Ted Kennedy has malignant brain tumor
Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 11:20 am
Just read this breaking news headline on the NYT website; no details yet.
A home for the weary.
https://www.wwtbambored.com/
I have been to the hospital for migraines. Migraines don't always mean brain tumors.Bob Juch wrote:Not good.
And NY Gov. Paterson is in the hospital for migraine symptoms which also could indicate a brain tumor.
Of course, but if one happens for the first time in an adult, that's certainly something to check.PlacentiaSoccerMom wrote:I have been to the hospital for migraines. Migraines don't always mean brain tumors.Bob Juch wrote:Not good.
And NY Gov. Paterson is in the hospital for migraine symptoms which also could indicate a brain tumor.
Why would Hillary choose Romney as a Cabinet secretary?gsabc wrote:If Teddy decides not to run for re-election, Romney runs for the seat if he's not a Cabinet official by then. You heard it here first.
In this case it's actually glaucoma per his doctor.ghostjmf wrote:I had my 1st migraine as an adult, in my 40s. And my 2nd, 3rd, etc. Mine were pretty much cycling with the hormones. Now that the hormones are bye bye, I have fewer migraines, but I still get them. I am glad I didn't know the brain-tumor correlation or I'd have had something to be paranoid about. Also, after years of being told "don't worry, they don't weaken your blood vessels to allow strokes", the thought is that they do weaken your blood vessels to allow strokes.
Romney may run, but he has no chance of ever being elected anything again in Massachusetts.gsabc wrote:If Teddy decides not to run for re-election, Romney runs for the seat if he's not a Cabinet official by then. You heard it here first.
Wouldn't bet on that. We're a perverse bunch, and Mitt did give Ted a run for his money a couple of terms ago. Lord knows I wouldn't vote for him, but then, I never have.ToLiveIsToFly wrote:Romney may run, but he has no chance of ever being elected anything again in Massachusetts.gsabc wrote:If Teddy decides not to run for re-election, Romney runs for the seat if he's not a Cabinet official by then. You heard it here first.
Is there some reason the Legislature couldn't change the rules again? --Bobgsabc wrote:Wouldn't bet on that. We're a perverse bunch, and Mitt did give Ted a run for his money a couple of terms ago. Lord knows I wouldn't vote for him, but then, I never have.ToLiveIsToFly wrote:Romney may run, but he has no chance of ever being elected anything again in Massachusetts.gsabc wrote:If Teddy decides not to run for re-election, Romney runs for the seat if he's not a Cabinet official by then. You heard it here first.
The Democrats in the state legislature are hoisted on their own petard. When Republican Mitt was governor and Kerry was running for President, it became possible that Mitt would be appointing Kerry's replacement as Senator. To prevent the oossibility of a Republican being named to complete the term, the state legislature changed the rules so that in the event that a Senator doesn't complete his/her term, there has to be a special election within some period that I've forgotten - 120 days? 90? So now the Democratic governor Deval Patrick won't be able to choose Ted's replacement, should it come to that. There's already a Republican challenger to Kerry, whose re-election is coming up. I have no idea who would run on the Democrat side to replace Ted.
No, but as I said, MA voters are a perverse bunch. Huge majority for the Democrats in the state legislature and the Congressional group, but frequently we vote in a Republican governor. Patrick is the first Democrat to hold the office since Dukakis left, and there have been many more Republican than Democratic governors since the 1960's. There could easily be a backlash if the General Court (as our legislature is called) flips back on this subject. Maybe if this happened in Texas, it would be okay and expected.Bob78164 wrote:Is there some reason the Legislature couldn't change the rules again? --Bobgsabc wrote: The Democrats in the state legislature are hoisted on their own petard. When Republican Mitt was governor and Kerry was running for President, it became possible that Mitt would be appointing Kerry's replacement as Senator. To prevent the oossibility of a Republican being named to complete the term, the state legislature changed the rules so that in the event that a Senator doesn't complete his/her term, there has to be a special election within some period that I've forgotten - 120 days? 90? So now the Democratic governor Deval Patrick won't be able to choose Ted's replacement, should it come to that. There's already a Republican challenger to Kerry, whose re-election is coming up. I have no idea who would run on the Democrat side to replace Ted.