ShareThis Page
Going the Kevorkian way |
Featured Commentary

Going the Kevorkian way

| Saturday, June 7, 2014 9:00 p.m

WINNER. Jack Kevorkian

Three years after his death, might a comeback be looming for the euthanasia enthusiast who had the cheerful nickname “Dr. Death”?

Kevorkian’s longtime assistant, Neal Nicol, has been urging states with the death penalty to abandon lethal injections in favor of Kevorkian’s favorite mechanism for ending life: a carbon monoxide tank and mask. This after the recent execution of a prisoner in Oklahoma appeared to be neither quick nor painless.

“Death comes within minutes,” Nicol told NBC News of the method preferred by Kevorkian, who aided in more than 130 suicides. “There are no twitches, movements or signs of discomfort at all.”

In the wake of the botched Oklahoma execution and with lethal injection drugs becoming increasingly difficult to obtain, Kevorkian’s method soon might be increasingly attractive to death penalty states.

LOSER. Jane Fonda

Vietnam veterans are furious that the aging actress who insulted U.S. soldiers more than four decades ago will speak this week at a UCLA graduation ceremony.

Fonda, 76, who famously met with enemy troops during a 1972 visit to Hanoi and labeled American U.S. soldiers “war criminals,” is slated to speak June 13 at UCLA’s School of Theater, Film and Television.

As one might imagine, the announcement wasn’t well received by the Santa Clarita chapter of the Vietnam Veterans of America. Said organization president Nick Callas to Fox News: “We hate her.”

— compiled by Trib Total Media staff

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.