Ted Kennedy has walked out of Massachusetts General Hospital today and gave a thumbs up to reporters before heading home on Cape Cod.

The senior senator from Massachusetts looked well enough.

And his exit from the medical facility offered a measure of hope to the millions of Americans who have been waiting since the weekend for just such hope.

But Kennedy understands, as does everyone else by now, that he is not well.

Doctors have discovered that the seizures the senator suffered over the weekend were related to a malignant brain tumor that, depending on the seriousness of his condition, could end his tenure in the Senate.

That would redefine American politics, especially but not only at the legislative level. As presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain said upon learning the news, "I have described Ted Kennedy as the last lion in the Senate, and I have held that view because he remains the single most effective member of the Senate."

Doctors treating the senior Senator announced Tuesday that "preliminary results from a biopsy of the brain identified the cause of the seizure as a malignant glioma in the left parietal lobe." Translation: the 76-year-old champion of civil right, labor rights, health care, education and a sane foreign policy is heading into the most serious fight of his life. A doctor says, "The usual course of treatment for Kennedy's type of tumor includes radiation and chemotherapy."

How successful that treatment will be depends on how advanced his condition has become. And, while doctors assess tests that have been completed and that may yet be done, Kennedy will do the same as he takes the Memorial Day weekend to consider his future.

Kennedy is reportedly "in good spirits and full of energy." And it is probably fair to say that if anyone can beat a tumor, it is this epic persona. But Kennedy, who has been a critical player in defining liberal Democratic politics for better part of fifty years, is likely to be sidelined at what will be an essential moment for the causes and ideals he has promoted for so very long.

Democrats are on the march, poised to gain control of both the White House and the Congress for the first time since 1994--and, perhaps, for the first extended period since Kennedy came to Congress in the 1960s.

His candidate for President, Barack Obama (who says of Kennedy: "some of us wouldn't be here if it wasn't for him"), is about to secure the Democratic nomination.

That nomination, which will come by acclamation, will be made at this summer's convention in Denver.

Since 1972, Kennedy has delivered the loudest, the boldest and often the most moving addresses at the quadrennial gatherings of what is in so many senses his party.

The question, today, is whether the liberal lion can roar once more at a Democratic National Convention.

The hope, surely, is that he will.

Comments (27)

1. Again, good luck to Sen. Kennedy and his family.

   Lotta good new treatments out there.

   Posted by Mask at 05/20/2008 @ 3:36pm

2. Posted by Mask at 05/20/2008

   There is a lot of snake oil out there. If people have a GBM and no good options, they'll try anything.

   Posted by srjenkins at 05/20/2008 @ 5:17pm

3. I wish the Senator well, but it's time to step aside. Representative Markey would make an excellent replacement.

   Posted by NoPCZone at 05/20/2008 @ 6:14pm

4. I wish him the best and hope he has some peace in these times......

   ...but we can't afford his ideals as I understand them and I have very serious doubts as to his morality...so, his ideals to many of us are socialistic and will kill off the golden goose that the American experiment that has succeeded beyond the wildest dreams, only to end up in a European model with bloated welfare state generating stagnant growth, a birth rate that will n ot sustain the local population,therfore the money for those wondeful free programs and 12% unemployment..and that is in the power house of Europe, Germany...

   add the immigration swamp that America is in and the lack of English being spoken by the immigrant class at all, combined with a 50% high school grad rate, well, the future looks bleak for most who will then turn to the govt..and the cycle begins a new with more Dem politicians promising more "faireness" and "progressive" programs(socialiatstic guarentees) as they further canabalize the rich and work their way down to the middle and PRESTO!!! you have turned the US into Europe....and we are heading towards a 60% tax bracket for the middle class as it is...

   Posted by JOMAMMA at 05/20/2008 @ 7:28pm

5. The article indeed belongs here: at Caroline's encouragement Teddy endorsed Barack.

   46 years in the Senate Teddy's had, relentlessly defending the causes of equality and fairness and dignity.

   Unfortunately those causes have not advanced as much as they might in this great country and we still have quite a few uneducated, bitter souls like Jones here.

   Ted Kennedy's one of the rare ones who's made this country marginally livable and kept hope alive during the Bush Dark Age.

   Posted by ryevrah at 05/20/2008 @ 8:05pm

6. METT, this man may not live to see either.

   Posted by ACook at 05/20/2008

   I don't know, he has he money to pay a lot to stay alive. Money can't buy a lot of things but it sure can buy some damn good medical care.

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/20/2008 @ 8:09pm

7. "Ted Kennedy's one of the rare ones who's made this country marginally livable and kept hope alive during the Bush Dark Age."

   Posted by ryevrah at 05/20/2008

   Oh really? How?!

   Posted by ACook at 05/20/2008 @ 8:31pm

8. You know, I share the concern about Senetor Kennedy. I pray for his health and for his strength, and for the strength of his family and friends in what must be a particularly difficult time.

   But, to change the topic ever so slightly, I must comment on the loss of another Democrat whom I admired very much.

   I know many of the political junkies that frequent this site are familiar with Duncan Hunter, the Republican from the district adjacent to mine in San Diego.

   Many are not so aware that the man he beat back in 1980 was a long serving (re-elected 8 times) Democrat name Lionel Van Deerlin. Van, as he was called, was an absolute CLASS ACT, who had actually employed Hunter's father in his previous campaigns.

   After retiring from politics in 1980, Van returned to his first love, journalism. He continued to write a weekly editorial column in the San Diego Tribune, publishing his final column just a day before his death...a couple of days ago. He was 93 years old.

   Duncan Hunter wrote eloquently about his affection and respect for Van as did a host of other politicians and commmunity leaders across the entire political spectrum.

   He was a shining example of a time when politics was far less partisan. He was an absolute breath of fresh air, even at age 93.

   He will TRUELY be missed.

   It is my fervent prayer that he is not soon followed by yet another Kennedy.

   Posted by Lillian at 05/20/2008 @ 8:59pm

9. Mask, the war cost a ton...do you really think the country can afford a spending spree by the lib loons on top of the war costs?

   We are spiraling down the socialist toilet..Bush didn't even slow down the flush, but it is spinning down the same..and Obie will make it spin faster...Did I mention the gas and carbon tax cooming to a bill for you?

   Posted by JOMAMMA

   war?

   what war?

   step into the future, JM........

   Posted by frosty zoom at 05/20/2008 @ 9:32pm

10. Nothing really to add except I repeat from the previous Kennedy thread...

    We are praying for Senator Kennedy, his family, and the doctors who taking care of him.

    there is no room for politics in events like this.

    Posted by lvliberty1 at 05/20/2008 @ 10:00pm

11. RE: Ted ...

    Uncle Ted is no Uncle Sam, which is to say he a good man. Lately, however, uncle Ted becomes more and more out-of-touch. And, ask yourselves, after almost half a century of empty oratory what achievemnts could the man claim? Strikingly, nil.

    Posted by HelenDAO at 05/20/2008 @ 10:49pm

12. "Well, now, let's be kind to ol' Teddy just a little. Without costing the MA taxpayers anything, he was able to keep offshore Martha' Vinyard free of wind mills....a major source of visual pollution to your average MA taxpayer who spend their days sailing!"

    Posted by HAPPY3 at 05/20/2008

    HAPPY, the folks on Martha's Vinyard are a bunch of NIMBYs. Besides, they're more into reaping the benefits and not the costs.

    Posted by ACook at 05/20/2008 @ 11:30pm

13. Those posts disparaging Ted Kennedy now that it has emerged that he has a malignant brain tumor are disgusting.

    Should the man have been subjected to more rigorous investigation and prosecuted if indicated for Chappaquiddick (?sp) ? Without question.

    Guess what, though folks. We are all flawed human beings; the question is whether we have the ability to raise ourselves above those flaws and still make the world a better place by our passage through it, or if we cannot do so that matters.

    Imagine if it was GWB that had the malignant tumor rotting a hole in his brain; could it honestly be said that that man has risen as far above his flaws and made the world a better place? Would the level of invective be any less - probably not, but the howling of the right would be at fever pitch.

    What would be nice is if the cheap shot takers would STFU and allow Senator Kennedy and his family to deal with this illness in his/their own way, whatever that might be.

    Posted by skeletonman at 05/21/2008 @ 07:44am

14. MAASCH, are the Dems so ideological that they're suicidally stupid?

    Or do you believe they can "raise taxes through the roof and crash the economy"....and somehow survive the next election cycle?

    Posted by Mask at 05/20/2008

    The Dems do not see the world as a growing pie, they see a glass half full constantly...these are people have a right top you too large a wallet....and the rich have screwed them out of a slice of the stagnant pie, rather than a growing pie..

    Yes, they will pass all the above, and when the economy starts to falter will simply blame Bush..years after he is out of office...

    Posted by JOMAMMA at 05/21/2008 @ 07:52am

15. The Dems do not see the world as a growing pie, they see a glass half full constantly...these are people have a right top you too large a wallet....and the rich have screwed them out of a slice of the stagnant pie, rather than a growing pie..

    Yes, they will pass all the above, and when the economy starts to falter will simply blame Bush..years after he is out of office...

    Posted by JOMAMMA at 05/21/2008

    Even if you are correct about an ever-expanding pie, you haven't explained why the highest income earners are entitled to a government handout (the Shrub tax cuts) while we charge 2 wars on Visa, can't otherwise pay our bills, much less consider a safety net for those at the opposite end of the economic pool.

    Mind you, this is coming from a guy who paid more in federal tax last year than the average household income nationally in the US. I don't get uptight about taxes by and large, it's the price of living in our society; the only part of that that I begrudge and would love to withhold are those portions that pay the salaries of Bush, Cheney, Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Thomas and the sundry other neocon crumb-bums in the executive branch.

    Posted by skeletonman at 05/21/2008 @ 08:31am

16. Skel,

    My point is you do not mind paying taxes, and frankly, neither do I..I just do not like the form or method they use.. I undrstand about the amnount you pay in taxes...yuou might want to change tax accountants...and in a deeper sesne..

    I do not take the premise that by letting YOU keep more of your nown money is a tax break...I am not in the camp that by YOU keeping the fruits of YOUR labors is a govt hand out..in fact you are the one handing out the cash...My freind pays $250,00 EACH QUARTER FOR ESTIMATES!!!

    He must be greedy.

    Posted by JOMAMMA at 05/21/2008 @ 08:37am

17. Yes, they will pass all the above, and when the economy starts to falter will simply blame Bush..years after he is out of office...---Posted by JOMAMMA at 05/21/2008

    JOHN, you're losing your mind in an attempt to hold onto your ideology.

    You REALLY think that Democrats can "crash the economy through massive tax hikes on the middle class"....and "get away" with blaming it on Bush?!?!??

    How about this? They're not stupid and they kind of like holding onto their jobs (or less cynically, they actually care about the country)...

    and they're not going to impose some massive tax hike and try to create a "New New Deal" (a disappointment to Ms vanden Heuvel and others)...

    and they'll simply tax the top 1% (as Clinton did in 1993), reduce the deficit, put out a FEW new programs but mostly just fully fund the ones out there, and when Repubs (like you) scream "They raised taxes SKY HIGH!" come 2010, 2012....they'll say...

    "Okay, voters, if your taxes went up under us...vote us out of office...otherwise the GOP is lying their ass off"

    and let the chips fall where they may?

    Or again, do you REALLY think the Dems (a cross-section from Ben Nelson to Bernie Sanders at that) are sooooooooooo ideological and naive (that they think they can blame Bush and get away with it)....that they're going to shoot themselves in the CHEST (not just foot) and GIVE 2012 to the Republicans???

    really????

    Posted by Mask at 05/21/2008 @ 08:55am

18. "and they'll simply tax the top 1% (as Clinton did in 1993), reduce the deficit, put out a FEW new programs but mostly just fully fund the ones out there"

    Posted by Mask at 05/21/2008

    Excuse me, but, which programs did the dems fully fund under the Clinton Administration? As I recall, the tax on the "top 1%" did nothing for the country as a whole, however, he did give us the Telecom Reform Act, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (which raised income tax rates; income tax, top rate: 39.6% for individuals and corporate tax 35%), Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, the Iraq Liberation Act, and NAFTA, just to name a few.

    Posted by ACook at 05/21/2008 @ 09:54am

19. Posted by ACook at 05/21/2008

    "fully fund" in the sense of not spending us further into deficits.

    You might recall we had balanced even SURPLUS budgets back then.

    Hint...here's where you say "Thanks to Newt Gingrich!!!!"

    Posted by Mask at 05/21/2008 @ 12:04pm

20. Oh please, tell me J, what has the Senator done other than enrich himself at the expense of the MA taxpayers?

    Posted by ACook at 05/20/2008 | ignore this person | warn it

    What?! How has he enriched himself one dime? One dime? You righties do love to project, don't you? The Bushes, Cheney, Cunningham, all of these people use government to enrich themselves with money, power for its own sake, or both, so you project that thievery onto everyone. So tell me what Ted did to enrich himself. The man has represented the interests of the powerless, in terms of labor, minimum wage, health insurance portability (ever hear of Kennedy-Kassebaum?), and just generally doing his damnedest to keep the bastards who've ruined this country from doing more damage than they've already done. You're paying $4 a gallon for gas, and not just in your gas tank, but in the cost of food and everything else you buy. You were paying about $1.80 when the oil industry seized this government in 2001. So tell me, when, where and how has Ted Kennedy enriched himself at taxpayer expense?

    Posted by jmusolino at 05/21/2008 @ 1:04pm

21. With some rare exceptions, it is not socially acceptable to speak disparagingly about people who are sick or who have recently died. So, for some, swallow that bitterness for the time being. There will be time for invective later.

    Posted by jsens at 05/21/2008 @ 1:09pm

22. So tell me, when, where and how has Ted Kennedy enriched himself at taxpayer expense?----Posted by jmusolino at 05/21/2008

    Our beloved ACOOK is a full on subscriber to the idea of ...

    "truthiness"

    Posted by Mask at 05/21/2008 @ 1:14pm

23. Who knows? – he might have years more in the senate and add great things to his record.

    As far as the opposition idiotic nonsense is concerned it just makes me more passionate about electing a Democrat for President.

    However – you write the same sentimental nonsense about 'beating' cancer. Please don't continue this blaming people for their own illnesses by insinuating that those who recover 'fought' a better fight and those who don't survive did not 'fight' hard enough. Survival is about the type of tumor, how advanced, excellent medical treatment and just plain luck. Tell it like it is – a serious illness that we all want Senator Kennedy to survive and continue to serve his country as he as always done. I wish him the best possible.

    Posted by Azul at 05/21/2008 @ 1:35pm

24. Posted by JOMAMMA at 05/21/2008

    Not that any of this is appropriate to this thread, but I do find the following points interesting.

    1. The U.S. deficit is at a record high. It will be almost double what Bush started with when he leaves office.

    2. It took Bush until 2005 to get the same reciepts as Clinton did in his last year in office. Why? Tax cuts.

    3. It took Bush 2 years to erase the budget surplus.

    4. The deficit has increased every single year since 1957.

    5. Most of that deficit is a function of military spending on Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and the countless "police actions" and all the research and development necessary to create military capability.

    Yet, in light of these facts and the fact that trust fund receipts have been combined with tax receipts to make military spending look smaller and social spending bigger - despite the fact that one is funded seperately and the other is all expense - you want to whine about social spending? Have yo ulost your friggin' mind? You think wasting money on military actions so that "the pie" can be given to the military and connected friends and to stave off spending for social programs and the poor isn't going to come back to haunt you one day? Or do you think you will make the escape to some despoting country before the "chickens come home to roost"?

    Nor does it take into consideration the issue of who gets what percentage of this ever expanding pie. That is determined by something called the Gini coefficient. A figure that increased more than 4% from 1995-2005 and puts our figure at 45 right up there with China, Iran, Jamaica, etc.

    Other developed countries? Canada, 32.1; Germany, 28; France, 28; United Kingdom, 34; Japan 38. You see a pattern here? Because I sure do.

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2008/pdf/hist.pdf

    https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2172. html

    Posted by srjenkins at 05/21/2008 @ 1:56pm

25. Yes, they will pass all the above, and when the economy starts to falter will simply blame Bush..years after he is out of office...

    Posted by JOMAMMA at 05/21/2008

    Funny because this is exactly what you guys are doing with Clinton. Instead of saying the faltering economy is Bushes fault you are saying he just inherited a bad economy.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/21/2008 @ 4:17pm

26. Posted by HAPPY3 at 05/21/2008

    I see the big five did not enjoy being in front of the Senate committee today, and the Senators were not too HAPPY with the profits they are reporting. It did not go well.

    Posted by Benchrest at 05/21/2008 @ 4:43pm

27. <i>Posted by lvliberty1 at 05/20/2008 </i>

    Hear hear

    Posted by Thrawn at 05/21/2008 @ 8:53pm