Poll
Question:
Should Gabrielle Giffords resign her Congressional seat?
Option 1: Yes
votes: 14
Option 2: No
votes: 10
Option 3: Other (?)
votes: 3
What say you, peanut gallery?
I'm torn. :hmm:
Quote
Gabrielle Giffords' staffer talks about congresswoman's health
E. J. Montini - Jun. 9, 2011 12:00 AM
The Arizona Republic
Pia Carusone knew the day would come when the questions about her boss, Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, would become more indelicate.
After answering some of those questions, Carusone, Giffords' chief of staff, told me: "We want to give people a clear picture (about Giffords). It's not in anyone's interest to have anyone feel misled. But it's hard because we satisfy one person and one set of questions, and tomorrow, we're on to the next. The feeling is like it's never enough."
It won't be. Not from now on. The inquiries will keep coming until the day Giffords decides if she will return to Congress.
Is she ready to do that?
No.
Is she close?
No.
The shooting near Tucson on Jan. 8 was horrific, and the grief over the six people killed and 13 wounded, including Giffords, was profound. So, the media backed off.
After all, the fact that Giffords survived and seemed to improve almost daily was miraculous. We reported on the upbeat assessments made by Giffords' doctors. We passed along the optimistic observations of her staff and her husband. We followed with giddy appreciation the love story of Giffords and her astronaut husband, Mark Kelly, and noted each time a political friend or associate visited the congresswoman and offered a tidbit about her progress.
But Giffords is a public figure, about whom tidbits are not enough. So, I asked Giffords' staff if they could explain, in terms that even a newspaper columnist could understand, exactly where Giffords stands.
For example, how well is she able to communicate with them?
"We do a lot of inferring with her because her communication skills have been impacted the most," Carusone said. "If you think of it as someone who is able to communicate with you clearly, it is easy to test them. You can ask them a series of questions, and you can get clear answers back. Whereas with Gabby, what we've been able to infer and what we believe is that her comprehension is very good. I don't know about percentage-wise or not, but it's close to normal, if not normal."
Does her struggle to communicate mean that she's not using complete sentences?
"Exactly," Carusone said. "She is borrowing upon other ways of communicating. Her words are back more and more now, but she's still using facial expressions as a way to express. Pointing. Gesturing. Add it all together, and she's able to express the basics of what she wants or needs. But, when it comes to a bigger and more complex thought that requires words, that's where she's had the trouble."
Is that frustrating for her?
"Absolutely," Carusone said. "When she is trying to come up with a word or a sentence and she's clearly struggling, putting everything she's got into it, and sometimes she's not successful. When she is, there's a relief that comes across her face that she has found the word. But when she can't come up with that, it is absolute frustration."
Who is making the decisions for the congresswoman? Is it Giffords herself or her husband, family and staff?
"It's a combination," Carusone said. "I've told her that we've been approached by every media outlet in the world, at this point, and that when she is ready, there are plenty of options for how we do it. She does not want to do that right now. And that's understandable. For someone who takes her job seriously and has a good relationship with the press and knows how important that is, to feel anything less than 100 percent is daunting. Let alone to feel what she's feeling: a real struggle and challenge with communication."
Is there a timetable established for deciding if she will remain in office?
"The only firm timetable is the legal timetable, and that is May of 2012, when petitions are due for re-election," Carusone said. "That's a firm timetable. Short of that, we'd love to know today what her life will be, what her quality of life will be, which will determine whether she'll be able to run for office and all sorts of other things involving her life. But we just don't know yet. . . .
"We're about halfway through the process that is the most important time for recovery. Patients recover for the rest of their lives, but it's the first 12 to 14 months that you make the biggest jumps. . . . In the doctors' minds, it's not even close to when you begin to make the final prognosis for the quality of her life."
When will the public get its first good look at her?
"This is a one-step-at-a-time process," Carusone said. "It has been a difficult and busy time with everything. Every week, there is something new. I think that we're getting close to the time when Gabby will feel comfortable releasing a photo. Then, we go from there."
How clearly have doctors been able to determine the damage done by the bullet?
"An MRI is the most complete way to look at someone's brain, but she cannot ever have an MRI," Carusone said. "She has bullet shards inevitably in her head, and because MRI is magnetic, that obviously would be bad. That is a problem that shooting victims have. They have to use a CT scan. If she had suffered a stroke, they could do an MRI and get a much better picture of the damage to her brain. But that will never happen."
Carusone and the rest of Giffords' staff are in uncharted territory. While they continue to battle the emotional burden of having lost a friend and colleague, Gabe Zimmerman, and nearly losing Giffords, they must carry out the responsibilities of a congressional office, work with Giffords' husband and family, satisfy the curiosity of the media and answer the concerns of the public.
Given all that, what is the blunt assessment of Giffords, right now, five months after having been shot in the head?
"She's living. She's alive. But if she were to plateau today, and this was as far as she gets, it would not be nearly the quality of life she had before," Carusone said. "There's no comparison. All that we can hope for is that she won't plateau today and that she'll keep going and that when she does plateau, it will be at a place far away from here."
Doctors remain pleased with Giffords' progress and optimistic that she will make what Carusone calls a "tremendously good recovery." But it will take time. And there are no guarantees. And when you are a politician, like Giffords, the questions will keep coming.
"There's so much that is unknown," Carusone said. "With cancer or a heart issue, doctors can tell you a lot more. With brain injuries, they can't. ... A lot of this is a waiting game. That is a difficult thing to explain when speaking to the public. But she was a perfectly healthy 40-year-old who was injured on the job. I'm hoping that buys her a little more patience. But it's a brutal world out there."
Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2011/06/09/20110609gabrielle-giffords-health-issues-revealed.html#ixzz1OoDARzD2 (http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2011/06/09/20110609gabrielle-giffords-health-issues-revealed.html#ixzz1OoDARzD2)
Yes. No idea who she is.
Oh it's her. Yes.
What do you want from me?
No, as long as she has a shot at enough of a recovery to function, let the voters decide when she is up for re-election.
She's about as useful to Congress as a Congressman running for higher office during an election campaign. Maybe more so. Should she resign? Probably. Will she? Probably not.
As soon as it becomes clear that she would never be capable of doing her job, I think she should go for the sake of her constituents. Before that is a tougher question.
I do think, though, that the fact that she become incapacitated due to being shot colors the way people evaluate her fitness to hold office. If she had a devastating stroke, I think there would be more pressure on her to go.
Quote from: Berkut on June 09, 2011, 02:35:56 PM
No, as long as she has a shot at enough of a recovery to function, let the voters decide when she is up for re-election.
The reason why I'm torn is that, while I agree with this in principle, the people of Tucson are disenfranchised right now with no clear end to that situation in sight.
Let her serve out the term.
She is apparently capable of complex thought, which puts her well above many sitting Congressmen.
If you were shot, would you quit your job?
At least she is not from NY. She can't do any worse than Weiner, Massa, or Lee?
Quote from: Grey Fox on June 09, 2011, 03:08:37 PM
If you were shot, would you quit your job?
It depends.
We had a parole officer shot in NYC in the line of duty. Worker's Compensation only covered 60% of his salary. He lost his house, car, and other things while in the process of recovering. It's not certain when he can return to work, so he may be forced to quit and find a new job once he exhausts all his leave time (plus any donated).
I wonder what kind of generous deal they get in Congress.
No, she should be given every chance and as much time as possible to recover.
I think it's important to a democratic system that every opportunity to thwart the ambitions of an assassin should be taken; let her serve out her term, unless she has a major permanent relapse or something dreadful happens like developing a persistent vegetative state.
Quote from: jamesww on June 09, 2011, 03:17:25 PM
No, she should be given every chance and as much time as possible to recover.
I think it's important to a democratic system that every opportunity to thwart the ambitions of an assassin should be taken;
Including voodoo?
Yes - she can't represent her constituents and in all likelihood, won't be able to in the near future.
Quote from: Malthus on June 09, 2011, 03:51:10 PM
Yes - she can't represent her constituents and in all likelihood, won't be able to in the near future.
If she can understand what she's voting on and she can push a button she can represent her constituents.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 09, 2011, 03:59:08 PM
Quote from: Malthus on June 09, 2011, 03:51:10 PM
Yes - she can't represent her constituents and in all likelihood, won't be able to in the near future.
If she can understand what she's voting on and she can push a button she can represent her constituents.
I don't agree. There is more to a congresscritter's job than pushing a "yes" or "no" button to voting on bills. In this case, she can't communicate with her constituents, can't negotiate, can't debate over legislation, in fact can't communicate at all with any but her intimates, so her constituents are being short-changed.
Quote from: Malthus on June 09, 2011, 04:17:48 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 09, 2011, 03:59:08 PM
Quote from: Malthus on June 09, 2011, 03:51:10 PM
Yes - she can't represent her constituents and in all likelihood, won't be able to in the near future.
If she can understand what she's voting on and she can push a button she can represent her constituents.
I don't agree. There is more to a congresscritter's job than pushing a "yes" or "no" button to voting on bills. In this case, she can't communicate with her constituents, can't negotiate, can't debate over legislation, in fact can't communicate at all with any but her intimates, so her constituents are being short-changed.
They let Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms stay under those same parameters. :hmm:
Quote from: Malthus on June 09, 2011, 04:17:48 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 09, 2011, 03:59:08 PM
Quote from: Malthus on June 09, 2011, 03:51:10 PM
Yes - she can't represent her constituents and in all likelihood, won't be able to in the near future.
If she can understand what she's voting on and she can push a button she can represent her constituents.
I don't agree. There is more to a congresscritter's job than pushing a "yes" or "no" button to voting on bills. In this case, she can't communicate with her constituents, can't negotiate, can't debate over legislation, in fact can't communicate at all with any but her intimates, so her constituents are being short-changed.
I can't really disagree with that, and i also think that DGuller is correct that there would be more pressure on her to resign if it weren't for the way her injuries occurred.
We have a Constitutional procedure whereby if the President is alive but incapacitated, the Vice-President can become Acting President, but nothing that covers the incapacitation of a member of Congress. There's not way to appoint an "Acting Representative" for her district.
While I would say that it would probably be best for her to resign, I wouldn't be prepared to tell her that myself, so I can't expect anyone else, like members of her staff, to do it.
QuoteHer words are back more and more now, but she's still using facial expressions as a way to express. Pointing. Gesturing. Add it all together, and she's able to express the basics of what she wants or needs. But, when it comes to a bigger and more complex thought that requires words, that's where she's had the trouble."
Not unlike most Teabagging GOP House members. So I don't see what the problem is.
Charles Sumner left his senate seat vacant for three years, so there is precedent in not resigning. That said, Giffords does not particularly symbolize any causes, so the Dems would probably be better off with someone who casts votes.
Tucson is fairly liberal, as far as Arizona goes. Even when they elect a Republican, he tends to be moderate (e.g. Gifford's predecessor, Jim Kolbe).
I think Arizona law requires a special election to replace a vacancy. By the time they get that set up, it'll almost be time to have the ordinary election. Probably not worth the effort.
Aren't all Arizona elections special?
Quote from: The Brain on June 09, 2011, 03:41:16 PM
Quote from: jamesww on June 09, 2011, 03:17:25 PM
No, she should be given every chance and as much time as possible to recover.
I think it's important to a democratic system that every opportunity to thwart the ambitions of an assassin should be taken;
Including voodoo?
Now go do... that voodoo... that YOU do... SOOOO WELLLLLL!
Quote from: Octavian on June 10, 2011, 07:15:46 AM
Quote from: The Brain on June 09, 2011, 03:41:16 PM
Quote from: jamesww on June 09, 2011, 03:17:25 PM
No, she should be given every chance and as much time as possible to recover.
I think it's important to a democratic system that every opportunity to thwart the ambitions of an assassin should be taken;
Including voodoo?
Now go do... that voodoo... that YOU do... SOOOO WELLLLLL!
You have the ability to remember song lyrics. Congratulations.
Quote from: dps on June 09, 2011, 04:43:45 PM
We have a Constitutional procedure whereby if the President is alive but incapacitated, the Vice-President can become Acting President, but nothing that covers the incapacitation of a member of Congress. There's not way to appoint an "Acting Representative" for her district.
Wouldn't this be a good moment to provide such a way?
Quote from: Iormlund on June 11, 2011, 03:52:08 PM
Quote from: dps on June 09, 2011, 04:43:45 PM
We have a Constitutional procedure whereby if the President is alive but incapacitated, the Vice-President can become Acting President, but nothing that covers the incapacitation of a member of Congress. There's not way to appoint an "Acting Representative" for her district.
Wouldn't this be a good moment to provide such a way?
You mean change the Constitution? That's kind of expensive and it takes a long time. Not to mention it isn't easy (you'd probably have some kind of bizarre GOP conspiracy theory about how this is somehow a plot to take away guns or set up death panels or have the UN take over).
The UN is always a threat. Today an office building, tomorrow Africans trying to tell us what to do.
Quote from: Ed Anger on June 11, 2011, 04:38:42 PM
The UN is always a threat. Today an office building, tomorrow Africans trying to tell us what to do.
You can easily stop a determined UN assault with little more then a pair of ear plugs.
Quote from: Razgovory on June 11, 2011, 04:30:46 PM
You mean change the Constitution? That's kind of expensive and it takes a long time. Not to mention it isn't easy (you'd probably have some kind of bizarre GOP conspiracy theory about how this is somehow a plot to take away guns or set up death panels or have the UN take over).
You could just copy & paste the relevant article of the 25th. Surely not even your politicians can screw that up.
No, for the reasons that Mongo already stated.
Once/if it's clear that she will never be able to fully perform her duties, then yes.
Quote from: Iormlund on June 11, 2011, 04:55:07 PM
You could just copy & paste the relevant article of the 25th. Surely not even your politicians can screw that up.
I assume you're being facetious? Amending the Constitution is no small task.
Quote from: Iormlund on June 11, 2011, 04:55:07 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on June 11, 2011, 04:30:46 PM
You mean change the Constitution? That's kind of expensive and it takes a long time. Not to mention it isn't easy (you'd probably have some kind of bizarre GOP conspiracy theory about how this is somehow a plot to take away guns or set up death panels or have the UN take over).
You could just copy & paste the relevant article of the 25th. Surely not even your politicians can screw that up.
An alteration of the Constitution requires a popular vote in the states. It's much more trouble then its worth.
Quote from: Razgovory on June 11, 2011, 05:09:11 PM
An alteration of the Constitution requires a popular vote in the states. It's much more trouble then its worth.
?? State legislature I thought.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 11, 2011, 05:08:39 PM
Quote from: Iormlund on June 11, 2011, 04:55:07 PM
You could just copy & paste the relevant article of the 25th. Surely not even your politicians can screw that up.
I assume you're being facetious? Amending the Constitution is no small task.
How many legislators can disagree on this particular amendment? It would be merely a non-partisan, technical improvement.
Quote from: Razgovory on June 11, 2011, 04:42:07 PM
You can easily stop a determined UN assault with little more then a pair of ear plugs.
:lol:
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 11, 2011, 05:10:33 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on June 11, 2011, 05:09:11 PM
An alteration of the Constitution requires a popular vote in the states. It's much more trouble then its worth.
?? State legislature I thought.
You may be right. I don't remember exactly. Still it's a lot of hassle for something not that important.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 11, 2011, 05:10:33 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on June 11, 2011, 05:09:11 PM
An alteration of the Constitution requires a popular vote in the states. It's much more trouble then its worth.
?? State legislature I thought.
Can be done by either the state legislature or by specially elected ratification conventions in each state, Congress specifies which when they send the proposed admendments to the states.
Quote from: Iormlund
You could just copy & paste the relevant article of the 25th.
Not really. The 25th provided a method whereby the Vice President would be able to become Acting President if the President was incapacitated. But we already had the office of Vice President. We don't have any remotely similar office in the legislative branch. While I do think that an admendment to address the situation of how a incapacitated Senator or Representative probably wouldn't encounter much direct opposition to the idea in and of itself, there's no particular sense that it's needed, either, and if one was proposed, there would be a huge battle over how to chose an acting replacement.
Quote from: dps on June 11, 2011, 07:01:17 PM
Not really. The 25th provided a method whereby the Vice President would be able to become Acting President if the President was incapacitated. But we already had the office of Vice President. We don't have any remotely similar office in the legislative branch. While I do think that an admendment to address the situation of how a incapacitated Senator or Representative probably wouldn't encounter much direct opposition to the idea in and of itself, there's no particular sense that it's needed, either, and if one was proposed, there would be a huge battle over how to chose an acting replacement.
Who takes the seat if a Representative dies? Does it remain vacant until there are new elections?
Quote from: Iormlund on June 11, 2011, 07:05:09 PM
Who takes the seat if a Representative dies? Does it remain vacant until there are new elections?
I think it depends on state law, but usually they hold a special election.
Takes backs. In a lot of cases the governor appoints someone.
Massachusetts famously changed their law during (Republican) governor "Mitt" Romney's tenure so that the legislature filled vacancies. Then after he left office they changed the law back so the governor chooses.
And of course you're probably familiar with the brouhaha in Illinois over Gov. Blagoyavich trying to auction off Obama's Senate seat.
Quote from: Iormlund on June 11, 2011, 04:55:07 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on June 11, 2011, 04:30:46 PM
You mean change the Constitution? That's kind of expensive and it takes a long time. Not to mention it isn't easy (you'd probably have some kind of bizarre GOP conspiracy theory about how this is somehow a plot to take away guns or set up death panels or have the UN take over).
You could just copy & paste the relevant article of the 25th. Surely not even your politicians can screw that up.
So the Vice-Congressman would take over? And after him the Speaker of the Congressman's House?
She is a bit of a scatterbrain, now is she?
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fd.yimg.com%2Fa%2Fp%2Fap%2F20110612%2Fcapt.d7c2e5d6bc204639a4d8cbab10aba004-3e5082984b4c482aace0b489542f50a5-0.jpg&hash=efe58eb72f010b81330669a32c8cd307787f8956)
Quote from: garbon on June 12, 2011, 10:10:46 AM
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fd.yimg.com%2Fa%2Fp%2Fap%2F20110612%2Fcapt.d7c2e5d6bc204639a4d8cbab10aba004-3e5082984b4c482aace0b489542f50a5-0.jpg&hash=efe58eb72f010b81330669a32c8cd307787f8956)
At least we know something important about her now, she dyes her hair.
Without her faux blond hair and with it cut that way she sort of looks like an Amish woman to me, though typically they have very long hair bound up and hidden under a bonnet.
I can see why she changed her look.
If she can competently understand the issues and has some means of interacting with the public and other politicians then I do not think she should resign and instead it should be up to the people of Arizona to decide if any limitations in her ability to communicate should factor in to her suitability for office. Most floor debates are showmanship and are only vaguely relevant, a congresswoman unable to speak properly but who still retains the rest of their mental faculties can still do all the agreements and horse trading in the congressional backrooms where the real politics happens.
I would (if I agreed with her politics) probably vote to reelect her if I was from Arizona if she remained mentally competent because even if she was unable to speak publicly she would have powerful "attempted assassination political capital" and could use it to advance an agenda very well. She was a conservative-ish Democrat from what I can tell so I might have voted for her if I lived in her district, but probably not.
It's also important that her constituents know whether her problems are "speech related" or "cognition related." I understand there isn't a super easy, straight forward way to answer that, but I do think a medical assessment can be done generally probably before the deadline in March 2012. If she has been reduced cognitively then it's arguable we couldn't trust any written communications from her because it would seem more likely her staffers were just using her as a flesh puppet (as staffers did with Thurmond and Byrd near the end of their seemingly endless lives.)
I have a bit of personal experience with situations like this. When my grandfather was 81 he had an angiography done; while exceptionally rare an angiography can cause a stroke and that is exactly what happened to my grandfather. However his stroke was actually fairly mild, he lost some speech but his cognition was unaffected. As an example he had a garden and he lost the ability to refer to a cantaloupe as a cantaloupe. But he could still write "cantaloupe", apparently such odd stuff isn't unheard of and the brain is a complex organ. It was very frustrating for him because he retained all of his prior cognitive abilities but lost his ability to form certain words and was unable to conjure up appropriate words from his vocabulary.
It was actually a period in which he got heavily involved in PCs, and was one of the first people in my family to have an email account and actually started writing children's books on early word processing software. Given these activities and many others I can say that aside from his becoming aphasic he was the same guy he was before. However when he was about 92 he had another stroke, this one much more devastating. It did not further degrade his speech but he became deeply confused and forgetful, he essentially was rendered pretty far along the dementia scale by the stroke. He lost the ability to remember things and people, had spotty recollection or recognition of family members and etc.
If Giffords condition is akin to my grandfather after his first stroke I think she'd be able to competently fulfill her duties. If she was like he was after his second stroke then she should resign.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on June 12, 2011, 02:32:48 PM
"attempted assassination political capital"
Never worked for Wallace. :(
what's the precedent for other Congressman/women sick or injured during their mandate?
I've seen people with cancer, even terminal, still keep their official job, even if they don't show up for the votes at our parliaments. I've seen one guy in disgrace still a member of his party, still a MP, and still a job even if he hasn't shown up for work (not even at his county office) for 13 months.
If it was Canada, I'd say she sure could stay until it's clear she'll never be able to do her job. But I'm unclear as to what happens in the US in these usual circumstances.
Quote from: viper37 on June 12, 2011, 02:40:21 PM
what's the precedent for other Congressman/women sick or injured during their mandate?
I've seen people with cancer, even terminal, still keep their official job, even if they don't show up for the votes at our parliaments. I've seen one guy in disgrace still a member of his party, still a MP, and still a job even if he hasn't shown up for work (not even at his county office) for 13 months.
If it was Canada, I'd say she sure could stay until it's clear she'll never be able to do her job. But I'm unclear as to what happens in the US in these usual circumstances.
They can stay as long as they keep getting elected. We have had very old Senators get reelected who are so infirm they haven't been to floor votes in months.
Quote from: Razgovory on June 12, 2011, 02:24:40 PM
I can see why she changed her look.
I was going to say she looked cute, then I realized that the reason she has short hair is because it was shaved for brain surgery.
Still, it works.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on June 12, 2011, 02:32:48 PM
apparently such odd stuff isn't unheard of and the brain is a complex organ.
Psych 101
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110621/ap_en_ot/us_books_giffords
QuoteGabrielle Giffords has deal for a memoir
The world has only begun to learn about Rep. Gabrielle Giffords.
The Arizona Democrat and her husband, astronaut and Navy captain Mark Kelly, are working on a memoir that Scribner will publish at a date to be determined. The book, currently untitled, will be an intimate chronicle of everything from their careers and courtship to the Jan. 8 tragedy when a gunman shot Giffords in the head during a political event in Tucson, Ariz. Six people were killed in the attack and 12 others besides the congresswoman were wounded.
"Since Jan. 8, it's been really touching to us to see how much support there is for Gabby and her recovery, and how much interest there is in how she's doing and her story," Kelly, who on Tuesday announced his retirement from the Navy and NASA, told The Associated Press during a recent interview from Texas.
"After thinking about it, and talking about it, we decided it was the right thing to do to put our words and our voices on paper and tell our story from our point of view."
The 47-year-old Kelly most recently was commander of the space shuttle Endeavour's final mission, which ended June 1. His retirement, which comes as NASA ends its space shuttle program, is effective Oct. 1.
Giffords, 41, was released from a Houston hospital last week and is set to start outpatient therapy. She had been in the rehab facility since late January, a few weeks after the shooting, and is now living with Kelly at his home in League City, a town 26 miles south of Houston. She will continue outpatient therapy at TIRR Memorial Hermann, the same hospital where she underwent rehabilitation.
Kelly and Giffords are collaborating with author Jeffrey Zaslow, who worked on Randy Pausch's million-selling "The Last Lecture" and Capt. Chesley "Sully" Sullenberger's "Highest Duty." Kelly praised Zaslow as a "good storyteller" and "the best writer" for the kind of book they wanted. Zaslow will interview friends, family members and colleagues of Kelly and Giffords.
"There are details of our personal lives together that I'd say I can count on one hand the people who know them. In some cases, it's just Gabby and I (who know the details)," said Kelly, who met Giffords in 2003 and married her in 2007. Before the shooting, they had maintained independent lives, Kelly based in Houston and Giffords in Tucson.
Giffords will focus on her recovery, but Kelly said that the book will be part of that process and that Giffords will provide details of what "she remembers after Jan. 8 and her story before that." While Kelly will be "the primary collaborator," he said Giffords will be a "big part of this." Giffords has been struggling to relearn how to speak and walk, and will be assisted by a 24-hour home health provider, according to the hospital.
For the book deal, Kelly and Giffords were represented by Washington attorney Robert Barnett, whose clients include President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. The memoir will be edited at Scribner by executive vice president and publisher Susan Moldow, and senior vice president and editor-in-chief Nan Graham.
"I really felt a connection with them and I knew Gabby would, too," Kelly said. "Gabby is very pro-women and she always has been. And I knew after meeting Susan and Nan that they were definitely the right people to work with."
Because of rules covering members of the House of Representatives, Giffords will receive no advance and the deal must be cleared by the House ethics committee. A portion of the authors' net proceeds will be donated to charities that benefit Tucson and Arizona.
Not sure I'm a fan...
Brain damage is not an issue. Everyone in Congress has that problem. I think she should resign based on the fact that she's not using her husband's last name.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on June 21, 2011, 11:37:13 AM
I think she should resign based on the fact that she's not using her husband's last name.
:huh:
Quote from: garbon on June 21, 2011, 11:46:41 AM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on June 21, 2011, 11:37:13 AM
I think she should resign based on the fact that she's not using her husband's last name.
:huh:
What? Why should her father's last name supersede her husbands? Was he an astronaut too? Give the guy his props. :P
Women are too uppity.
She married an astronaut? The good kind or the insane diaper killer kind?
Quote from: The Brain on June 21, 2011, 12:29:48 PM
She married an astronaut? The good kind or the insane diaper killer kind?
Well, he's still flying and hasn't been locked up. :lol:
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on June 21, 2011, 12:12:45 PM
Quote from: garbon on June 21, 2011, 11:46:41 AM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on June 21, 2011, 11:37:13 AM
I think she should resign based on the fact that she's not using her husband's last name.
:huh:
What? Why should her father's last name supersede her husbands? Was he an astronaut too? Give the guy his props. :P
:huh:
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on June 21, 2011, 12:46:46 PM
Well, he's still flying and hasn't been locked up. :lol:
Umm, he announced his retirement today.