news-record.com

Um, well, that's beside the point. A silly criterion like that would rule out George W. Bush as well. Back here in the real world, the media report on all sorts of people, both self-made and otherwise.

The actual question, of course, is whether Kennedy's death would have warranted front-page coverage today by a newspaper that's focusing its energies on local coverage. Is Kennedy's death a purely national event or one that has local resonance as well? I don't have the answer, though I recall the Oklahoma newspaper that didn't report Obama's victory in November because the editor felt it was national news that his readers would get through other media outlets.

The only reason I could give you is that over the past four-plus decades, the man left his finger prints on most of the meaningful pieces of legislation Congress handled in that time involving civil rights, education and public health care. Heck, he helped Bush pass No Child Left Behind. Whether you believe his legacy is to the good or ill, he certainly made his mark and people feel the impact of the laws he helped to craft and get passed every day.

The thing that holds me back is that the cultish royalty-worship that's grown up around the Kennedy family - all of that is a bit distasteful.

And no, there's no discernible local angle that I can find.

"His passing could have a dramatic impact on the healthcare debate ... or more specifically ... the healthcare vote in the Senate."

Rich Lowery:

"I can't see how wrapping Obamacare in Ted Kennedy's cloak is going to help much. The votes in Congress it would tend to influence most are already in favor. For swing votes with red-state-type constituencies, it might even be a net minus because Kennedy is a liberal icon associated with expanding government no matter what the cost — an association that serves to reinforce the bill's vulnerabilities. The talk of how Kennedy's passing is going to push the bill over-the-top is just liberal politicians and liberal journalists spinning one another up."

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YzhhNTQzOWY5OWNmMGIyY2Q0MzA3MDB...

More....

Scott Atlas:

"What will Kennedy's passing mean to health care reform? We can first look at what has happened since the new administration entered the White House and Democrats took a stranglehold on Congress. Since the one-party domination of government took hold, Kennedy notably separated himself from his party's pretenders. He stood apart from Nancy Pelosi's shrill threats and hyper-aggressive declarations of pay-back; he stood apart from Harry Reid's over-the-top partisan sarcasm; he stood apart from Maxine Waters' desperate and ultimately embarrassing name-calling of the opposition. And even more so, he stood in contrast to President Obama's indignant dismissal, as liars and fear-mongers, of all who oppose him.

....Sen. Kennedy's last year of life and his battle with cancer was all about individual choice, timely access to subspecialty trained doctors, access to medical technology, access to new drugs, capitalizing on the unique innovation that distinguishes our medical system, while having the freedom to choose for himself how to deal with disease. This even with a disease that has little chance of survival, even with a disease that would cost tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars for advanced medical care, all for only a small hope of success or for a relatively short prolongation of life without cure.

Kennedy was fully autonomous, empowered by our current health care system as an individual, without needing to limit his options due to government-proven outcomes or 'appropriateness' criteria that could take years and would come far too late to matter.

And his own actions, when it mattered most to him, when it was a matter of life and death, must be the strongest endorsement for making sure that health reforms empower Americans and their families, rather than government."

http://www.forbes.com/2009/08/26/health-care-reform-insurance-edward-ken...

Last, but not least....

Susan Ferrechio:

"The death of Sen. Edward Kennedy strips the Democrats of the 60-vote supermajority they enjoyed for a mere 51 days. But the liberal icon's demise may help pass a watered-down version of his health legislation.

The loss of Kennedy leaves Senate Democrats with 59 votes, one short of the 60 they need to block a certain filibuster from Republicans. With the future of Kennedy's vacant seat up in the air, Democratic leaders will now have justification for passing health care reform in the Senate with just 51 votes through the use of a parliamentary maneuver called reconciliation.

Such a move would force the Democrats to break the bill up into separate, smaller bills, rather than the sweeping reform Kennedy sought."

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Kennedy_s-death-may-weaken-De...

I hope your have your closet doors locked, lest your skeletons come out. Everything you refer to happened decades ago, in another century. But what of the last twenty years? Do you not want to be given a second chance, an opportunity to clean up your act so to speak? And didn't your parents teach you any better than to speak ill of the dead? (I'm not even referring to the facts you speak of, but your final comment.)