Does Ted Kennedy deserve his extended cancer care?

American Thinker ^ | July 22, 2009 | James Lewis

[neverdem]

Senator Ted Kennedy, who is now 76 years old and was diagnosed with brain cancer in May of last year, is telling the world that nationalized medical care is "the cause of his life." He wants to see it pass as soon as possible, before he departs this vale of tears.

The prospect of Kennedy's passing is viewed by the liberal press with anticipatory tears and mourning.  But they are not asking the proper question by their own lights: That question -- which will be asked for you and me when we reach his age and state in life --- is this:

Is Senator Kennedy's life valuable enough to dedicate millions of dollars to extending it another month, another day, another year?

Because Barack Obama and Ted Kennedy agree with each other that they of all people are entitled to make that decision. Your decision to live or die will now be in their hands.

Ted Kennedy is now 76. Average life expectancy in the United States is 78.06. For a man who has already reached 76, life expectancy is somewhat longer than average (since people who die younger lower the national average); for a wealthy white man it may be somewhat longer statistically; but for a man with diagnosed brain cancer it is correspondingly less. As far as the actuarial tables of the Nanny State are concerned, Kennedy is due to leave this life some time soon. The socialist State is not sentimental, at least when it comes to the lives of ordinary people like you and me.

The socialist question -- and yes, it is being asked very openly in socialist countries all around the world, like Britain and Sweden -- must be whether extending Senator Kennedy's life by another day, another month or year is socially valuable enough  to pay for what is no doubt a gigantic and growing medical bill. Kennedy is a US Senator, and all that money has been coughed up without complaint by the US taxpayer. Kennedy is already entitled to Federal health care, and it is no doubt the best available to anyone in the world.

Before he dies, Senator Kennedy wants to feel sure that you and I and our loved ones can put that personal decision about life or death safely in the hands of a Federal bureaucrat. It is "the cause of his life," we are told.

Now there are many people in this country who believe that Ted Kennedy has not spent his life very constructively. Mary Jo Kopechne's family might still want to trade his life for hers, if she could be brought back. Senator Kennedy has exercised more power over our immigration chaos than any other person in the last half century. 9/11 was committed by illegal entrants who slipped through our deliberately full-of-holes borders, using all manner of Kennedy-authored loopholes and enforcement gaps.

Others might point to the socialist habit of importing vast numbers of voters from Pakistan and Somalia into Western Europe, to make for cheap socialist votes in order to defeat and scapegoat native Europeans. Socialism by immigrant vote buying is happening in every single socialist country in Europe. It is what keeps socialist parties there in power. Kennedy has opened our borders for precisely that kind of takeover by masses of illegal immigrants.

So there might be a rational debate over the social utility of Senator Kennedy's life. We could all have a great national debate about it. Maybe we should do exactly that, to face the consequences of what the Left sees as so humane, so obviously benevolent, and so enlightened.

Consider what happens in the Netherlands to elderly people. The Netherlands legalized "assisted suicide" in 2002, no doubt in part for compassionate reasons. But also to save money. There is only one money kitty for medical care in the socialist Netherlands. When you get old, the question is asked, either explicitly or by implication:

Do you deserve to live another year compared to young refugees from Somalia, who can use the same euros to have many years of life?

There's only so much money available. The Netherlands radio service had a quiz show at one time, designed to "raise public awareness" about precisely that question. Who deserves to live, and who to die?

But nobody debates any more about who has the power to make that decision. In socialist Europe the State does. It's a done deal.

The Netherlands legally recognizes four categories of euthanasia.  One of them is:

Passive euthanasia: A physician may choose not to treat an recurrent disease or event in a patient with a terminal progressive disease.

I don't know enough about Senator Kennedy's condition, but I would suppose that he has "a recurrent disease or ... a terminal progressive disease." That would be the case if his brain cancer is not curable. In the socialist Netherlands Kennedy would be a perfect candidate for passive euthanasia. 

Has anyone raised this question with Senator Kennedy? I know it seems to be in bad taste to even mention it. But if ObamaCare passes in the coming weeks, you can be sure that that question will be raised for you and me, and our loved ones. And no, we will not have a choice.

[gov_bean_ counter]

He should have been left convulsing on the floor. Let him die with at least as much dignity as Mary Jo did.

[SirJohnBarleycorn]

Does Ted Kennedy deserve his extended cancer care?

Did Mary Jo Kopechne deserve to die in a submerged automobile?

[Jet Jaguar]

Recurring care for an admitted 22 year old alcoholic was too much for the socialist medical system in England.

22yo dies after being denied liver transplant

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/07/22/2633055.htm

[MitchellC]

Does Ted Kennedy deserve his extended cancer care?

I feel a very cordial series of replies coming on...

[Rodebrecht]

His chances for survival are slim, and his National Health Policy adviser has just determined there’s a 33 year old from Worcester who would be a better investment for the government.

[eyedigress]

Yes he does. (That’s the Cristian in me.)

[Jemian]

I’ll be humane (on the theory that there is some spark of human in him and therefore, as all mankind was, made in the image of God. I’m taking it on faith) and give him an aspirin.

It’s more than Mary Jo got.

[MissDairyGoodnessVT]

I agree with many of the opinions and grudges that are expressed here on this thread but why make HIM an example?

Don’t waste your time Concentrate on the problems @hand and the peripatetic putz that’s in residence

[allmost]

If he signs on to this health care bill that will kill millions in a similar state, he deserves what he gets. He is condemning untold millions to, "Got a headache? Take a number and go to the back of the line fatso...".

"You are not worth keeping alive."

[Seeing More Clearly Now]

The ultimate arm chair liberal, Ted Kennedy.

[Kitanis]

According to the House Plan that has been floating around.. and if Ted was placed on that plan.. No.. he would not get the care..

But the house of reps were cagy.. they put in it a provision that members of congress would not have to be on the plan.. for five years... so ted has five more good ones..

[fatnotlazy]

Kennedy does deserve the “special treatment” he is receiving. However, the rest of us also should have the same quality of health care. If these bums in Congress want us to have this government-mandated “health care,” then so should the Senator and his colleagues, the House, the President and everyone else who gets “special treatment.” Of course, that won’t happen.

[nathanbedford]

No one's life, or the ending of it for that matter, better illustrates the liberal mentality then the life of Teddy Kennedy. Excused for cheating at Harvard, excused for vehicular homicide, excused for notorious serial adulteries, excused for notorious and chronic intoxication, excused for the Au Pair bar.

Adored and exalted not for what he did, not even for who he was, but for whom he was related to. And forgiven for the most egregious of peccadillos. Pampered and privileged in virtually every facet of his life. A hypocrite in every respect. He will die as he lived, professing concern for the common man while selfishly exploiting every privilege he has never earned.

Liberal Elitism on Parade.

[allmost]

He gets excellent care. He wants everyone else to have substandard care. You say he deserves it, I wonder how?

[Yaelle]

I believe that each and every one of us, Senator Kennedy included, deserves the very best medical care we can afford.

There is free medical treatment now in this country, but free and cheaper options are NOT the best.

Just like with your TV. You can find a free TV on Craigslist right now, but it’s going to be pretty shabby and old. You can go down to Best Buy right now and get some kind of TV for a couple hundred dollars. But you will have to spend a couple grand to get a superlative TV.

It is better to have a little money than no money. It’s better still to have even more money.

Surprise, surprise, this is how nature is. And so the motivation to earn money and provide care for one’s family is strong.

“Government” or other people’s money is against nature, and actually provides incentive not to do well but to beg the loudest.

We are a good people, of course, and there are wonderful medical charities all over the place.

[Dustbunny]

Unfortunately Ted Kennedy is a Senator and has health care provided for him by our tax dollars, the type of health care us peons will not be entitled to if the health care bill is passed.

[Semperfiwife]

She actually suffocated in an air hole in six feet of water.
He got out and ran to his advisors to save his political career. He reported it the next morning when it was too late for Mary Jo. He could have saved her but chose his future presidency above all else.

[Apple Pan Dowdy]

We are not debating here whether or not Kennedy "deserves" care.

A true American and all doctors who take their oath seriously, would say, "despite his sins, he and all of us deserve the same top level of care.

What this article seems to be asking is - shouldn't we be using Kennedy as an example to point out the sham that Obama Care is because Obama Care differentiates between Kennedy and the other elite and "we the people".

The article asks, Has anyone raised this question with Senator Kennedy? I know it seems to be in bad taste to even mention it. But if ObamaCare passes in the coming weeks, you can be sure that that question will be raised for you and me, and our loved ones. And no, we will not have a choice.

I sure would like to know how he would answer the question.

[Pajamajan]

I wouldn't wish cancer on anyone. Prayers for Ted Kennedy.

Still the questions here must be asked. Nationalized health care will be an early death sentence for seniors. They will not be "allowed" to decide whether they want to extend their life or not.

MUST READ BUMP