Is a Life Worthless, or Isn't It?

Can someone explain this to me? Why is it that the Bush posse thinks nothing of devoting the resources of the State of Florida, the Congress and the Supreme Court, and would issue not a whisper of criticism over the hundreds of thousands of dollars spent in legal fees to keep a single non-functioning person pumped with water and nutrients through a tube, and yet,
...
if a jury were to award the Schiavo or Schindler families $500,000 to compensate them for the loss of their beloved Terri, George Bush would cite that as an example of why the tort system is running amok, as if no life could possibly be worth $500,000**. As if greedy families and injured people were trying to suck the life out of doctors and companies whose carelessness and dangerous products are just part of the cost of doing business.

In fact, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't he trying to make sure than no one can ever recover more than $250,000 for pain and suffering, loss of consortium and other "non-economic" damages in tort and medical liability cases?

Why are we spending so much to save this person's life when a life is only worth $250,000?

** In this case, a settlement valued her life at $300,000 in Michael Sciavo's loss of consortium claim.

Comments

[Vidiot]

Alas, it looks like it's pretty much about money.