Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Ted Kennedy
As a historian you tend to appreciate those that are part of history and still around making it. I was sad to hear the news about Ted Kennedy having cancer, but watching Senator Robert Byrd (the only member of the senate who has served longer than Kennedy) cry while he prayed for him on the senate floor was seriously moving. I don't know if it is up on youtube, but it was a powerful moment. Byrd certainly has a checkered past, but I appreciate him as an historian in his own right. We need more of them in the senate. I have always thought that the senate needed more diversity, both in race and gender, but also in occupation. We need more doctors, teachers, engineers, military personal, scientists, and less lawyers in the senate. Of course Byrd is technically a lawyer, he got his degree at night over a decade while serving in the senate, but he also has published a several volume history of the senate. Anyway I digress, get better Ted.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Would Kennedy's cancer treatment be allowed by the British Health System?
Given his age and advanced cancer, I'll bet the socialized medicine machine certainly would not have paid for that $10000 helicopter ride that Mr. Kennedy got from his private island paradise.
Let's let Ted go over to Great Britain to have the doctors at the National Health Service treat his cancer.
Of course, I would think that he'd be denied cancer therapy as Ann Marie Rogers (a breast cancer patient) was denied an anticancer drug by the British court. Too bad she was not allowed to buy private health insurance by the socialized medicine folks in England.
Sorry, Ted, no cancer treatment for you. Health care rationing, you know.
Also, Ted Kennedy is going to have to eventually answer for Mary Jo Kopechne, in this life or after. Ted, it's getting about time to fess up to your past.
Is it me or did that sound like an automated response? I understand what you are getting at, anonymous, but you failed to mention the many more people who can't afford treatment in the US now, that would get treatment for their diseases should we have national health care. The question is: is it better to have excellent health care for those who can afford it, or good health care for everyone? It is not an easy choice, but I think the answer is clear.
Is it just me or does that family just have the worst luck in the world? Or do we just notice it more because they are so famous? Probably a bit of both
This just came to me in an e-mail forward and I thought I would share it because it is apropos. A get well letter to sign for Mr. Kennedy: http://pol.moveon.org/getwellkennedy/?id=12702-6711042-EdEcaJ&t=2
Post a Comment