Patterico's Pontifications

3/27/2005

A True or False Question for the “Let Terri Schiavo Die” Folks

Filed under: Dog Trainer,Schiavo — Patterico @ 11:29 am

Looking at the recent coverage of the Schiavo case by the L.A. Times, I am struck by the way the paper consistently portrays the theme of the controversy as “Family vs. Government.” And much of the public appears to be buying it.

This is apparent in today’s disgraceful article about Tom DeLay, which I discussed in this post. The article begins:

A family tragedy that unfolded in a Texas hospital during the fall of 1988 was a private ordeal — without judges, emergency sessions of Congress or the debate raging outside Terri Schiavo’s Florida hospice.

How ironic, right? DeLay wants Government to override the wishes of Family in the Schiavo case — but not in his own private situation.

The same “Family vs. Government” theme appears in the paper’s recent story about two mothers who made different decisions about ending the lives of their children. I discussed that article in this post. According to that article, the mothers believe that the government shouldn’t be involved in the Schiavo case:

There is no one correct course, [Kaye] O’Bara says. It’s a private decision one a family must make on its own, with love.

[Shirley] Bradley feels the same. Watching politicians and protesters presume to know what’s best for Terri angers her. She would not have wanted a stranger to make the choice for Randy.

Quite obviously, I am missing something. I am under this crazy delusion that Terri Schiavo’s family is divided about her wishes — and that most of her family members (including her mother, father, brother, and sister) think she would want to live. If anything, I would have thought that the case is about Congress plus the Schindlers, on one hand, vs. the Florida courts and Michael Schiavo, on the other.

But the L.A. Times says it’s Family vs. Government. And many members of the “Let Terri Schiavo Die” crowd seem to agree.

So enlighten me. Tell me where I am wrong.

Please answer the following statement true or false:

The Terri Schiavo case is, quite simply, a case about Family vs. Government. It pits the wishes of the family against the wishes of politicians.

I am especially interested in having this question answered by those who believe Schiavo should be allowed to die.

Please open your comment with the word “true” or “false.” Then take as much time and space as you need to explain.

I am also interested to hear your reaction as to whether it is appropriate for the L.A. Times to run a story about the death of Tom DeLay’s father. Was that story an utter disgrace, as I believe — or an on-target expose of DeLay’s hypocrisy? In your answer, please address the fact that DeLay’s family was unanimous regarding the wishes of the elder DeLay, whereas Schiavo’s family is virtually unanimous that she would want to live.

John Ziegler’s Spiked Column

Filed under: Dog Trainer,Morons — Patterico @ 1:37 am

Go register your vote as to whether the L.A. Times should have printed John Ziegler’s “Outside the Tent” column.

My vote:

Opinion showed sound judgment by not subjecting print readers to this puffery.

My vote was clear after listening to Ziegler’s incompetent interview of self-promoting Blake juror Roberto Emerick. I thought the Times article on Emerick had made him sound, well . . . incredibly stupid. But compared to Ziegler, he sounded like a genius.

Dog Trainer Takes a Cheap Shot at Tom DeLay

Filed under: Dog Trainer,Schiavo — Patterico @ 1:00 am

I am not a fan of Tom DeLay. But this article in the Los Angeles Dog Trainer* disgusts me beyond belief.

The clear premise of the article is that DeLay is a hypocrite, because he fought for federal review of Terri Schiavo’s case, but allowed his own father to die without taking extreme measures to save him.

Read the story. The circumstances of the two cases are as dissimilar as they could be. The elder DeLay was injured in a horrible accident, and was being kept alive on a ventilator. His organs were failing, and he would have required dialysis. The family was unanimous in its view that he would not have wanted to live any longer.

By contrast, before the state ordered her to be starved and dehydrated to death, Terri Schiavo was not terminally ill. Her organs were not failing. She was not on a ventilator or a dialysis machine. Most important, her family was unanimous that she would want to live — save only her husband, whose conflicts on the issue of her wishes have been discussed at length.

There is no parallel here. None. It is shameful for the L.A. Times to devote an inch of newsprint to the story.

Yet you can hear the sardonic chuckles of the reporters and editors as they put together this story. And I bet you a million dollars that they will run reams of letters from the sheep who lap this sort of thing up, decrying the alleged hypocrisy of DeLay on this issue.

I swear, between this paper running Ted Rall cartoons, and this kind of cheap shot, I think it may be time to cancel my subscription. They’re probably going to keep giving me the paper for free anyway. Why should I subsidize thinly veiled derision masquerading as news?

*Despite recent claims to the contrary, I rarely call this paper the “Dog Trainer” any more. But I think it may be time to resurrect the name. With stories like this, the paper does not deserve to be treated with any respect.

UPDATE: I’ve been overruled. Mrs. Patterico wants to keep subscribing.


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2306 secs.