Republicans & Conservatives: Archives

It is indeed repugnantcan through and through.

We don’t “elect parties”, Matthew. We elect individuals. I expect those individuals to act in accordance with the rules that we have laid out for them (in the Constitution, for example). In short, I expect them to do their jobs, and not someone else’s.

I’m not bothered that the Republicans saw political value in this. I’m bothered that they put their party interests above doing their jobs. They were not elected to take the place of Florida judges. They were elected to make laws regarding federal issues.

Despite what my personal feelings are in this case (for the record, I am leaning towards siding with the parents), this decision should ultimately fall in the hands of Terri Schiavo and her family. As the family was unable to make the decision themselves, the state courts had to settle the issue — WHICH THEY DID. There is no need for the federal government to be involved.

Of course, as easy as it is to attack the Republicans over this, 47 Democrats in the House voted for it, too. Political grandstanding isn’t limited to one side of the aisle or the other.

Personally, I applaud the 5 Republican congressmen who ignored party pressure and voted to let the state do its job. Perhaps we can count on them to do theirs.

What claims to be a full copy of the GOP’s memo is here:

http://dcinsidescoop.blogspot.com/2005/03/exclusive-gops-schiavo-talking-points.html

I agree that “it is a little bit silly to be upset that a political party acts in a strategically partisan fashion”, but on the other hand, it’s not like Congress is actually doing their job. We’re seeing 1000’s of pages worth of omnibus budget bills rushed thru at the last minute with riders that nobody will even acknowledge putting in, and on the other hand, Congress is grandstanding in in the interests of “exciting the pro-life base”, and investigating not its own ethical problems, but those of major league baseball.

It’s not government, it’s more of a government-themed reality show.

Your hypothetical about Democrats and Labor law is a strawman argument. I think rather the democrats would use an individual labor dispute to rally support for labor law reform in general.

But that’s just a hypothetical. This really happened. And what I wonder about is why the decision was made to have Congress act against the judiciary? Why didn’t the pressure from the “Right to Life” movement really come down hard on the Florida Legislature? Or the Governor of Florida? Could it be because they are controlled by Republicans? Why didn’t Florida pass a law making Schiavo a “ward of the state” and pass control of her medical care to the (Republican controlled) Florida state government? That would have worked 100% — even if it later went to court. I can see the protesters outside a state hospital right now. But the people behind this effort won’t go that route because then it is only “right to life” Republicans they are protesting against.

I see this entire Schiavo episode as a set up to fail so that the “Christian Right” can blame the “Liberal judges” when Schiavo dies (it won’t matter what the judge’s politics are: all judges who make “anti-life” decisions are “liberal.”) Like so many other issues taken up by fundmentalist Christians, they have to have a left-wing boogeyman to blame the problem on.

I do not think that this is justified, personally. I believe it is immoral to highlight this specific family tragedy for purposes of political gain in the upcoming elections. Good government is based on political parties married to ideals and values. The congress is supposed to be a deliberative body, not a partisan stage.

What about Sun Hudson, a 6-month-old infant with a fatal congenital condition. His mother wanted him kept alive as long as possible, but the hospital didn’t want to pay for the continuing care. Just last week, the hospital overruled the penniless mother, removed his feeding tube, and he died.

The hospital’s action was perfectly legal, under the Texas Futile Care Law, which allows the termination of life if there is no hope of improvement, even if the family objects. The law was signed by George W. Bush when he was governor of Texas.

Suddenly human life is worth so much that its worth leaving the Crawford ranch for, but the same is not the case for the aftermath of the tsunami. Not only that but Bush offered an initial $30mil in relief aid - people, we spend that much in Iraq before breakfast. Gee, I wonder if this is a political football?

This is political football (as Paul said), which is why GOP’s memos are quite possibly more important than Terri Schiavo’s life itself.

The heart of this issue is that Terri Schiavo’s “life” is being used as a tool for political gain. Now, normally I would have no objections to this, except that in this instance there was an overstepping of boundaries by interfering with the State’s decision. Next time, when they feel like forwarding their political careers the Senators should just start mud-slinging campaigns.

William:

Are you seriously quoting a blog site to be the truth? It even states, ?it is rumored? to be from Santorum?s office. That really sounds like unbiased truth.

SKComm:

Could explain to me, what is a ?fundamentalist Christian?? I hear that word thrown around, but what is it? It sounds like a desease.

Rob said, ?I’m not bothered that the Republicans saw political value in this. I’m bothered that they put their party interests above doing their jobs. They were not elected to take the place of Florida judges. They were elected to make laws regarding federal issues.?

From what I understand, the Florida House & Senate are taking up the same thing tonight. Are they also not elected to take the place Florida judges? Wouldn?t you consider the Florida lawmakers imposing their will on the judges? Don?t lawmakers have better things to do?

Since dogs in the state get more humane treatment than Terri Schiavo, perhaps it would have been better to have the Florida State Police just put her out of her misery with a bullet. I’m sure that would please everyone: her husband, the judges, & all the compassionate people. Most of you seem to be compassionate toward Terri & her family, at least that is what you say.

Blaine, we don’t want to waste precious bullet money. Starvation is OBVIOUSLY a better route.

The fact that a political party saw a political advantage in intervening in the Schiavo case is not inherently bad…

Yes, it is. It’s utterly shameful. To exploit that family’s personal tragedy for political gain is shameful.

Blaine wrote:

Since dogs in the state get more humane treatment than Terri Schiavo, perhaps it would have been better to have the Florida State Police just put her out of her misery with a bullet. I’m sure that would please everyone: her husband, the judges, & all the compassionate people. Most of you seem to be compassionate toward Terri & her family, at least that is what you say.

I for one, am glad there is such petty, partisan bile like this being expressed openly by the Right, because it cements the image and negative opinion a majority of Americans now have of Bush and the Republicans, according to the latest polls.

I can argue the basic Conservative tenets violated here - against government intrusion, the right to privacy, respect for state’s rights - but I know I’d never get a defense on point, in this Red column thread. I can express outrage over bloggers from the Right now calling Democrats ‘killers’, only to find commenters here distancing themselves instead. I can point out the blatant distortions about Shiavio’s documented medical condition advanced by Bill Frist, Tom DeLay and the Conservative media, only to read a response of unsubstantiated lies presently circulating the Conservative Echo Chamber as the truth.

However, the Republicans will count this as a victory, because it pleased and energized their pro-Life base. Also good timing, after the RNC warned they could seriously lose their 32 seat margin in the House, come the 2006 Mid Terms.

And, they seriously believed this helps?

Interesting article,

Bush said he stepped into the Schiavo case because the United States should have “a presumption in favor of life,” but there were 152 executions in Texas during his administration, including some in which the convict’s guilt was in doubt.

Congress passing laws for individual cases while ignoring similar cases for others undermines the foundation of our democracy as a nation of laws, not of men. In fact, it moves us toward a nation of men and away from a nation of laws to be applied equally and fairly for all.

The Republicans simply got this one very, very wrong, on ethical grounds, governance grounds, and on the grounds of the intent of the Constitution of these United States.

For those who want to charge there were Democrats voting with the Republicans - you are quite right. Though a majority of Republicans voted for it, while a majority of Democrats did not. Not that that says much about either party, just the wisdom of the men and women who voted wisely or not on this issue.

The Evangelical Vote is more important than nebulous Constitutional Issues about Separation of Powers.

Obtaining Info on the War on Terror is more important than theoretical Human Rights and Internatonal Law.

The Wishes of the US are more important than the worthless UN Mandates.

Face it. These are the Values of the Conservatives today. Morality is just a word. Ethics is just a concept. Winning is all.

This seems to be an issue where, no matter what the Congress did, it would be wrong.

Some of the politicians who did not vote also did so for political purposes.

If we go by the law - the husband has the legal right to make this decision. Period.
If you think it is right or wrong, that is your own personal opinion, and when you have to make a decision like this …. all my best to you.
Maybe he should have been given the right to divorce her (Can’t do that either.) - so he could refuse to do it and then ‘pull the plug’.
Did the parents not fight for ‘custody’? I know they sent letters to the husband stating they would like to take responsibilty.

As for the doctors’ findings - it’s funny how people can find doctors to side with them no matter what a case is. The doctors the parents hired sided with them - the husbands with him - the court’s doctor with the husband.

It will always be that someone has to have the legal right to make the final decision.
It is the husband in this case and he should be allowed to make it without the rest of the country sticking their noses in it.
I don’t know how anyone can claim there was not due process.

From an article in today’s (3/23) New York Times:

” ‘Judge Whittemore has engaged in a gross abuse of judicial power,’ said Burke J. Balch of the National Right to Life Committee.”

Here’s what’s going to happen in the next couple of weeks:

1. Various court actions will go nowhere.
2. Schiavo dies
3. Since this is now a national issue, various right-wing pundits go on National television putting the blame for Schiavo’s death on Liberal Judges who refuse to take pro-life positions.
4. None of these right-wing pundits will blame:
a) The governor of Florida (a Republican) or
b) the Florida Legislature (Republican controlled)
Both of which could have acted long ago to save this woman’s life. The above quotation is just the first volley you will hear from the “Christian Right.”

I think it’s interesting that a woman who is basically dead is all over the news and web is getting all this attention and the kid who killed 9 people is being over shadowed. 10,000 cameras outside a hospice filled with dieing people. Another thing if the christians do believe Terri is one of God’s loved creations; why not let her go to the god that loves her? Operation Save America tried to give her a cup of water. The individuals were arrested who trespassed in their attempt to give her water. A preacher who is a representative for OSA said “the US government has ruled against this book (the bible)”; is it just me or do we have a seperation of church and state.

I have a question about morality; how much of the morality of the United States should be based on the Bible? The individual voters in America can have individual views about what should be done and can bring God/Jesus into their decision. But, should a politcian? We have freedom of religion in this country and religious affiliation shouldn’t play a part in the election process but, it does. The reasoning behind voting for a person based on religious affiliation being; if the person your voting for is of the same faith, they have the same values and morals. How much of America’s values should be religious based?

We as Americans live in a free country governed by laws created by man. Yet, if we are the minority we may be forced to follow the laws created by God. Which is in confliction with our freedom of religion. If we have leaders who pray to god before they make a decision, is it them or God making the decision? Religion will then be playing a role in the government, and creating and enforcing laws on a supposed free society. Is this right or, did the supreme court do the right thing?

This case should have an influence on cases similar to it in the future. I think it’s great that it’s in the open. Should the religious conservatives decide your fate or, should your legal guardian/husband? Who would know better, some guy who read about you in the newspaper or the love of your life? Her parents don’t want her to die because they think she can understand them and can respond/recover. But, her parents would think that if all she could do is blink. The parents have been going to see her for 15 years. This woman has laid in a bed for 15 years unable to do anything for herself. What brain processes does this woman possess? What kind of a life will she have? Are the parents saving her life for her or are they saving her life for them?

Chad, wasn’t it 10 people that got killed? You are talking about the recent Redlake shootings right? (They happened in my state).

Although it was a rhetorical question, I’ll answer your question, “What brain processes does this woman possess?”

Her limbic system (primitive reactionary) and spinal cord are still functional. Other than that, nada.

By the way, not to get too off topic…

but do people have any idea whats going on in the Congo? Our we serious about preserving human life or winning elections?

Paul, if by “we” you mean people, we are interested in preserving human life. If by “we” you mean politicians, we are only interested in preserving human life insofar as it helps us politically. Hah, even I knew that silly!

This was purely a legal issue that would be best decided in the courts and not the congress.

Have you seen this from Power Line?

A Fishy Story gets Fishier

+Photi