MyDD :: To the America First Party they go...

To the America First Party they go...

by Jerome Armstrong, Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 10:53:25 PM EST

Bush Appointees Help Murder Terri Schiavo
GOP Cannot Be Trusted on Life

I've been keeping an eye out on the 11% "culture of lifers" at freeperville that the Bush brothers have lost over this little GOP catastrophe. The MSM and the Republican bloggers might be ignoring it, but the online theocons are having a bit of an identity crisis. No longer is the Republican Party seen as religion, and so, where the online thecon activists will settle remains in question:

To be sure, the majority of them will stay in the Republican Party (though I predict a 'sitting on their hands' problem for the GOP in '06), but not the hardcore activist types. They want to stay involved in politics. It's to places like America First Party is where they are headed. Their platform is here, for the curious.

Tags: 3rd Parties (all tags)

Permalink :: 51 Comments :: Post a Comment

Reminds me (none / 0)

Of the Texas state constitution.

by rafadex on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 11:19:53 PM EST

What about the anti-war platform? (none / 0)

Seems to me that the Radical Religionists I've run across (on the internets, thank Shiva) have an almost unholy commitment to the war.

Do you think it's just the byproduct of their formerly pristine Bush worship, and so easily jettisoned?

I must say, I find that picture seriously creepy.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

by boadicea on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 11:42:10 PM EST

Constitution Party (3.00 / 1)

And Judge Roy Moore 2008. There's always a place for people in either party who feel sufficiently used or taken for granted to run.

Oh, here's part of the preamble to their platform:

The Constitution Party gratefully acknowledges the blessing of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ as Creator, Preserver and Ruler of the Universe and of these United States. We hereby appeal to Him for mercy, aid, comfort, guidance and the protection of His Providence as we work to restore and preserve these United States.

This great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been and are afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here.

The goal of the Constitution Party is to restore American jurisprudence to its Biblical foundations and to limit the federal government to its Constitutional boundaries.

by tparty on Wed Mar 30, 2005 at 11:55:59 PM EST

Re: Constitution Party (none / 0)

i was going to recommend they flee to the constitution party as well. buncha wingnuts, those folks are. the theocons would feel right at home.

Visit us at TexasKAOS, where we're taking Texas back!

by annatopia on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 12:02:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Constitution Party (none / 0)

Well they got 4% in the PA Senate Race because of the Wingnuts hatred of Specter.

Councilman Bill Painter

by Painter2004 on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 07:35:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Schiavo's coma - caused by Bulimia? (none / 0)

Is this true?

That she starved herself into this coma?

by ultraworld on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 12:55:10 AM EST

Not a 'coma'... (none / 0)

First off it isn't a true 'coma'... in a 'coma' the brain lives but is unconscious... she had a loss of blood to the brain and the top part - the cerebrum - pretty much died off from a lack of oxygen ... it doesn't take long... afterward the dead tissue 'was 'digested' by the body... only fluid remains where the normal 'gray matter' used to be...

But 'yes' it appears her eating disorder might have played a role in creating electrolyte imbalances that caused the heart failure.

by dryfly on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 01:17:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

from what i've read, yes (none / 0)

the lawsuit won by michael on terri's behalf was based on the fact that her doctors did not diagnose her as bulimic prior to her heart attack, which caused the oxygen shut off to her brain, which in turn caused the PVS.

i guess people are hesitant to discuss the circumstances which led to terri's PVS. i would imagine that someone who was bulimic wouldn't want their shell of a body paraded all over tv for the world to see.

Visit us at TexasKAOS, where we're taking Texas back!

by annatopia on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 01:59:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: and lack of potassium (none / 0)

affected her heart. So rarely mentioned.

I know of one person passionate about the feeding tube issue who insisted that her condition was because of a car accident . . . when you wish to willfully disregard the facts ...

by Maven on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 01:49:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: and lack of potassium (none / 0)

i heard reports of people attempting to bypass security with crackers and bottles of water to "feed" her.

really? you're that passionate about an issue about which you obviously know nothing.

by doinkicarus on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 01:57:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I wish you were right (none / 0)

but sadly, this is cheap talk and hand-wringing from the wingnuts. I don't really think these people will desert the GOP in 2006 any more than I think the self-styled "small government conservatives" who are supposedly horrified by the GOP's intervention in this matter will desert the party. When push comes to shove, they will fall in line.

John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."

by desmoinesdem on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 01:00:10 AM EST

Re: I wish you were right (none / 0)

I don't know... They may not leave the party but I think the sitting on their hands is a real possibility. Affecting their turnout is almost as good as them losing people.

http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!

by yitbos96bb on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 10:09:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wishful Thinking.... (none / 0)

I don't think too many Republicans are going to jump ship over this. Short term anger, combined with a long stretch before 2006.

I very much agree with this -- (I laid out my thoughts here) -- and also think that we have to be very careful about indulging in wishful thinking at this point, since it could put us in a vulnerable position ourselves.

There are indeed, at this moment, some fractures in the Republican coalition, and it would indeed be to our benefit to exploit them as best we can, but we're not in the best of positions to do that in regards to the religious right (who are the disaffected party here), and the mainstream moderate Republicans (with a couple of exceptions) haven't shown anything but concern for their party -- no signs, in other words, of their perhaps being interested in jumping ship.

I continue to think that we can't sit back and wait for the right to fall apart, we have to be proactive about things and give it a push, but I don't see a lot of activity in that respect. I think we're missing an opportunity, and the net result is going to be zilch.

unfutz

by Ed Fitzgerald on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 03:33:23 AM EST

Re: Wishful Thinking.... (none / 0)

I think the ultimate thing for short term is convincing the moderates that to save their party they need to not vote or jump ship and take back control. Their short term defections will help them rid the party of the Theocons on a longer term basis.

http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!

by yitbos96bb on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 10:13:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Lets run the numbers (none / 0)

1. 2/3 of the world have sustained environmental
damage so far reaching, the implications are
dire

2. Out of 37 tigers in the last great tiger reserve
- sirikar - a full 19 simply disappeared last
year. The tiger became totally extinct in 20%
of its reserves, leaving no pug marks in
many cases, in almost half of the other ones.

The snows of kilimanjaro melted off and disappeared.
The PGA tour played the TPC two rounds on a

Tuesday morning for the first time in 25 years

5. Savannah, Georgia experienced their coldest
St. Pattys day in 45 years

6. The siberian polar bear population woke up, in December, and started giving birth as if it were
spring.

2004 was recorded as the warmest year in human history.
2005 , February, is now privately but very, very definitely confirmed as the point in which

peak oil production has been passed - the remaining oil in the ground is much more difficult
and expensive to get out of th eground.

9. Since 2000, mercury levels in many states have risen nearly 400%. Autism in america, curiously enough, has risen the same amount. Parents note well: Autism costs, on average, 40,000.00$ a
year. If you spot it in your kids please take
my advice and invest some extra time NOW.
Especially young boys. Thanks.

-=-

To feel happy about the performance of either
party right now - NEITHER of which have
even touched ONE of these issues as a plank
is absurd. Kerry, for example, in the 04 debates -
caved so immensely when Bush said in the debate
(the third one I believe..) " I guess I'm just a
steward of the environment" - Kerry sucked up
to the same energy industry lobbyists.
He could have pole-axed bush then and there.
Why did he not?

Why are we so excited about social security?
Bush will simply enact his plan
by Executive order.

What about the war in Iraq?
It will go on despite anything we say.

How about Supreme court appointments
and the nuclear option. Please look carefully.
If the house and senate go for the nuclear
option - what can you as a voter, do
to change it.

NOTHING. ZERO.

Realize your own situation in this whole
matter. Just because you can sit on
your arse and think that the people
who support Terri are right wing
nut jobs, doesn't mean that you should
ignore the very real lessons that you,
as a voter, alone, should take away.

1. Congress drives for show, but putts for dough.
If you're not on the green, you don't score
with them.

2. Grandstanding and political theatre are
used complicit to media coverage. Not
one single thing would be happening if
the GOP didn't cover the media.

3. Newspapers and television go out of their
way to ignore boycotts, and grassroots action -
they are covering only as much of
terrisfight.org as they think befits the
sick spectacle of a country watching a woman
die.

Folks, believe me. now is the time.
China will eclipse america - ONLY if the american
electorate releases their grasp on power.
Our decline in this past 20 years has been
primarily one of delegating our power
as voters, and participants - to
lobbyists and corporations.

And corporations say "its cheaper in CHINA"

soooo..

1. Boycott all gas stations that import foreign
oil. Generally, you can buy from Conoco,
Citgo, BP, Hess. Two others. Those guys
are domestic.

2. Unite with the christian grassroots. Believe
me, I've read the bible and there's nothing
in there that says republicanism is a better
way to govern by Caiphus' will, than democracy.
Far from it - without Caiphus (a member of
the religious ruling sect elite) whipping
the crowd up to frenzy - the vile murderer
barrabas would have been in prison, and
christ would have never been crucified.
Republicanism (the rule by the elite)
killed christ. Just as surely as Tom Delay
killed his own father, ripping the feeding
tube right out of his mouth.

3. Take back our country. Dean, surely, is
being corrupted right now in the halls
of power. Carville and the rest of the
Georgetown parlor boys are telling him
all kinds of neat ideas about how to
win an election, clinton style. Let me be
clear: the governor of montana won
his seat in 04 as a democrat, gun wielding,
christian and utterly democratic.

4. Overthrow the liberal elite. Elitism is
holding both parties back. Democracy
should be hot, and raw. Not cool and
controlled.

5. Turn off your Cable TV. Cable TV has become
the primary means of infotainment - news,
a scourge upon america itself. Get a
copy of the newspaper instead, and buy
dvd's or go rent them cheaply. You'll
save 50.00 bucks a month.

6. Calculate your own greenhouse situation -
how much do you drive, etc. and then plant
trees. Make a conscious effort to correct
your own problem.

Works of the world! Unite!! >:)

by turnerbroadcasting on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 05:16:49 AM EST

Re: Lets run the numbers (3.00 / 1)

The oil thing is mostly bougus...

http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/saudigas.asp

Get your facts straight before posting...

--sam

p.s. not meant as a slam.... just sayin'...

by samizdat on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 10:45:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Let me get this straight... (none / 0)

In response to a post about conservatives fleeing to a 3rd party, you post a barely coherent rant that reads something like...

incoherent point 1) the environment's going to shit (which may be correlated with Autism, which is expensive) and our 2-party system sucks because both parties are not addressing this problem (and to prove that point, you give the following evidence: George Bush and John Kerry had a bad exchange in a debate, once).

point 2) Social Security and the War in Iraq are going to hell in a hand basket, and we're screwed as far as Supreme Court appointments... and there's nothing you can do about it.

point 3) Just because you think Terri supporters are weird, there are three lessons to be learned from this: 1) Congressmen like to golf. 2) Something about the GOP covering the media which I don't understand 3)Newspapers and T.V. don't boycott gasoline like you think they should, and they cover Terri Schiavo because that's what we want to hear about.

SOOOOO...

If we don't watch out, China's going to have more power than us if we don't

boycott gasoline.
watch out for people like Tom Delay, who would have killed Jesus if he had the chance.
realize that Howard Dean is being advised by James Carville (but let me be clear, the Montana governor is conservative).
don't be an elitist
cancel your cable subscription and rent dvd movies
if you drive a car, plant trees.

WHAT IN THE FLYING FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!?!?!? Please don't write while on acid.

Invest in nature

by NCDem on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 05:27:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

So much for good posts... (none / 0)

and the above was meant as a slam...

Invest in nature

by NCDem on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 05:29:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

If this happens, I wouldn't go gloating. (2.00 / 1)

If wingnuts start fleeing to the Constitution and America First Parties and Republicans start taking steps to suppress said parties, we should be very careful about trying to make hay of it. They might throw the things we've done to Ralph Nader and the Greens at us, and not all of those things were entirely ethical.

by craverguy on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 05:28:05 AM EST

Lets define Judicial Activism then (none / 0)

Judicial Activism is bringing the federal government
down against the explicit barriers set up
by the constitution that protect you and
me from the fed.

The only - and I mean only judge that would
have sided with Terri Schiavo would
have been a judicial activist. Period.
Husband is legal guardian. Finding of
fact that she said not to turn her life
into a veggie tale... all kinds of stuff.

Congress totally overstepped their bound.

But the worst part wasn't that they did
that, I'm saying - the worst thing was -
they did it in a crude, crass and grandstanding
manner. Tom Delay pulled the plug on his own
father.

Mark Shields wrote an excellent article called
the Democrat's 'big tent'. quote marks included.

read it here:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/03/22/big.tent/index.html

and with excerpt rights granted by the
great US constitution, I'm posting just
a snippet to help make my point (and
steer you to his column too)

"The truth is that on the abortion issue, the pro-life GOP has been much more of a "big tent" than the "liberal" Democrats who have insisted upon orthodoxy from convention speakers.

Just look at the 2004 New York convention. where coveted, prime-time spots were granted to the pro-choice, pro-gay-rights governor of California and the pro-gay-rights, pro-choice and pro-gun-control former mayor of New York City. Did the Democrats in Boston hear anybody who was even mildly pro-life? Not on your life."

BTW chris is going to love that article
by shields coz its mostly about pennsylvania.

Enjoy.

by turnerbroadcasting on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 08:55:38 AM EST

Re: Lets define Judicial Activism then (none / 0)

I was pretty sure that judges were supposed to overturn laws and declare their (un)constitutionality, and all that mumbo-jumbo, withtout which we would be subject to the whims of the legislature with no recourse whatsoever.

seems like the only time anyone complains about "judicial activism" is when the judges rule in one's opponents' favor.

without judicial activism, they would merely be puppets of the legislature and executive branches.

like I said, I'm pretty sure I read that in the Federalist papers, but feel free to correct me if I'm mistaken.

(I'm not.)

by doinkicarus on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 10:11:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Another idiotic post... (none / 0)

allow me to translate...

judicial activism is bringing America down.
I post this as a direct quote, because I can't translate it... because it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever...

"The only - and I mean only judge that would
have sided with Terri Schiavo would
have been a judicial activist. Period.
Husband is legal guardian. Finding of
fact that she said not to turn her life
into a veggie tale... all kinds of stuff."
From what I can tell, he thinks the judges made the right decision??? (which conflicts with point "1")... somebody help me...

therefore... Congress was out of line, especially because Tom Delay pulled the plug on his own father...

all the rest of the stuff means...
"Democrats don't tolerate pro-lifers all that well." which relates to the first part of the post somehow, I'm sure.

---------
Turner... I can assure you Chris never found that diamond (Mark Shields' article) in the rough (your incoherrent blatherings).

Invest in nature

by NCDem on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 05:42:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The new Know-nothings (3.00 / 2)

I find it particularly appropriate that their logo is a man with a gun trampling the flag:

by Rabid Child on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 09:18:56 AM EST

Re: The new Know-nothings (none / 0)

ROTFLMAO

http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!

by yitbos96bb on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 10:15:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The new Know-nothings (none / 0)

That's not a flag. That's waves of Jesus's blood.

Invest in nature

by NCDem on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 04:51:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Play muffled drums. Terri Schiavo is dead. (none / 0)

Its really sad, if you ask me.
She was a very beautiful young lady.

:~(

by turnerbroadcasting on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 10:00:26 AM EST

Re: Play muffled drums. Terri Schiavo is dead. (none / 0)

Yes, too bad the doctors didn't do a better job diagnosing her eating disorder, or the Husband and parents realizing she has a problem. (I have a feeling they did know on some level and subconsiously ignored it... Having lived through it with a family member, one tends to do that at times... It is sick and strange but we do act the ostrich in many of these situations) Then this whole fiasco would not have happened.

http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!

by yitbos96bb on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 10:18:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

hmmmmm.... (none / 0)

is it just me, or does "America First Party" sound overtly fascist. It kind of has the same ring to it as National Socialist Party?

doinkicarus
www.blamp.com

-you'll know what i mean when i punch you in the sac.

by doinkicarus on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 10:07:49 AM EST

Re: hmmmmm.... (none / 0)

Not just you. But while most of this stuff is pretty odious, it's interesting that there's a few of their planks I wouldn't mind seeing on a Democratic platform, including:

-banning imports created by child or slave labor
-pulling out of NAFTA, the WTO, and the IMF
-enforcing Congress' exclusive right to declare war

by Woodhouse on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 03:23:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wishful Thinking.... (none / 0)

Of course according to most polls, the majority feel he was justified in his decision and support it. But yes many people will call him that.

http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!

by yitbos96bb on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 10:11:24 AM EST

Re: Wishful Thinking.... (3.00 / 0)

"Missed a prime opportunity for a classy gesture - or at least a PR coup...but I am not really suprised, based on what I've read about him so far. He's already gotten what he wanted."

Now that I agree with you on 1000%. It sounded like on the news he got into an arguement with the brother and kicked the family out, but of course that is radio news so who the heck knows how accurate it was. But is was shitty that he didn't let them be by her side. I support the law, which gives the spouse the right to make these decisions. He chose his decision, based on what he felt she would want. I support those rights and really got angry when Jeb Bush interfered originally... that was despicable in my opinion, although I understand why he did... it was still wrong of the legislature and executive branches of state and federal to involve themselves in a legislative matter... I applaud the courts for NOT being activists on this case.

Now that being said, the guy got what he wanted and not allowing the parents to be at her side goes down as one of the most spiteful things I have heard in a long time. My mind might change if I hear a good reason why, but my personal opinion of Michael Schiavo is not a particularly high one.

http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!

by yitbos96bb on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 01:03:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Spite.... (3.00 / 1)

oh please. It was kindness beyond belief that he allowed them in at all in the last few months, after the lies and spite they've spewed about him on national TV and in the media and in various courts and legislatures . . . They exhibited more nastiness and vindictiveness than he ever showed toward them.

by Maven on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 01:52:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wishful Thinking.... (3.00 / 1)

They've reviled him publically, accused him of beating her, passively endorsed a bribe for him to release Terri's body to them and belittled his current relationship and his children in their quest to keep the feeding tube in.

Yet he's being "shitty" by wanting to have them out of the room at the end.

I think it was incredibly generous to allow them in after all they'd done to him.

And, don't think it's over. I'll bet dollars to donuts that the Schindlers will become the Culture of Breathing's poster children before summer.

They'll continue to vilify Michael. It's the price of admission to the show.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

by boadicea on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 03:21:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

huh? (3.00 / 1)

"We, The America First Party, wholeheartedly support 2nd Amendment rights as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and as given to us by Almighty God."

Which commandment was the right to bear arms?..i keep forgetting.

by srolle on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 10:24:17 AM EST

Re: huh? (3.00 / 1)

The 13th. It was on the slab of 5 that Mel Brooks... I mean Moses dropped.

http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!

by yitbos96bb on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 01:25:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It's only 3 months into this term (none / 0)

there is a lifetime of politics until the mid terms, and a genration until the presidential elections. Anything can happen, and probably will.

I hope that many start to see how they have been used, this fiasco cant help their cause, but i dont think it is enough for them to jump ship en masse. I am concerned about them being thrown more tidbits, like supreme court nominees, more abortion restriction legislation and letting churches beome political.

by Pounder on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 11:23:32 AM EST

Re: Wishful Thinking.... (3.00 / 1)

I am pro-euthanasia , pro choice and I think Terri should have been taken off the feeding tube. And even I had a hard time supporting the husband in this matter. While I don't fault him for his inclination to get her off the feeding tube, I think that he should have backed off once this thing was growing into a circus. I read what Terri said to him and even if you believe his account, there is nothing to imply that it was anything more than a casual thought based on a sincere belief that it is better to die than be a burden on society and your loved ones. Or if you take the Million Dollar Baby scenario, then be living a hellish existence. None of this applies in this case. Her parents don't believe its a burden. Someone volunteered a million dollars for Michael to back off. And Terri can't feel any pain or be depressed like the person in Million Dollar Baby. If Terri only mentioned this to her husband's family and not to her friends and birth family, I doubt she felt this strong about the issue that she would still want this to happen regardless of the rifts created between family members. There are issues I feel strong about that I would want to happen regardless of what anyone feels including my parents. Guess what, they know what they are. I would not casually mention it only after getting married to one side of the family. If I did, then I probably don't feel that strongly about it. There are exceptions of course. Maybe Terri would have wanted to go out this way regardless of the reactions. The thing is we don't know for sure how STRONG she felt about this issue even though there is no reason to doubt Michael that she preferred not to be on life support or a feeding tube.

Don't just dismiss people opposed to removing the feeding tube as nuts or you will bring liberalism the same undeserved reputation in the 90s when college feminists went about equating every frat drunken sex incident as date rape. I think both sides come off bad on this issue. The pro life nuts raving hysterically over how she is being starved when all medical accounts say she won't feel anything because of no brain activity. But then, you had the left wing side that will cry hoarse over some convict getting the death penalty and equate that with this. They ask the stupid question that if one values life, then why don't the prolifers protest the death penalty? I heard this too often in the last few weeks and it is a ridiculous analogy. It is possible to wish death upon criminals and be pro life to the innocent. Not everyone supporting the parents right to take care of the child when the husband wants to move on is a moron like Randall Terry. Maybe parents are clinging on to some faint hope that there could be a medical advance regenerating whatever is needed? I don't know what they are hoping for. It doesn't matter.

This thing that congress should not interfere is bullshit. We would be supporting it if it came down to supporting one of our issues. Let's not be hypocritical. It is true most of the politicians are interfering for the sake of politics. it is true the judges who ruled on this issue are from both parties. But it does not make it wrong to try to save a woman. Even if I am pro death penalty, I would want Congress to interfere in case judges shafted a death row accused who is actually innocent and are unwilling to give him a fair chance. Doctors have been wrong before. In this case, I personally believe there is no hope for Terri. But if the parents want to take care of her, and since some right wingers are willing to fund her care, who the hell is Michael Schiavo to stop that? Michael has kids with another woman and no kids with Terri. I hardly call that a lifelong bond. These days, husbands come and go, and parents stay parents. When it comes to these matters, I would side with neither the parents nor the husband arbitrarily. I would side with whichever side wants to take care of her and err on the side of hope.

If dems want to fight back, then they should be highlighting the fact that this is not a party related issue, this is a personal issue and the judges who ruled against Terri's parents were not all liberal. Some were conservative.

by Pravin on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 11:23:39 AM EST

Re: Wishful Thinking.... (none / 0)

It was a good post.

I still though will always be strongly against what the Florida State legislature did, which was a far worse thing than what the US congress did (which I was against too). I think the US congress was a political move for many of the people (some I think were sincere in there motives too), but all the bill did was allow the federal courts to review the case. I think it was bad policy but it was not nearly as bad as what they did in Florida, which was clearly a way to circumvent checks and balances that are at the heart of our government. Had the Florida law giving Bush the power to insert her tube applied to ALL patients in dispute, then it would be another matter, but that was not the case.

Ultimately, The legislatural role in this either on a Federal or State level should be to draft a bill that will prevent this from happening again OR make it a lot less likely. Maybe along the lines of if the patient can't communicate, there is no living will or power of attorney (not all states require these... mine (IL) does) and there is not proof one way or the other that the patient would prefer a particular course of action, then maybe error on the side of life. Or make it that the decision is always the spouse. I am not sure. but the job of the legislature is to write law, not circumvent the Judicial branches interpretation of said law.

I am sad a woman died, and maybe Michael should of backed off once the circus started. Of Course, it could also be said that the parents should have backed off. What did Terry want? We will never know for sure. The Courts interpreted the data available and made a decision based on the data. We hope it truly was what she wanted. It isn't a perfect system. But until the other branches fix it, it is the best one we have.

http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!

by yitbos96bb on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 01:18:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wishful Thinking.... (none / 0)

Great thoughts; earned you a 3 from me. But I disagree on one point: I think it's absolutely bullshit that Congress thought it fit to intervene, and I would have a problem with it even if it was an intervention to support something I believed in. The principle at stake is the separation of powers, and that rises above the personal circumstances at hand and the political issues in question. The Republican justices at the 11th Circuit saw this clearly, and, accordingly, decided against their own likely political biases with respect to the narrow issue of the case at hand. I think if the table were turned, a lot of Democrats would have seen it likewise.

Incidentally, for the same reason I'm also a staunch supporter of choice, but think that Roe v. Wade, while a convenient decision for our side, was not an exemplary piece of jurisprudence.

by Woodhouse on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 03:20:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wishful Thinking.... (none / 0)

At least you are consistent on the judicial intervention. I guess, when I think about it, a more prudent method would be for Congress to modify a law the old fashioned way if they feel the law is not perfect.

by Pravin on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 04:15:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wishful Thinking.... (none / 0)

Yes. And the fact that the lawmakers sought to make their legislation solely applicable to the Schiavo case is an admission that they themselves recognized that their intervention was illegitimate. Much like the Supreme Court's decision in Gore v. Bush, which likewise limited itself to a single case and disavowed itself of any precedent-setting standard. Whenever legislators or judges strain to limit the exercise of their power to the particular case, its a sure sign that they're intruding on the jurdisdiction of another branch.

by Woodhouse on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 04:34:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Damn, these post are good! (3.00 / 0)

My hat is off to the many excellent posts today. T. Schiavo's case was a tough one, and her ordeal had a positive impact on America. I am glad that her suffering is over. Let us continue to broaden the values debate and make the world a better place.

by Paul Goodman on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 11:33:18 AM EST

Re: Damn, these post are good! (none / 0)

Now, I don't think the govenrment ought to have done anymore than it did-- it arbitrated years of legal battles between Terri's legal guardian and her parents, in a dispute over a very, very private matter. What I don't understand, and what nobody can seem to explain is:

Why is the State so adamantly opposed to acting on her behalf, to keep her alive? Afterall, there is no definitive proof that she wanted to be left to die in such a situation.

Compare that to the State which so openly persecuted Jack Kevorkian back in the Mid 1990s.

What we have here is a blatant hypocrisy. On one hand, the State says: If you're not competent to make a decision regarding your life, then we will decide it for you. On the other hand, and in Kevorkian's cases, the same State is saying to a COMPETENT, LUCID individual who made a decision to die by his/her own volition, that "No, we don't agree with you and we will not let you take your own life with Mr. Kevorkian's assistance."

So, people who are able to, and want to die-- the state doesn't let them, and it prosecutes those who attempt to assist them. But in a case where the subject cannot express her own will/desires, the state forces her to die?

I don't get it.

by doinkicarus on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 11:49:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Damn, these post are good! (none / 0)

You've captured inconsistencies in various laws well. In this case the state, through the courts, decided that by allowing her to die it was acting on her behalf. The decision is certainly open to argument but it can't be argued there was a lack of due process.

Alot of laws are contradictory. Michigan law is free to contradict Florida law.

Florida law seemingly contradicts itself by allowing individuals the freedom to ask that they not be kept alive artificially through Living Wills but then not allowing the most humane measures to be used to enforce those wills.

Florida seems to want to take pains to avoid euthanasia while allowing a right to die. It's tough to walk that line and this case points out difficulties in trying to do so.

by Curt Matlock on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 01:22:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Damn, these post are good! (none / 0)

Lest we not forget that they tried to make this a federal issue, and the feds tossed it out, basically. but what the courts in florida were really saying is: we are not going to force you live any longer, because it appears you may have wished to die in such circumstances, we are going to let you die, if you may. We will not, however, assist you in your "decision" to die. We will rule that you have "decided" do die, but we will not let you do it with dignity, and in peace.

I guess my question is, if the state determines that she wants to die, why couldn't they take measures to expedite the process?

in Kevorkian's circumstances, he was assisting people who, of their own volition, decided to die, but were unable to kill themselves. Their inability to end their own life somehow precluded them from doing so? Just because you can't purchase/operate a handgun, or swallow a vial of poison-- why shouldn't you have the same ability to terminate your life on your terms?

but kevorking would be appalled with this outcome, because what we have is a person subject to the decisions of others, not a persons will.

by doinkicarus on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 01:55:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Wishful thinking (none / 0)

The Religious Right doesn't expect its Party to get anything done for them; it expects its Party to fight really hard. Which it did. This will fuel feelings of fundie victimhood for decades to come -- if you thought the Republicans were batshit before, wait until you see what comes next.

by Kimmitt on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 12:50:00 PM EST

None will leave the GOP (none / 0)

It's wishful thinking to believe any will go to any other party. They'll rant and rave, but they'll always come home.

We can't pin hopes of winning elections on the idea that a few zealots will leave the GOP. Instead, I think, we need to use this episode as a chance to demonstrate the hypocrisy of the entire GOP, and hope to persuade moderate voters to switch sides.

by Toadvine on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 04:09:52 PM EST

Though I'd expect to see (none / 0)

more activism organized through religious and other groups independent of the Reep organization, I think it's a stretch to think that they're going to leave the party over this. For one thing, while the rank-and-file of the Theocratic right may be every bit as willing as that of the Naderite left to bail on their branch of the Duopoly, I think the Reeps have the discipline and grassroots leadership to keep their footsoldiers from deserting.

In the end, what we'll probably see is an increase in Theocratic PACs and educational funds, and whatever-the-heck-kind-of-group M o t G o L qualifies as.

Yeah, I'm cynical.

by catastrophile on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 07:06:02 PM EST

Birch concurrence in the Schiavo case... (none / 0)

This is truly amazing...

I read Birch's concurrence last night (from the last 11th circuit appeal)-- there really is an unbelievable split on the Right... Birch, who comes with strong conservative credentials, essentially said that by invading the judiciary's "rule of decision" function**, Congress attempted to legislate his court into a group of "activist" judges. What's truly amazing is that the court wasn't even tasked with the question of the law's constitutionality -- yet this conservative felt compelled to defend his turf. What's truly ENCOURAGING (imo) is the apparent unity among judges -- regardless of approaches -- in defending judicial independence.

Also, it's time to re-characterize the public debate about judges: it's NOT that we have "activist" judges running rampant; it's that there is an ASSAULT on the judiciary by the real "activists" here on the Right, who want to trample it.

**He declared T's law unconstitutional because it "legislated" a standard of review and defined how the court was to examine the case -- an authority clearly within the exclusive province of the courts.

Hank

by HKingsley on Fri Apr 01, 2005 at 10:10:58 AM EST

Fund it... (3.00 / 0)

We should support the America First Party.

Nader's campaign was financed by the very people he made a career of opposing in order to divert liberal support from Gore and Kerry.

It's time to Nader the Republicans.

by wayward on Sat Apr 02, 2005 at 08:19:47 AM EST

As a party member (none / 0)

I can veribly say that you guys have no idea what you are talking about. We are not neo-cons like Republicans, we are conservatives. There's a difference, and you can't tell the difference. We are for small Government. The Republicans are for Israel controlled fascism. Please do not comment on that which you know very little about. Thank you. (dbasarab@ycp.edu)

by dbasarab on Tue Jul 12, 2005 at 10:01:16 PM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.