Monday's first hour of National Public Radio's Diane Rehm show out of Washington focused on the health and political ramifications of Sen. Tim Johnson's brain surgery. Guests were Norman Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute and CNN medical correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta. Early in the show (about 7 and a half minutes in), Rehm grew a little crass, asking if Sen. Johnson's family could ruin the slender majority the Democrats hold in the upper chamber. Consider this through the lens of the Terri Schiavo debate, and see the liberal flip-flop coming:
Rehm: "What’s if Johnson’s family were to say ‘Tim Johnson can no longer serve’? Do they have the right to do that?"
Ornstein: "Uh, basically, no. I suppose you can imagine a set of circumstances under which he was in such awful condition, clearly deteriorating, moving towards death, where there might be a broader consensus in the Senate and in the society, but otherwise, no. It’s within his control. And again, we’ve had examples in the past where family members wanted to cut those ties, end the kind of torture, in a way, they were going through, but do not have the legal authority to do so."
Can you imagine the spectacle if the Johnson family wanted a certain course of care for Senator Johnson, and the Michael Schiavo Democrats were saying no, the guardians have no say? Didn't they want the Washington politicians out of the debate?
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Isn't it interesting how th
December 18, 2006 - 13:55 ET by ckc1227Isn't it interesting how the ovewhelming rejection of conservative policies and the current administration by the American voters that resulted in an undeniable mandate for change is now a "slim majority", lol?
How is 51-49 not a "sl
December 18, 2006 - 14:25 ET by Uncle JohnHow is 51-49 not a "slender majority"?
He must be talking about t
December 18, 2006 - 14:38 ET by MightyMouthHe must be talking about the "overwhelming majority" of .26% of the votes that defeated Allen.
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
LOL - Yes I've been thinking
December 18, 2006 - 14:47 ET by ValendilLOL - Yes I've been thinking that for some time now!!
Ornstein a Flaming Hypocrit (amongst other things)
December 18, 2006 - 14:14 ET by PSPCplThis is just more of the "I voted against the war after I voted for it" hypocracy from the left. They twist themselves so often I wonder if they have a hard time deciding to use one or two Dramamine patches to keep themselves from getting nauseous.
Flip flop
December 18, 2006 - 14:34 ET by iveseenitallOf course they'd flip-flop. It's not about Mr.Johnson, his family, their rights, or any sort of moral principles. It's about the liberal Democrats and their power. They are disgusting, soulless hypocrites. Never forget the Wellstone "funeral".
MERRY CHRISTMAS!
NEVER,NEVER trust a liberal
another bubble bursts
December 18, 2006 - 14:50 ET by RackieGosh darn it, don't you just hate it when reality bites you on the ass?
Of course this is political
December 18, 2006 - 14:49 ET by motherbeltOf course this is political, just like everything the Democrats do. Why else would
"dingy Harry" Reid be visiting Johnson daily and acting as "point man" to give the media updates? This is just disgusting; the first concern the democrats and the media had was how this would affect the Democratic majority. Does Sen. Johnson have a wife?? A family? Who knows? Harry Reid is running the show. And now someone finally questions whether the FAMILY has the right to decide if he can still serve. They should all be ashamed, but they have no shame.
I hope and pray for Tim Johns
December 18, 2006 - 15:03 ET by Andrew H.I hope and pray for Tim Johnson's recovery--and suggest to put the silliness of the dims aside the Republican governor go ahead and commit to appointing a dim if needed. That way, maybe the focus can be put where it belongs--on the man's HEALTH.
Liberalism is a convenient lie.
Not so fast, since when is it
December 18, 2006 - 15:48 ET by dscottNot so fast, since when is it the Democrat Party's right to a political office in which the voters by majority rule get to decide? Who's to say another Dem would have won the office if Johnson didn't run? Follow the rules, the Governor gets to choose, not the Democrat Party. The facts here are no contraversial legislation is going to pass in these next two years, period. The Dems don't have the votes to advance their agenda, and if they were smart, they'd let the Repubs take the heat for a do nothing congress for the next two years and capitalize on the unfairess of losing the Senate majority. Losing is winning don't you know?
“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius
Mr. Scott--I know you're righ
December 18, 2006 - 16:56 ET by Andrew H.Mr. Scott--I know you're right but I'm not going to let my voice be used by any dim for their purpose--they always have an agenda to force down our throats. We'll win when we win. The country will suffer greatly if they lie their way to a large enough majority.
Liberalism is a convenient lie.
AOH - Good man
December 18, 2006 - 17:08 ET by misterbillAOH - Good man. I agree, I have prayed for his well-being. I don't want to win anything by seeing the health of another go bad.
Dirty Harry's main concern is
December 18, 2006 - 16:56 ET by NoMoreClintonsDirty Harry's main concern is for himself and his newfound status as Majority Leader, which will evaporate if Sen. Johnson cannot serve.
Yes, I am sure that Senator J
December 18, 2006 - 18:00 ET by UnsaneYes, I am sure that Senator Johnson had blood vessel issues in his brain simply to inconvenience the people of SD and the Senate, and above all, the MSM.
May he get better soon. I'd rather conservatives get the Senate, but not this way, not at all.
"Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy." -Sir Winston Churchill, British statesman (1874-1965)
Stupid wording
December 18, 2006 - 21:28 ET by nkviking75In fairness, I think Rehm was asking if the family can decide that Tim Johnson can no longer be a senator. BUT, Rehm is a radio broadcaster who should be far more articulate than that. Nothing excuses the poor choice of words, or at least the failure to clarify what she meant followed by an apology.
Exactly - it was simply a leg
December 19, 2006 - 10:43 ET by Archibald CoxExactly - it was simply a legal question, specifically: Can a senator's family, as opposed to the senator himself, legally decide that he should no longer be a senator?
Granted, it appears the question could've been clearer, but perhaps it was clear when heard with the surrounding context - the person answering certainly seemed to grasp what she was asking.
How does Senator Johnson's pr
December 19, 2006 - 10:48 ET by BlondeHow does Senator Johnson's profession preclude his wife's spousal rights to make his health and legal decisions if he is unable to do so? Any lawyers? It is an interesting question.
I don't see how being a senator could possibly have anything to do with that, but then again, I'm not a lawyer.
I believe the Constitution al
December 19, 2006 - 11:25 ET by Archibald CoxI believe the Constitution allows for only a handful of ways for a Senator to end his term prematurely: resign, die or be expelled by the Senate. (It's not quite clear whether members of Congress can even be impeached.) So the question is, can a Senator's family resign his postion on his behalf? Since they weren't elected to the position, I'd say the answer is no.
Family's rights
December 19, 2006 - 14:14 ET by nkviking75I'm not a lawyer either, but I can't imagine that the family of a Senator has any fewer rights regarding the care of the patient than they would were he not a senator.
I'm sure Sen. Johnson's fami
December 19, 2006 - 16:39 ET by Archibald CoxI'm sure Sen. Johnson's family does indeed have all the same rights as anyone else regarding his care. The question is whether they have the right to resign his Senate seat without his consent.
Harry Reid says Castro, Arafat and Senator are stable
December 18, 2006 - 22:25 ET by pearlHarry Reid says Castro, Araft and Senator Johnson are all in stable condition.
On Arafat's stability of condition
December 18, 2006 - 23:27 ET by UnsaneArafat is in VERY stable condition, all right...
"Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy." -Sir Winston Churchill, British statesman (1874-1965)
But what about Fidel?
December 18, 2006 - 23:31 ET by BlondeBut what about Fidel?
What is Rehm and all her ilk
December 19, 2006 - 16:58 ET by bigtimerWhat is Rehm and all her ilk going to do if something happens to one of the two Senators in Hawaii or in West Va. just a couple of examples......what a little worry wart...move on...
Btw...what the hell business is it of anybodies what the family decides to do if he is not able to use his noggin anymore....it is a private matter, seems to me I heard that phrase adnauseum by the press and all the other leftists politically and otherwise that had to defend the lying rapist Clintoon...it is a private matter!
"Once the coffers of the federal government are opened to the public, there will be no shutting them again." - Grover Cleveland
I'd agree the issue would be
December 19, 2006 - 19:15 ET by Archibald CoxI'd agree the issue would be private under normal circumstances, but once you get into the club we call the U.S. Senate, there are only a few ways to get out before your term expires - namely death, resignation and expulsion. Like it or not, those are the rules. So the question becomes, can your family resign for you if you're not able? Murky waters, to be sure, but my guess is, no, they can't. You took the oath of office, not them.
And you're absolutely right that something may happen to another Senator - which makes the issue all the more interesting.