Wednesday, March 23, 2005
Lazy, lazy Mickey Kaus:
In a post
about the Shiavo case, Kaus writes: (orig emp)
P.S.: Where do you go to sign a living will saying you want them to leave the tube in? I somehow don't think such a document is readily available as a handy preprinted form! Nor do I think it would get all that much respect from the courts.
A Fray poster has this
Here's [www.leginfo.ca.gov] your form. Just check option B in section 2.1. And appoint somebody who'll make sure of it in section 1.
And a follow-on Fray entry
I hadn't known California law, but I agree one would think the Mick would--even should!--have checked it out before implicitly writing about it. Of course, that would have required leaving the world formed by the cocoon (yeah, that's the word) of his own ill-considered opinions.
When the Schiavo case caused me last week to ask my attorney to see what the relevant provisions of my will were, he e-mailed within an hour the relevant forms allowing me to choose a wider variety of options than I'd ever considered for the situation, including prolonging my life "to the greatest extent possible without regard to my condition, the chances I have for recovery or the cost of the procedures." Now that wouldn't be my choice, but obviously it's readily available, and not as unknown as the Mick implies.
Oh come on, be fair.
Mickey was looking for the "connect my brain directly to the internet so I can continue to post insane gibberish" checkbox.
He needs to look a bit closer at the fine print: it's right next to the checkoff for "I am so going to Hell for being a greedy hateful hypocritical philistine, so KEEP ME ALIVE, DAMMIT!".
Digby at Hulabaloo pointed out yesterday that Chris Matthews and Tim Russert had a discussion where they wished there were some way to find out what Americans thought about the feeding tube issue, ignoring the fact that there have been numerous polls by all the usual news and polling organizations for some time now. All of which show support for removing the feeding tube, among all parties, everybody, even by a small margin (40-44) among evangelicals.
So they don't know about the existence of polls, and the Mick doesn't know about living wills, and these people, being ignorant of common knowledge, are somwhow qualified to be pundits?