Comments on: Fred Thompson Has Lymphoma

By: cosmoetica

cosmoetica — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 12:10:45 +0000

AustinRoth: I know progress has been made in many cancers’, but not much in this one, which is why I wrote, ‘itâ€™s still a deadly cancer, and chemo affects the brain’.

By: White Agent

White Agent — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 02:38:25 +0000

Well he’s out. Next.

By: domajot

domajot — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 21:57:14 +0000

I would not vote for Mr. Thompson, but I wish him a long and healthy life.

By: The Sandbox

The Sandbox — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 19:26:10 +0000

Fred Thompson Has Cancer, Good Prognosis…

Here’s the AP story:Republican Fred Thompson, the actor-politician who is considering a bid for president, said Wednesday he was diagnosed with lymphoma more than two years ago but the cancer shouldn’t affect his life expectancy. In an interview with…

By: AustinRoth

AustinRoth — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 19:11:23 +0000

cos – the progress in cancer treatments, and chemo in particular, in the past 25 years are amazing. It isn’t like it was back then.

By: Sensible Mom

Sensible Mom — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 18:35:53 +0000

Is This National Cancer Month?…

And if Fred Thompson is the knight in shining armor, it’s just been dented heavily.

…

By: casualobserver

casualobserver — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 18:11:31 +0000

Some more prognosis facts are going to need to be widely aired. The boogeyman of uncertainty is never a good thing to have accompany you on the campaign trail.

By: cosmoetica

cosmoetica — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 16:07:36 +0000

He’s toast, but not because of the cancer, per se. My dad died nearly 25 years ago from chronic lymphatic lymphoma and leukemia. The minute it reappears Thompson will have to get either chemo or radio treatments- as it’s still a deadly cancer, and chemo affects the brain, as well the body (loss of hair, weight, etc.).
Were he Prez, constitutionally, in those times, he would likely have to turn over the Presidency to the VP, and who’ll vote for a part-time ona gain off again Prez?

By: joe gandelman

joe gandelman — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 16:06:57 +0000

I was not saying voters SHOULD react that way. I as saying some voters will.

By: C Stanley

C Stanley — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 15:38:03 +0000

CaseyL,
I agree with you but I still feel that candidates should be willing to openly address questions about the status of their health. There are no guarantees for any of us, of course, but voters have a right to know if the candidate they vote for has health risks that are greater than average (particularly for the presidential office).

That’s not to say that any particular condition or history should disqualify, but just that it is a valid consideration. I’m glad that Thompson is putting this out there and I hope if he does decide to run, that he’ll be very forthright with answering questions about his prognosis.

By: CaseyL

CaseyL — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 15:29:13 +0000

There will inevitably be some voters whoâ€™ll wonder if heâ€™ll be able to go all the necessary rounds.

They shouldn’t, and I speak as a liberal Democrat who couldn’t care less whether Thompson gets into the race or not.

“Cancer” is no longer an automatic death sentence, and it isn’t necessarily an automaticaly deeply disabling disease anymore, either.

Elizabeth Edwards isn’t the only person to say “I’m not letting cancer dictate what I do with my life.” Two very senior Senators have had cancer – Biden and Specter – and are cancer-free, still working, and apparently ready to go on working for as long as they like.

Rudy Giuliani is another cancer survivor who seems quite healthy and energetic.

We’re simply going to have to change the way we perceive people with cancer. They’re not just killing time until the disease kills them: they’re managing a difficult but survivable chrinic condition that doesn’t keep them from pursuing the causes and professions that matter to them.

By: C Stanley

C Stanley — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 15:28:50 +0000

It sure does sound like he’s on the verge of announcing though, and that this was an effort to get out in front of the disclosure.