Michael Schiavo had been on O'Reilly instead of Larry King he would have been given tougher questions and challenged on pretty much everything. Sure, Larry King is more objective than O'Reilly is but on the Factor you can atleast expect a guest to be argued with and O'Reilly to have counter-questions ready.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » March 22, 2005, 7:20 pm

Larry King doesnt run opposite of Bill O'Reilly.

the fact that people don't even know what CNN airs at 8pm is a seperate problem entirely

.

But Larry has beaten Hannity & Colmes 4 of the last 5 nights

Brotha · Post by **Brotha** » March 22, 2005, 7:22 pm

Paula Zhan airs while O'Reilly does right? I meant it more in a generic sense- the different styles of the CNN/Fox nightly shows.

Surprised to hear he's beaten H/C though. I thought they had him beat pretty bad.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » March 22, 2005, 8:56 pm

"In June of 1993, eight months after he got the malpractice money, he tried to kill Terri by withholding antibiotics needed to treat an infection. There was $800,000 in the fund at the time," Bobby Schindler said.

According to court records, the caregivers at the nursing home overruled Schiavo's order and treated Terri for her infection.

hm just curious, I've been too busy to really read that much about this: Wasn't the fund created for her treatment? Would he get the money if there was anything left?

That is slightly murky if he would but he has been offered way more and said no..

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » March 22, 2005, 8:58 pm

Xzion wrote:
Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:Just let the poor thing die already. It's bullshit that this guy has had to hold off on getting on with his life for this godamn long. End the fucking misery.

We need more vigilantism(sp?). The same brave souls who assassinate waste of life like that scum bag in Florida last week, can kill this poor woman and end the misery for everyone. I getting sick of seeing her veggie face on TV every 5 minutes.
you voted for bush and a reinstatement of religious fanatics in washington DC, if you didnt see this, or other religiously driven political acts comming with a 2nd bush term you are a moron.

/boggle

There you go. lol

I vote for a candidate based on the entirety of their scope of ideas and beliefs, not just on one issue. That would be short-sighted, small minded, and ignorant. Oooops, did I just sum your political picking process up in one sentence? Gosh. Sorry.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » March 22, 2005, 9:13 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:I vote for a candidate based on the entirety of their scope of ideas and beliefs, not just on one issue. That would be short-sighted, small minded, and ignorant. Oooops, did I just sum your political picking process up in one sentence? Gosh. Sorry.

Either explain, or go troll somewhere else please. I want to see where Xzion says he votes on one issue...

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » March 22, 2005, 9:50 pm

Lohrno wrote:
Either explain, or go troll somewhere else please. I want to see where Xzion says he votes on one issue...

He just bashed Bush and said that is who we voted in, on this one issue. Get it now?

Damn, Lohrno, you show such creativity doing the Mafia game and then you come here and can never put 2 and 2 together ever. It's really fucking pathetic how you need everything explained to you all the time.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » March 22, 2005, 9:52 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:He just bashed Bush and said that is who we voted in, on this one issue. Get it now?

I fail to see how that equates to him being a one issue voter...Or were you using the "I know you are but what am I?" defense?

Brotha · Post by **Brotha** » March 22, 2005, 10:18 pm

Kelshara wrote:hm just curious, I've been too busy to really read that much about this: Wasn't the fund created for her treatment? Would he get the money if there was anything left?

That is slightly murky if he would but he has been offered way more and said no..

From WorldNet the article:

As additional "proof" that he's not in the legal battle for the money, Schiavo told King he offered three times to donate the money to charity two years ago.

If he could have chosen to give the money to charity two years ago, I assume he could have chosen to keep it as well. Not that there was much money left then anyways...

Like I said, even if he was in it for the money, I can't see him suddenly reversing himself now after fighting the Schindlers for so many years. Not that I think the moneygrubbing angle is airtight or even THAT convincing but it makes me wonder...

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » March 23, 2005, 1:09 am

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:
Xzion wrote:
Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:Just let the poor thing die already. It's bullshit that this guy has had to hold off on getting on with his life for this godamn long. End the fucking misery.

We need more vigilantism(sp?). The same brave souls who assassinate waste of life like that scum bag in Florida last week, can kill this poor woman and end the misery for everyone. I getting sick of seeing her veggie face on TV every 5 minutes.
you voted for bush and a reinstatement of religious fanatics in washington DC, if you didnt see this, or other religiously driven political acts comming with a 2nd bush term you are a moron.
/boggle

There you go. lol

I vote for a candidate based on the entirety of their scope of ideas and beliefs, not just on one issue. That would be short-sighted, small minded, and ignorant. Oooops, did I just sum your political picking process up in one sentence? Gosh. Sorry.

actually i despise bush on almost all of his stances, from high government spending/defecit to the failed iraqi invasion to the invasion of our privacy to the stripping of our civil liberties and to the enforcement of religion in american government

Badabidi · Post by **Badabidi** » March 23, 2005, 2:04 am

Lohrno wrote: I fail to see how that equates to him being a one issue voter...Or were you using the "I know you are but what am I?" defense?

He voted for Kerry because he isn't Bush? Do you see it now?

Back to the topic anyway, I'm suprised that people outside of Florida actually have to deal with seeing her on the news every 5 minutes, even if it is just a few places. Maybe she'll have passed before the Atlanta Court makes a verdict, for everyone's sake at least. If she hasn't by then, I hope they have the balls to make the right decision

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » March 23, 2005, 10:50 am

He voted for Kerry because he isn't Bush? Do you see it now?

Yes it obviously couldn't be because he disagreed with Bush' policies. How could somebody disagree with the almighty Bush!

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » March 23, 2005, 12:56 pm

Badabidi wrote: He voted for Kerry because he isn't Bush? Do you see it now?

Xzion posts enough to make me believe he isn't just a sheep who hates Bush 'Just because it's cool.'

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » March 23, 2005, 1:46 pm

Xzion wrote: you voted for bush and a reinstatement of religious fanatics in washington DC, if you didnt see this, or other religiously driven political acts comming with a 2nd bush term you are a moron.

Lohrno, this above is what Xzion said to me when all I did was comment on the Terry Schiavo issue. He brought up Bush and religion and mentioned that on that issue I voted him in on. I then responded that I am not one who would make a decision on a cadidate based on a single issue, idea or philosophy....then made the response of a dig at Xzion saying maybe that is what he is about. Why? Because he so easily summed up my voted for Bush so simply based on his hatred for religion. Not important really. But you always seem to cloud every issue with your focus on the unimportant.

Now to answer Xzion stupid statement. Is the Terry Vegetable the first time this subject has been brought up in our society? No. There has always been factions of people against it and factions for it. To blame Bush is fucking stupid and irresponsible. Would you blame Kerry if was in office as this is going on right now? Kerry is just as religious. He just didn't advertise it like Bush, because he cares what the poles say...Bush doesn't. Stop trying to sum up people so quickly. Life is multifaceted. People are multifaceted. I'm sure you don't think you are just one thing and easily summed up by others. You feel you are a complex being right? What makes you so different than anyone else.