Got a hot tip?
Drop us a line!

Subscribe

Links:

Site search

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

  • Hanlon: "Understood! And you do make an excellent point. Blag’s within his authority to appoint the guy,..."
  • Dormilona: "P.S. My fury was aimed at the source article (the one on the link) NOT at your commentary, Hanlon!"
  • Dormilona: "My New Year’s Resolution: Shut up and get a life. Just something to “work towards.” *_*"
  • Dormilona: "What infuriates me is that the paragraph (”The dispute had taken on racial..."
  • Rechan: "I don’t have resolutions. I know they’re a bunch of bull. Not the desire to improve is useless,..."

 

December 2006
M T W T F S S
« Nov   Jan »
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Archives

Older Articles

A fun hypothetical about Senator Johnson…

by Hanlon on December 14, 2006 at 1:12 am

So I’m sure most of you by now have heard about Senator Tim Johnson’s little brush with medical disaster.

Johnson was taken by ambulance to George Washington University Hospital in Washington this afternoon after becoming disoriented during a conference call with reporters.

A spokeswoman originally said he suffered a possible stroke. Hours later, after he was examined, spokeswoman Julianne Fisher said he didn’t suffer a stroke or heart attack.

Johnson’s condition could determine whether Democrats gain control of the Senate when the next session of Congress begins in January. Democrats won a 51-49 majority in the midterm elections last month.

But the big thing is that just having a stroke isn’t enough to knock him out of the Senate. He has to either be dead or resign, neither of which are likely to happen. Should he die, then the governor of South Dakota, a republican named Mike Rounds, chooses his replacement. Obviously choosing a republican, that makes it 50-50 and the vote goes to Cheney.

Now, Johnson is likely to be fine and this is all going to go away, but let’s take a little trip down fantasy lane and just imagine…

Let’s say Sen. Johnson falls into a coma. He’s hooked up to a respirator and is entirely unable to perform his duties as a senator. This brings back thoughts of another South Dakota Senator, Karl Mundt, who had a stroke in 1969, but stayed in the Senate until the end of his term in 1973 despite not being able to attend.

It should also remind some of you of Strom Thurmond, who near the end of his final term had to be propped up with pillows to keep him from tipping over.

Okay, so Johnson’s stroke puts him in a flat-out coma. Now there’s a debate over a supposed “living will” he had. His wife says Tim didn’t want to be kept alive on a machine, but his children don’t want him to die. The family is fighting amongst itself whether or not Johnson will be kept on the machine, and thus keep his job.

I’m not sure I need to explicitly point out what parallel I’m drawing here.

So now we have one hell of a conundrum, for both parties to some extent but to a greater extent the republicans. If they stick to their message from the last go-round, that human life is inherently worth living and that this is “state-sponsored murder,” that it’s similar to the Nazis if we kill a living, breathing human being, then they have a problem. Keeping him alive means they don’t get control of the Senate.

The Democrats will likely take the opposing stance, that it’s up to the family and if they decide he should die then it’s their choice. However, if they do that, then there is the chance that they will again be fighting for the death of the man who is keeping them in control of the Senate.

Now obviously if the family decides to keep him alive then the Democrats will go with that (I can’t imagine them now, nor could I with Terri Schiavo, calling for him to die against the wishes of the family), but the stance of the republicans at the time was not that it should be the children’s decision over the husband’s, but that it was an act of barbarism to “kill” her.

So that leaves us with an interesting staring contest of sorts. Whichever side “gives in” will relinquish control of the Senate to the other party. Keep this in mind:

Johnson is one of 23 Democratic senators whose death or incapacity would jeopardize Democratic control of the chamber because their successor would be appointed by a Republican governor. That number will fall to 18 in January when the governorships of Maryland, Massachusetts and New York switch from Republican to Democratic control.

Now that’s a lot of people who could drop into a coma and throw the balance of power to the other side. Will the republicans fight to keep them all alive? Will the democrats fight to allow them to die if that’s what the family wants?

There’s another interesting wrinkle. Living wills aren’t binding contracts. The republicans would have us believe that it’s just plain sick to want to kill living, breathing human beings. Even if the family agrees that they should pull the plug, will they allow that? Imagine the backlash of the republican party flipflopping on this issue, letting a man die simply so they can take control of the Senate.

UPDATE: Sen. Johnson is having brain surgery right now. I hope all goes well, independent of the political outlook.

Comments

Comment from Siddhartha Vicious
Time December 14, 2006 at 1:24 pm

You still don’t get it, do you? With Terri Schiavo there was no living will, and no evidence, other than the testimnoy of the husband, who had promised to do everything possible to help his wife. He kept that promise until he saw the money begin to run out.

There is no chance that, in the face of a desire from Senator Johnson’s family, that the Republicans as a party, or as individuals, would support him being killed in any way, and certainly not a slow, painful, brutal way as was Terri Schiavo.

Comment from ArturKarim
Time December 15, 2006 at 3:17 am

Sori, poiskom ne nashel.
U vas na forume videl ssilki na comedy club (4 poslednih vipuska)

Mozhet temi etoy uzhe ne sushestvuet, dayte plz eshio raz ssilki dlya skacki.
Ochen nuzhno!!!

Zaranee spasibo!

Write a comment