Yeah, he was briefly hospitalized last year for that reason. A few people speculated this morning that that might explain his wilder-than-usual behavior last month at CPAC--that he might have been affected by a mini-stroke or something--but there's of course no proof of that. Anyway, this stuff has been known to strike down people in their 20s and 30s, so there's nothing too surprising about it.
Every lefty like you who says stuff like this just proves Andrew was right about the Left all along.
I doubt there was anything untoward about it. This sort of thing is not unheard of among men in their 40s, and Andrew had a history of heart trouble already. The coroner will probably report a coronary or aneurysm or something, simple as that.
That said....if this was an assassination via poisoning or something, we need to bring such a hell down on the Left they will never recover.
The problems we associate with old age can manifest much earlier in life. I think right now we just have to wait for more information.
I can only say what Robert E. Lee said about one of his key generals and close friends who was killed in the war: "He is at peace now, and it is we who are living who are left to suffer." Godspeed, sir.
Wait, I thought it was only the Tea Partiers who were threatening violence against those they disagreed with, and the OWS movement was just Democracy In Action? This is clearly a hoax of some kind.
Sign inside djmcs' head: "This Space For Rent."
Dude, no one's buying your spin. Lie down before you hurt yourself.
Another conservative position, contra what you seem to be arguing here, is that the ends do not justify the means. Saying they do is, of course, very tempting to us all, but it can obviously take us down some bad roads, even when the ends (desegregation, for example) are in themselves laudable. This is why I don't like the idea of advocating judicial activism for Board but not Plessy. (Incidentally, I think a stronger case can be made that Board was an instance of judicial restraint, since it rested in part on a narrow interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment. But then this is the Warren Court we're talking about, so I won't insist on it.)
Lastly, I would suggest if you have to look for reasons not to get off the Internet, it's probably time to get off the Internet, which I will now do as it's rather late. My thanks to you for a calm and rational discussion.
I don't have his stuff in front of me, but I would recommend a read of Thomas Sowell sometime for an explanation of why judicial activism is something originating with the progressive movement. Of course individual progressives as well as individual conservatives will support such activism when it furthers their policy goals, but calling for the courts to follow the letter of the law and not look for hidden meanings between the lines is really the conservative position.