More on Terri Schiavo--UPDATE: Schiavo dead 31 Mar 05

[Patrick Degan]

It was just released today that their will be an autopsy performed once she dies. Hopefully this will put to rest the claims that the husband was abusive and tried to kill her, and show the real extent of the deterioration of her brain.

I'd lay bets that the loonier and more paranoid Fundies would claim cover-up by the hospice in order to harvest her organs or some such bullshit. These people will never accept reality no matter however much tonnage of it is dropped on their little House of Delusions.

[Gandalf]

Apparently many fundies are unimpressed with Jeb and W Bush right now.

It'd be interesting if this plays out to something interesting.

[Darth Wong]

Apparently many fundies are unimpressed with Jeb and W Bush right now.

It'd be interesting if this plays out to something interesting.

Don't be too encouraged. They're unimpressed because he didn't rewrite the Constitution to give himself authority to override the courts or ignore the courts and order the National Guard to forcibly take over the hospice. They're upset because they think he's just humouring them rather than doing what should be done. They're insane.

[Aaron]

I'd lay bets that the loonier and more paranoid Fundies would claim cover-up by the hospice in order to harvest her organs or some such bullshit. These people will never accept reality no matter however much tonnage of it is dropped on their little House of Delusions.

I'll lay odds that her parents will be the ones coming out with that. They seem more divorced from reality than most of the protesters.

[Dalton]

Hm. Joe Scarborough earlier compared Terri Schiavo's situation to that of starving Ethiopians...

[Aaron]

Hm. Joe Scarborough earlier compared Terri Schiavo's situation to that of starving Ethiopians...

How does that equate?

[Darth Wong]

Hm. Joe Scarborough earlier compared Terri Schiavo's situation to that of starving Ethiopians...

This is exactly like the tactics fundies use when attacking evolution. It's a simple four-step process:

1. Invent a completely false description of the situation.
2. Never question #1, and never acknowledge anyone who does.
3. Spend all of your time making mountains of analogies, emotional diatribes, audio/visual aids, cute anecdotes, stories, books, tracts, movies, editorials, blogs, and essays which assume the truth of #1.
4. When faced with a persistent challenger to #1, point him to the huge volume of material you created in step #3, as if repetition = evidence.

[Aaron]

This is exactly like the tactics fundies use when attacking evolution. It's a simple four-step process:

1. Invent a completely false description of the situation.
2. Never question #1, and never acknowledge anyone who does.
3. Spend all of your time making mountains of analogies, emotional diatribes, audio/visual aids, cute anecdotes, stories, books, tracts, movies, editorials, blogs, and essays which assume the truth of #1.
4. When faced with a persistent challenger to #1, point him to the huge volume of material you created in step #3, as if repetition = evidence.

In other words, baffle them with bullshit.

[Elfdart]

Tevar, the difference is that there are no corpsefuckers in your family. I went through the same thing when my father died. Even though it was the word of myself (age 16) and my kid sister about whether he wanted the plug pulled, we said so and that was that. We only had to wait for my older brother to show, since he was 20, and one of my uncles, since minors couldn't actually give the OK. One of my aunts died a few weeks ago from Alzheimers. My cousins pulled the plug. No circus, because they wouldn't stand for it -and they're a lot more truculent than I am.

That's why I have no sympathy for the Schindlers. As vile as Alan Keyes, Randall Terry and the other cadaver fetishists are, they were invited in by Schiavo's in-laws. Like vampires, ghouls, barghests and the other bloodsucking, corpse-defiling monsters of folklore, they can't enter your home unless invited.

If any of the members of the rogue's gallery in Florida ever showed up where one of my relatives was dying, they'd be given a very harsh lesson in respect for the dead.

[Gil Hamilton]

What gets me is the way this is being reported. If you watched the news, particularly networks like FOXNews exclusively, you'd probably come to the conclusion that Terri Schiavo was merely disabled and her depraved husband was trying to kill her for the money. Most channels are trying their hardest to look balanced, which means treating the loonies like they aren't so, and letting people like Mrs. Schiavo's younger brother and father be media whores spouting whatever allegation they think will get people on their side (recently the trend has been not only is Michael Schiavo trying to kill her, but strongly implying without openly saying it that he beat her into that condition in the first place). Then there is FOXNews which has been utterly open to the fact that they are putting out propaganda on the matter, endlessly parading people who have recovered from vegetative states that weren't even close to as serious as Mrs. Schiavo's, plus having all their talking heads sounding off about Mrs. Schiavo is merely disabled and is not dying and is recovering and all that jazz.

We may think "God, how could anyone buy into that bullplop?!" but if you go by the media, it's actually pretty easy, particularly if you are the type that exclusively watched FOX. It's no wonder alot of people think the tube should be reinserted and that Mr. Schiavo is a Snidley Whiplash style murderer, because they get bombarded with it in droves.

[Darth Wong]

What gets me is the way this is being reported. If you watched the news, particularly networks like FOXNews exclusively, you'd probably come to the conclusion that Terri Schiavo was merely disabled and her depraved husband was trying to kill her for the money. Most channels are trying their hardest to look balanced, which means treating the loonies like they aren't so, and letting people like Mrs. Schiavo's younger brother and father be media whores spouting whatever allegation they think will get people on their side (recently the trend has been not only is Michael Schiavo trying to kill her, but strongly implying without openly saying it that he beat her into that condition in the first place). Then there is FOXNews which has been utterly open to the fact that they are putting out propaganda on the matter, endlessly parading people who have recovered from vegetative states that weren't even close to as serious as Mrs. Schiavo's, plus having all their talking heads sounding off about Mrs. Schiavo is merely disabled and is not dying and is recovering and all that jazz.

We may think "God, how could anyone buy into that bullplop?!" but if you go by the media, it's actually pretty easy, particularly if you are the type that exclusively watched FOX. It's no wonder alot of people think the tube should be reinserted and that Mr. Schiavo is a Snidley Whiplash style murderer, because they get bombarded with it in droves.

This is why I think that someone needs to set a precedent and sue the living shit out of FOX. Media bullies will recklessly say anything that gets them ratings for as long as they're allowed to, and it really doesn't matter to them whether it's sound journalism.

[Dalton]

This is why I think that someone needs to set a precedent and sue the living shit out of FOX. Media bullies will recklessly say anything that gets them ratings for as long as they're allowed to, and it really doesn't matter to them whether it's sound journalism.

That's the problem with ad-supported news networks, IMO. Real news and real reporting are thrown into the backup bin for slow days while countless analysts, talking heads and arrogant pundits clog the airwaves with rehashed, recycled, controversial and sensationalistic garbage. All the important stuff is relegated to two-minute bites. I see the same fucking news on a daily basis.

[Darth Servo]

This is why I think that someone needs to set a precedent and sue the living shit out of FOX. Media bullies will recklessly say anything that gets them ratings for as long as they're allowed to, and it really doesn't matter to them whether it's sound journalism.

That's the problem with ad-supported news networks, IMO. Real news and real reporting are thrown into the backup bin for slow days while countless analysts, talking heads and arrogant pundits clog the airwaves with rehashed, recycled, controversial and sensationalistic garbage. All the important stuff is relegated to two-minute bites. I see the same fucking news on a daily basis.

Oh if only SD.net had enough members for an effective boycott.

[Fire Fly]

There's already a new debate forming: cremation vs. burial. The husband wants to cremate the body and have the ashes buried in a family plot but the family wants a burial. I'm sure somehow this will be twisted into another "Michael really did want to kill his wife" argument.

[UCBooties]

But that's tied into all of our media. Because all (American) media is controlled by a few corporate interests, all media is designed to sell. That means style over substance and appealing to the lowest common denomenator. Media no longer act as a watchdog of anything but its own profit margins. now I try to stay away from conspiricy theories, but the fact that major corporate interests control our media and have iron triangles between themselves, congressional comittees and the beurocracy is a major problem for our country. These companies have major ties to eachother and have goals which are severly counter productive to Americans in general. Whethar your a pluralist or a majoritarian, this is a major flaw for a democratic system. Especialy because these groups which weild so much power are unelected and almost totaly unacountable.

[HemlockGrey]

Hell, even "Stars and Stripes" had a nice little piece on how horrific it would be to starve to death and on all the pain and suffering Terri would be facing as her husband "ordered the hospice to kill her"...and not in the OP-Ed page, either.

[Frank Hipper]

There's already a new debate forming: cremation vs. burial. The husband wants to cremate the body and have the ashes buried in a family plot but the family wants a burial. I'm sure somehow this will be twisted into another "Michael really did want to kill his wife" argument.

Any mention of how he's already called for an autopsy to be performed?
Of course, the dimbulbs at RR are saying that's further "evidence" of the conspiracy.

Such power this man has, this Michael Schiavo.
He controls Judge Greer, controls the medical profession and dictates their professional opinion, and now he's going to control the medical examiner so as to cover up how he murdered his mildly disabled, conscious and responsive wife.

[18-Till-I-Die]

Just because i want to put forth an obscenely ironic notion...

It would, to me, for some morbid reason, be interesting if they did an autopsy and it turns out she actually had a brain and was just in a coma.

Not that that will happen, but i just thought it'd be mind bogglingly ironic.

[Edi]

This is why I think that someone needs to set a precedent and sue the living shit out of FOX. Media bullies will recklessly say anything that gets them ratings for as long as they're allowed to, and it really doesn't matter to them whether it's sound journalism.

Very difficult. I don't know if you could apply the duty-of-care statutes to commercial news reporting, but that would be about the only thing you could use. US libel and slander laws require the person who is the target to prove a negative, i.e. prove that the allegations are not true, instead of the lying sack of shit needing to prove that his bullshit is true. That fucked up little statute allows the TV networks to get away with anything as long as the great unwashed masses approve of it.

Edi

[Cairber]

I actually didnt mind fox all that much until this shiavo thing started (coupled with the jackson trial). But now ive officially moved into the "I cant stand this channel" camp. Come to think of it...a lot of my opinions are changing lately. I think the one that did it for me with fox was on one of their prime time shows the host talked about Christopher Reeve and how he couldnt feed himself either.

[Lord Zentei]

This is why I think that someone needs to set a precedent and sue the living shit out of FOX. Media bullies will recklessly say anything that gets them ratings for as long as they're allowed to, and it really doesn't matter to them whether it's sound journalism.

Very difficult. I don't know if you could apply the duty-of-care statutes to commercial news reporting, but that would be about the only thing you could use. US libel and slander laws require the person who is the target to prove a negative, i.e. prove that the allegations are not true, instead of the lying sack of shit needing to prove that his bullshit is true. That fucked up little statute allows the TV networks to get away with anything as long as the great unwashed masses approve of it.

Edi

The libel and slander laws can be changed, at least. Might it not be possible to find some judge willing and able to declare them unconstitutional?


And in older posts

Don't be too encouraged. They're unimpressed because he didn't rewrite the Constitution to give himself authority to override the courts or ignore the courts and order the National Guard to forcibly take over the hospice. They're upset because they think he's just humouring them rather than doing what should be done. They're insane.

That just gave me a scary fucking mental image.

And your rebuttal to my point that IF the foetus is a true human then using the argument that "it will happen anyway" in support for the pro choice crowd is morally indefensible?

Not necessarily. It would depend on the circumstances, socioeconomic factors etc. Though one could also make a utilitarian calculation based upon the idea that the least amount of suffering is preferable(though I would not go so far as to make that calculation, all other things being equal in suburbia... )

If all humans are equal, then that would in principle also justify the termination of a family's children (though of course not in practice).

[Darth Wong]

This is why I think that someone needs to set a precedent and sue the living shit out of FOX. Media bullies will recklessly say anything that gets them ratings for as long as they're allowed to, and it really doesn't matter to them whether it's sound journalism.

Very difficult. I don't know if you could apply the duty-of-care statutes to commercial news reporting, but that would be about the only thing you could use. US libel and slander laws require the person who is the target to prove a negative, i.e. prove that the allegations are not true, instead of the lying sack of shit needing to prove that his bullshit is true. That fucked up little statute allows the TV networks to get away with anything as long as the great unwashed masses approve of it.

Edi

Duty of care is exactly what I'm talking about; I mentioned it earlier in this thread. All you have to do is grab some journalism school textbooks in order to show that what FOXNews is doing is not journalism. Then throw in FOXNews' own "fair and balanced" claims, and you have a pretty much open-and-shut case that they have failed their duty of care as journalists. Suing someone for negligence rather than slander is an unusual and indirect tactic, but then again, so was prosecuting Al Capone for income tax evasion rather than murder.

[mwm1331]

DW I can't think of any news organisations which haven't and don't violate the cornerstone of journalism, objectivity.
All of them try to put out thier interpertation of events rather than reporting the facts.
None of them present the facts without interpertation.
Fox news, ABC, CNN it doesn't matter.
They are all guilty or presenting thier view.
It would be nice to see a news organisation reportng straight facts and allowng the viewer to interpert them, but as long as most viewers want to be told what the news means that won't happen.

[Darth Wong]

DW I can't think of any news organisations which haven't and don't violate the cornerstone of journalism, objectivity.

So? I can't think of any corporation which doesn't make a mistake sooner or later either, but that doesn't mean we can't determine that one of them does it much more flagrantly than the others, or even their own claims. FOXNews makes a big deal out of calling themselves "fair and balanced". By doing this, they raise their own duty of care.

[mwm1331]

DW I can't think of any news organisations which haven't and don't violate the cornerstone of journalism, objectivity.

So? I can't think of any corporation which doesn't make a mistake sooner or later either, but that doesn't mean we can't determine that one of them does it much more flagrantly than the others, or even their own claims. FOXNews makes a big deal out of calling themselves "fair and balanced". By doing this, they raise their own duty of care.

I'm not commenting on fox news, I have never sen it, jjust pointing out that no news organistions are living up to thier duty of care.
IMHO singling one out as worse is if anything counterproductive. Rather than focusing on which are the worst offenders shouldn't the focus be on the industry wide trend away from objectivity?
You focus on Fox, nd they become the problem, you focus on the industry, and they are seen as what they are, one symptom of the problem.
Personally I would rather try and focus on the problem than the symptoms.