Forums | MacLife

NAG wrote:

What to take bets who will do the movie? I'm guessing Lifetime.

Ooooh, what will be the title! I love Lifetime titles!

Sleepless in Florida: The Terri Shiavo Story

Ooo, original stuff!

I feel bad for this guy. They are out to get him for anything because they do not agree with him. Something seems wrong with this

Elwood wrote:

Is it just me or do the Bush brothers seem to have a bad case of sore looser syndrome?

It's not like they were insisting on recounts or anything ...

resedit wrote:

WindowsBreakerG4 wrote:

I feel bad for this guy. They are out to get him for anything because they do not agree with him. Something seems wrong with this

Remember that next time you attack Bush.

I'll remember that when Michael Schiavo runs fro POTUS.

The t's have been crossed so many times it boggles the mind

Even after the medical examiner basically proves that Michael did the right thing in trying to let his wife die, Jeb can't let it be. What an ass.

Under any other circumstances, I have to wonder if a governor could ever get an investigation like this started. Don't criminal investigations usually require a hint of evidence that a crime was committed? And doesn't the autopsy suggest that no crime was committed? Looks like another Bush family abuse of power...

resedit wrote:

jkahless wrote:

resedit wrote:

Remember that next time you attack Bush.

I'll remember that when Michael Schiavo runs fro POTUS.

Nothing like a double standard - it's OK for you to attack those you do not agree with for anything, but how they attack someone else for anything.

FYI - I don't see this probe as a problem.
Michael wanted an autopsy despite the family not wanting one - he got it.
But there is a question about the timing of the 9-11 call.

I do kind of think perhaps the governer is overstepping his bounds a bit, it should be law enforcement asking to look into it - but I understand the desire for all the t's to be crossed and i's to be dotted on this case.

Michael got an autopsy to vindicate himself of the charges of abuse and neglect that were being levelled at him.

Jebby's way out of line here.

and as for Dubster. . .

All sorts of folks were accusing him of foul play. . . look around you. . . from "he beat her" to "he fed her slow acting poison" and in between. The only way the allegations can be put to rest is autopsy. Without it, there would be many opportunities for folks to make accusations of foul play in light of some rumor or his being seen with someone shady or his not remembering having visited her on a given occasion. . . it'd never end.

This is really just more of that. . . and now it's Jebby that's doing it. Jebby should STFU, he's being a major-league smurf here.

additionally, the parents were probably not really interested in whether the autopsy was an indignity in the form of "Lukes final insult" for Terry. . . keeping her alive for so long and so in the public eye was certainly an indiginty. . . and I really feel, from everything I've heard, read, and discussed about this case was that Terry's parents were really only concerned for themselves.

Helix wrote:

Under any other circumstances, I have to wonder if a governor could ever get an investigation like this started. Don't criminal investigations usually require a hint of evidence that a crime was committed? And doesn't the autopsy suggest that no crime was committed?

Yeah.  Yeah.  Yeah.  But, we are talking about Jeb Bush in Florida, which is similar to George Bush in Texas.  Normality, including normal use of the law, does not apply.

And, one must consider the sheer doofusness of the kind of people who lap up the pabulum served by Jeb, as demonstrated by Resedit above.  They are people not bright enough to grasp the difference between a vulnerable citizen acting on his legal rights and a chief executive abusing the powers of his office.

I've been thinking about Thogmartin (geez, what a name!), the coroner.  I suspect he had no intention of his autopsy being misused by Jeb to further abuse Michael Schiavo.   But, if he speaks up, that could cost him his job.     There may be other reluctant people being used the same way, though I gather the prosecutor may be a willing participant.

Don't you guys understand?  There's no evidence he didn't hurt here: therefore, he must have.

Pundit Guy wrote:

Is this a faith-based versus fact-based thang?

Adding that to my notebook of bon mots.

The New York Times editorial board is smacking Jeb upside his oversized head rather thoroughly.

For most of the nation, that news provided closure on a wrenching episode. But not for Mr. Bush, who asked a state prosecutor to investigate Michael Schiavo, Ms. Schiavo's husband. Mr. Bush said he wanted to clear up discrepancies in Mr. Schiavo's statements over the last 15 years about the time that elapsed between his finding his wife on the floor and his 911 call. If such discrepancies existed, Mr. Bush surely knew of them long before yesterday. To seek an investigation now seems tactical, an attempt to deflect attention from the autopsy report.

Of all the politicians who tragically failed to understand and respect the sanctity and privacy of family life in this case, only Mr. Bush seems determined to save face by disturbing the family's peace further and berating those who had been saying all along that he was going down a terrible road.

Read the rest:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/18/opini … hiavo.html

Jeb responded to a previous NYT editorial calling for closure in the Schiavo situation with an incoherent letter.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/18/opini … hiavo.html

That led to the more explicit remarks above.


Before people get too attached to disinformation from the um, resourceless, Resedit, here's a correction.  The Schindlers did not consistently oppose an autopsy.  They said they wanted one at times.  Their "opposition" arose after Michael Schiavo arranged for an autopsy.  Opposition from the Right to Life movement increased as the release of information from the autopsy neared.   In fact, some Right to Life sites were already trying to discredit the autopsy before it was released.

iBubba wrote:

resedit wrote:

isaly wrote:

Michael got an autopsy to vindicate himself of the charges of abuse and neglect that were being levelled at him.

No. He got an autopsy because he knew the parents didn't want one.
He didn't need an autopsy to vindicate himself, he had the courts and medical experts on his side.

The only people who would be convinced by the autopsy were those that were convinced already. Right? Isn't that exactly what happened?

FLORIDA STATE LAW DICTATES THAT THERE HAD TO BE AN AUTOPSY. QUIT WITH THE SPIN ALREADY.

Have a link for that?
Really - that's new to me - my understanding is it was done at his request, not the states.

The law only requires autopsy in cases where the body is to be cremated - which his parents did not want, which many catholics disagree with - Terri and her parents were catholic.

I'm sorry, but the autopsy WAS NOT REQUIRED - he wanted it that way.