home

Open Thread: Schiavo

Judge Wittemore rejected the Schindler's request to reinsert Terri Schiavo's feeding tube. The Schindlers have filed a Notice of Appeal to the 11th Circuit.

Whittemore wrote that Schiavo's "life and liberty interests" had been protected by Florida courts. Despite "these difficult and time-strained circumstances," he wrote, "this court is constrained to apply the law to the issues before it."

The ruling is here.(pdf) [Via How Appealing}

Thoughts?

< Judge Wittemore's Judicial Rulings | Santorum Questions Death Penalty >
  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 09:31:14 AM EST
    You know, for a believing Christian, death really is no big deal. Get over it, people! Sure, killing someone else intentionally, now that's a huge sin to a Christian. But losing this life in exchange for the next? Puhleeze. The Christian attitude can be found in the words Thomas More says to his executioner in Robert Bolt's play: "Friend , be not afraid of your office. You send me to God." Death is NOT an utterly catclysmic punishment for Christians. (The above was plagiarized from this fellow. Scroll down several grafs or use search.)

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#2)
    by nolo on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 09:32:50 AM EST
    Santorum is already screeching about activist judges.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 09:36:58 AM EST
    On our local radio station...Catherine Crier from court tv was a call in guest. Her opinion of congressional action was that they all KNEW how this would turn otu..and they are just preparing to cry out "activist judges!!". Well just a few minutes ago on Rush Limbaugh..he proved her right.."This is a liberal judge appointed by Clinton." The GOP is playing this poor family like a fiddle for their own agenda. This case now goes to the 11th Circuit. They will do the same thing....and be called "activist judges"...then it will be on the Supreme's shoulders..will they hear the case?....who knows..but if they do..they will ALSO come to the smae conclusion...and be labeled "activist Judges."

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#4)
    by glanton on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 09:39:01 AM EST
    If Santorum thinks he has something to screech about today, wait until November 2006. While the midterms overall look bleak for the Dems, somehow I think the people of PA, at least, "won't get fooled again."

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 09:41:57 AM EST
    I'm a Republican, and I think this is a black mark on our party. Let the poor woman die in peace. How can this be considered a life? I wish more Republicans would speak out against the conservative wing on this.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 09:45:23 AM EST
    MB..I agree..this is part of the larger battle between Libertarian minded conservatives (i.e...less government in our lives) and the religious right who believe it is the governments DUTY to legislate morality..of-course that legislation should be guided by "God's Will." For those Libertarian minded people..you should keep an eye on your religious Republican friends..cause they are taking over.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 09:49:46 AM EST
    Check out cnn.com for How To Lie With Charts and Graphs 101. Under the picture of the gratuitous praying for Terri Schaivo's political usefulness, click on the Interactive: Opinion poll. (I'd do it as a link, but it's a popup.) Follow the Nexts through the graphs--note that on those that show a dramatic difference between Rethugs and Democrats, the scale starts at 54 or 50, but on the last graph, the scale starts at 0. It makes a big difference, no? Always, always, always look at the scale on graphs and charts like this. If it looks too dramatic, it probably is. So saith the Data Goddess...

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#8)
    by roy on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 09:50:18 AM EST
    Some Leftists have been pimping polls that show most people support removing the feeding tube. But why do the poll questions always leave out the details that make this case constroversial? (Link disects one poll; other polls I've seen have similar problems) Apparently public opinion only matters if it's ill-informed and skewed. The Right uses the same trick, but they don't usually pretend as hard about respecting the people's judgement.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#9)
    by Che's Lounge on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 09:52:57 AM EST
    Bill Kristol was on Faux saying that people on the left "just want her dead" I wouldn't waste any spit on his face.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#10)
    by nolo on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 09:54:21 AM EST
    Santorum, DeLay, Frist and their ilk all knew exactly how this would play out. The end-game's about judicial nominations, folks, and this is how they plan on firing up the base. What they're doing, though, amounts to a full-scale assault on judicial autonomy and the rule of law. It is dangerous, and it is wrong.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#11)
    by Dadler on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 09:58:29 AM EST
    roy, your point about polls as easily, if not more so, applies to the wars in afghanistan and iraq. or any other issue the right will "pimp" (i hate using that word) when the numbers look to be in their favor. you want the doctors, neurologists, and her husband to be ignored completely, fine, that's your real point. just state it.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 10:01:07 AM EST
    Roy, I notice you linked to Volokh. I was wondering if he found support for the bold, thoughtful suggestion that rather than "letting Terri starve to death" that perhaps everyone in her family should, you know, like flog her to death? Just asking

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#13)
    by glanton on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 10:08:10 AM EST
    It seems more and more this issue is being relegated to its proper place, as an in-fight between GOP-ers. I am deeply impressed by the Demo Senators for simply abstaining from that ridiculous swamp, that "vote," altogether. They ought to do more of this, it exposes them for what they are. Next logical step: a Demwide boycott of Fox.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#14)
    by roy on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 10:10:29 AM EST
    tristero,
    I was wondering if he found support for the bold, thoughtful suggestion that rather than "letting Terri starve to death" that perhaps everyone in her family should, you know, like flog her to death?
    Link, please?

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 10:26:01 AM EST
    The Conservatives are against technology when it suits them (i.e. stem-cell research which, incidentally, might lead to a cure for her condition one day) and are all over it when it furthers their agenda. While I'm personally against watching another human being slowly die for two weeks, it's not my place to make that decision for someone else. That decision should be her husband's to make. Period. That said, since the religious right is using God and morality to justify it's involvement, wouldn't Ms. Schiavo live despite the removal of the feeding tube if God intended for her to live?

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 10:36:36 AM EST
    If I were a Federal Judge I would be extremely angry over this intrusion into the realm of the judicary. I would also be as slick as the Congress and Pretend I don't see through this end run around the rulings of my brethren in florida and go along with the process and just as the supreme court did with Bush v Gore, simply rule against Terry's Parents. This ruling will surely send the congress the obviouse message. Keep your nose out of our business!

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 10:41:08 AM EST
    The Repiglicans will be happy to let Terry Schiavo die after they finish humping her limp body for votes in next year's elections.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 10:44:28 AM EST
    Hey ROY You are no different than Delay/Bush. If you don't like the facts just throw Bull sh-t at them. Face it roy most americans see through this cynical intrusion into a very tragic and what should be, private matter for what it is. This is the sorry truth.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#19)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 10:46:43 AM EST
    If god wants her to live he will let her eat on her own.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 10:50:44 AM EST
    I applaud judge Whittemore's ruling. It's based on facts, logic and an understanding of the law.Just because you don't like the outcome of judicial proceedings, doesn't give you the right to make new law to circumvent it. Terri's had more due process than most of us could ever hope for. QUESTION: What are the family's chances of reversing Whittemore's decision? Anyone know?

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 10:51:59 AM EST
    tristero - We are not all Thomas More and you embarass yourself in trying to use him to support your argument for death. mb - This woman's death is not imminent unless hastened by outside means. Her breathing is NOT being sustained by a ventilator. You claim to be a Repulician. So what? What does politics have to do with this? We have a dispute. On the husband's side all we have is his word. Said "word" BTW was not brought forward for seven years according to her brother. Who is lying? The brother? The husband? We have confusion and chaos. Why not have more investigation? Why rush her into the grave? Why not give her the same sympathy many give convicted killers? SMC - "That decision should be her husband's to make." Why? The husband has demonstrated no sympathy for his wife, and he has shown his disdain for the marriage vows by continuing long term adultery and fathering children out of wedlock. He can demonstrate nothing in writing, only his "memory" which now appears to have occurred years after the event. Should all husbands have such dominance of their wives? et al - Again. Get the politics out of this and just apply some logic. Think. The husband has no proof except his word, and we know he has no respect for his word by his actions. Is the husband lying? Is he telling the truth? I don't know. But I have always commented that I am against capital punishment - the taking of a life - unless it can be absolutely 100% proven that the person did the crime. This is an identical situation. The state is taking a life with evidence that would be laughed out of any court room.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#22)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 10:54:32 AM EST
    I guess Congress forgot to tell the judge he not only had to review the case --he had to agree with them

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#23)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 10:55:08 AM EST
    I would think that 10+ years is not rushing to judgement. "Male dominance over women", is ridiculous even by your standards PPJ. You think the husband is lying and I think the brother is lying. So there it is in a nutshell. I am going to side with the 20 or so judges that ruled on the case. Let god heal her or let god take her.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#24)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 11:00:13 AM EST
    20 or so judges and her guardian butEven if you have doubts about the disinterrestedness of Ms. Schiavo's husband, keep in mind that the Florida trial court judge appointed a separate attorney who served as her guardian ad litem in the state court proceedings. That is the same representation a minor child whose interests are before the court might receive. Plus, Florida law required that the judge make his own independent decision because the case involved ending life sustaining care. But I guess all those people plus the medical experts were dumb and now the 11th Circuit as long he POPJ doesn't get the answer he thinks is right we must keep investigating

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#25)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 11:01:35 AM EST
    The state is taking a life with evidence that would be laughed out of any court room.
    Jim is deservedly ignored most of the time, since all he does is repeat the same talking points. This time, however, his punchline is pretty funny. The matter of Terri Schiavo's wishes was adjudicated, at great length, in multiple courtrooms with multiple judges. The conclusions were all the same: Terri has no chance of recovery and would not have wanted to linger in such a condition. It wasn't just the husband suddenly deciding to get rid of her.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#26)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 11:04:14 AM EST
    For one of these ultra-Christian folks, Wouldn't a heartattack be some sort of message that God wants Terri "back home?" and that is "his will?"

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#28)
    by nolo on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 11:11:16 AM EST
    PPJ, if you really believe there's been a rush to judgment and that the only evidence was Michael Schiavo's "word," you should review the detailed timeline (with court opinions) compiled by the University of Miami's Ethics Project.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#29)
    by roy on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 11:13:46 AM EST
    Hypocrisy abounds. The decision should be a private one, but enforce the court order to remove the feeding tube. The Federal government should respect the state's authority, but hooray for SCOTUS barring states from executing juvenile criminals. Sex criminals deserve rehabilitation, but Shiavo should starve to death. Forcing court decisions to be re-reviewed until they agree with Republican doctrine is wrong, but forcing re-count after re-count is a great way to get a Democratic president in office. The Right is just as bad, but laying into them would be redundant on this site. And I actually agree with the courts, Shiavo's husband should get to make the decision. But, cripes, can't we resolve a problem in this country without splitting into two teams and acting like children?

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#30)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 11:17:43 AM EST
    Anyone who might be seduced by Jim's words should read the guardian ad litem report for Terri Schiavo: http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/WolfsonReport.pdf Terri's parents _told_ him to start dating, and met some of the women he did date. He also seeked every treatment available for her in the first three years after the accident, and only stopped after it became clear to her doctors and him that there was no hope.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 11:21:40 AM EST
    But, cripes, can't we resolve a problem in this country without splitting into two teams and acting like children?
    apparently, not! bushCo; the great divider?

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#32)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 11:21:49 AM EST
    Brilliant analysis Roy: "The decision should be a private one, but enforce the court order to remove the feeding tube." Did I misread the fact that the Schindlers along with the Governor and Congress and the POS POUS, are not trying to politicize the issue and keep teh tube in? "Forcing court decisions to be re-reviewed until they agree with Republican doctrine is wrong, but forcing re-count after re-count is a great way to get a Democratic president in office." I am sorry, I don't recall a majority of folks on this website or in the party for that matter calling for recount after recount, in fact I remember Al Gore ceding rather readily. Typical yawn stuff here. If god is so powerful and Terry is an angel or has a right to live, let god do something about it. And for chrissakes, let's get on with the important stuff like the war, medicaid, ss, deficit etc and forget about wasting congress time on steroids and brain dead family arguments.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#33)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 11:22:35 AM EST
    mb - This woman's death is not imminent unless hastened by outside means. Her breathing is NOT being sustained by a ventilator. many give convicted killers? You know, you look at her on tv, you know she has nothing. It's not life. She hasn't had anything for 15 years. I understand the difference between the respirator and the feeding tube scenarios, but I still think she should be allowed to peacefully pass. You want to know what percentage of the Republican party takes my view. Well, start out with the premise that there are roughly 50/50 Republicans/Democrats out there. And then they did this poll that said 70% of the public thought she should be permitted to pass. I'm assuming almost no Democrats are amongst the 30% wanting her kept alive, meaning 40% of the Republicans happen to agree with the Democrats on this. I would assume that that's about the smame figue of pro-choice Republicans. I have so many problems with today's Democrats, but on this kind of stuff, I just don't see our side.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#34)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 11:28:14 AM EST
    On the husband's side all we have is his word---PPJ The Second District Court of Appeal of Florida has a different opinion (unanimous 3 judge opinion) of what all we have:
    Finally, the Schindlers argue that the testimony, which was conflicting, was insufficient to support the trial court's decision by clear and convincing evidence. We have reviewed that testimony and conclude that the trial court had sufficient evidence to make this decision. The clear and convincing standard of proof, while very high, permits a decision in the face of inconsistent or conflicting evidence. See In re Guardianship of Browning, 543 So.2d at 273. In Browning, we stated: In making this difficult decision, a surrogate decisionmaker should err on the side of life.... In cases of doubt, we must assume that a patient would choose to defend life in exercising his or her right of privacy. In re Guardianship of Browning, 543 So.2d at 273. We reconfirm today that a court's default position must favor life. The testimony in this case establishes that Theresa was very young and very healthy when this tragedy struck. Like many young people without children, she had not prepared a will, much less a living will. She had been raised in the Catholic faith, but did not regularly attend mass or have a religious advisor who could assist the court in weighing her religious attitudes about life-support methods. Her statements to her friends and family about the dying process were few and they were oral. Nevertheless, those statements, along with other evidence about Theresa, gave the trial court a sufficient basis to make this decision for her. In the final analysis, the difficult question that faced the trial court was whether Theresa Marie Schindler Schiavo, not after a few weeks in a coma, but after ten years in a persistent vegetative state that has robbed her of most of her cerebrum and all but the most instinctive of neurological functions, with no hope of a medical cure but with sufficient money and strength of body to live indefinitely, would choose to continue the constant nursing care and the supporting tubes in hopes that a miracle would somehow recreate her missing brain tissue, or whether she would wish to permit a natural death process to take its course and for her family members and loved ones to be free to continue their lives. After due consideration, we conclude that the trial judge had clear and convincing evidence to answer this question as he did.
    Note that "few" statements does not equate with "only". The state is not taking a life with evidence that would be laughed out of any court room. The evidence was found to be clear and convincing.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#35)
    by nolo on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 11:38:54 AM EST
    I might add for reference that "clear and convincing" is a term of art for the highest burden of proof in non-criminal cases.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#36)
    by Sailor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 11:45:01 AM EST
    Anybody else notice that PPJ's points were taken direct from the RNC talking points? A question for the Consitutional scholars out there; The LA Times said "The legislation passed the Senate on Sunday under the chamber's unanimous consent rules. Three senators were on the floor — Frist, Mel Martinez (R-Fla.) and John W. Warner (R-Va.)." Can legislation pass with out a quorum present? I thought the Constitution provided for this, not Senate rules. Does this mean that a few senators can sneak in in the middle of the night and pass any legislation they want?

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 12:00:53 PM EST
    et al - Again. Get the politics out of this and just apply some logic.
    would et al include yourself?
    The state is taking a life with evidence that would be laughed out of any court room.
    no wonder your frequently referred to as disingenuous.
    ...as long he POPJ doesn't get the answer he thinks is right we must keep investigating.
    could there be some truth in this statement?

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#37)
    by Kevin Hayden on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 12:02:04 PM EST
    Judge Whittemore issued a judicially sound decision. It also seems to be an ethically sound decision. Setting it up as an 'activist judge' situation is likely a ruse designed to give Frist fodder to kill the filibuster and get Bush nominees approved, so they can get GOP activist judges in to replace those who demonstrate restraint. From the perspective of reality, Terri Schiavo as a thinking entity died more than a decade ago. If there is any real state interest in keeping her shell alive so that medical science can provide it a second life, then the state should be providing similar support for cryogenics for any who request it.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#40)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 12:53:30 PM EST
    ppj (aka Jim): "tristero - We are not all Thomas More and you embarass yourself in trying to use him to support your argument for death." Jim, I'm so sorry, but you fell for my trap big time. I will excerpt what I wrote above. But this time, I STRONGLY suggest you click on the link before telling me I'm making a fool of myself: For a believing Christian death is no big deal. The Christian attitude can be found in the words Thomas More says to his executioner in Robert Bolt's play: "Friend , be not afraid of your office. You send me to God." Death is NOT an utterly catclysmic punishment for Christians. (The above was plagiarized from this fellow. Scroll down several grafs or use search.)

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#41)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 12:55:36 PM EST
    "stem-cell research which, incidentally, might lead to a cure for her condition one day" No. Stem cell research is unlikely to enable us to grow her a new brain. If it did, the result would be somebody else, not her-a different person in her old body.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#42)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 12:59:49 PM EST
    A 'thermobaric bomb' on her hospice would do the trick. The same people who just murdered 30,000 corticated Iraqi women now want to lecture the world on the worth of a decorticated American woman. That's because they know what 'virtue' is, because they haven't been prosecuted yet for their grave moral crimes.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#43)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 01:16:34 PM EST
    Is the husband lying? Is he telling the truth? No, Jim he´s obviously lying, do your homework.. Several witnesses have testified that Terri would not want live in this kind of state. He did not walk away with the 10 million or the recent 1 million offered. No, it seems the k-i-l-l-e-r has different motives.. How evil

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#44)
    by Tony on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 01:16:40 PM EST
    Does anyone know when the 11th Circuit is expected to rule? Sorry, as a non-lawyer, I don't completely understand how these things work. This is a 3 judge panel, correct? And they are only being asked to rule on Judge Whittemore's decision to deny the temporary restraining order? Is that correct?

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#45)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 01:29:34 PM EST
    Ten fully-functioning people die violently in Minnesota...where's the outcry? Why isn't Congress jumping up to do something? Oh, that's right, more important things to do...

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#46)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 01:31:37 PM EST
    One thing people are not asking why is this fight happening now? is it part of some bigger move on our human and civil rights? is it that some people behind the political rocks of government are looking for away to do a little legalizing for mass murder of the old and the helpless? and what will this world look like in 20 years? will we have the right to die? or the right to be removed from life under a propaganda political religious deal? watch out people something evil is in the woods and you can't see it until it hits you, in your bed. schiavo has the right of life and the state has no business in this thing.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#47)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 01:42:29 PM EST
    I have been in the health care field for thirty years. Every day, in hospitals, hospices, and nursing homes all over the couuntry, patients like this poor woman are allowed to die in peace. While she did not have a living will, she did express her views to her husband. He is merely trying to carry out her wishes. Does the government and all the "pro-life" folks plan to interfere with every situation like this? Will they picket and protest outside of every hospice, hospital, and nursing home? what about the patients that are in the hospice where this young woman residents? do the protestors and congress want to step in for those folks too? how is all this uproar affecting those patients last days? Does this mean that if my family disagrees with my living will, I could be allowed to exisit in a vegetative state against my will? If the politicians and "pro-life" folks are so pro-life, why are health care benefits being cut nation wide? Why are Veteran's being denied hospice services because of budget cuts? Why do we have the death penalty? These people should be ashamed.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#48)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 01:45:52 PM EST
    Like shameless rubbernecking at a ten-car-pileup; this thread, with few exceptions, is a litany of craven ghouls eager to sound off politically on this terrible tragedy, each of them hoping for the expediant death of Ms. Schiavo. Where is your compassion? Think the Republicans are in it for the politics? What about those oft-lauded poll numbers you keep tossing around? If you believed those numbers, than what are the Repubs gaining politically? And why did the bill face no opposition from the Senate Democrats? Why did half of the Democrat Congressman vote in favor of the bill? Perhaps maybe this is about more than simple politics. Perhaps this is about Court Ordered Executions of Innocents based on the unsubstantiated 7-year late claim of a philandering adulterer. A man who has refused to divorce his wife, but has carried on with his own life none the less. But its clear you fools have no problem with that scenario. Teaching Liberals morality is like teaching pigs to fly. Ogle on.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#49)
    by Tony on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 01:58:32 PM EST
    Like shameless rubbernecking at a ten-car-pileup; this thread, with few exceptions, is a litany of craven ghouls eager to sound off politically on this terrible tragedy, each of them hoping for the expediant death of Ms. Schiavo. No, each of them hoping that Mrs. Schiavo's wishes for an expediant death can be granted. ...of a philandering adulterer. A man who has refused to divorce his wife, but has carried on with his own life none the less. Who carried on with his own life at the encouragement of the Schindler's themselves.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#50)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 02:04:33 PM EST
    FOR THE RECORD: 1. I do not want to be kept alive if I am in a persistent vegitative state. 2. I do NOT want MY PARENTS making ANY decisions about my medical care or my son's. 3. Anyone I deem to be my guardian will be authorized to SHOOT ON SIGHT any congressfolks who try to interfere in my family's health or well-being.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#51)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 02:33:48 PM EST
    First - A call to put PPJ on your manual IGNORE. He has been caught in his lies, hypocrisy, fabrication and plain bad logic so many times it's almost boring. He never moves his position based on facts or based on his points being entirely discredited. What he does is suck the oxygen out of a discussion and set us back while everyone spends loads of time repeating comments, providing links and dissecting his disingenuous spouting. In fact, his positions are antithetical to each other and, while I have been able to comprehend (though not necessarily agree with) the positions of most regular commenters, Jim has no discernable position except to oppose TL ad hominen. To the point, actually that I'm thinking you're a paid hack (or is it shill), PPJ. While opposing points can be beneficial, PPJ creates a miniature in here of the progressive problem. We spend so much time trying to answer PPJ's ridiculous accusations we are always on the defensive and can't generate a dialog that moves beyond this. PPJ, sorry to say that I truly hope your buddy DeLay lets me weigh in on pulling your plug.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#52)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 02:54:20 PM EST
    > Does the government and all the > "pro-life" folks plan to interfere > with every situation like this? Will > they picket and protest outside of > every hospice, hospital, and nursing > home? As long as they don't have to pay for it (i.e. Medicare), sure. Cranky

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#53)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 03:04:59 PM EST
    Ignore ppj: PPJ has his uses. Please hear me out. In an earlier post, I remarked that to a believing Christian, death is no big deal. I even quoted a play about Thomas More to that effect. Unwittingly, PPJ rose to the bait and huffily ordered me to stop embarassing myself by quoting Thomas More. Ooops! He fell into a trap! He should have clicked the link before blowing me off like that. You see, I clearly mentioned that my sentiments on the desirablility on death for Christians had been plagiarized from this source (y'gotta scroll down a few grafs to find it.) Hey, Horse with No Name: Care to answer my questions now?

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#54)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 03:05:09 PM EST
    A call to put PPJ on your manual IGNORE.
    Agreed.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#55)
    by nolo on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 03:18:37 PM EST
    Put Horse on the manual ignore as well.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#56)
    by roy on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 03:22:28 PM EST
    Tristero, Speaking of answering questions, did you ever find evidence for your 11:01 AM claim about Eugene Volokh? Sorry to nag, but such a vile statement shouldn't lay around both unchallenged and unsupported.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#57)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 03:39:27 PM EST
    ironic little tid bit (for me at least) i came across surfing this situation:
    Schiavo means "slave" in Italian
    A call to put PPJ/Horse "whose name is well known" on your manual IGNORE.
    as the younger generation might quip, already: meaning done.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#58)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 03:43:53 PM EST
    Tristero: "For a believing Christian death is no big deal." Well, at least until the portion of the prefrontal lobe that handles belief runs out of oxygen. I can pretty much guarantee you that your brainstem hasn't heard the Good News.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#59)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 03:45:28 PM EST
    Oh, I dunno. Steve Dunleavy of the New York Post called liberals "traitors" 2 days after 9/11. That's me, Roy. I'm a liberal. He called me a traitor. Sounds to me like there are a lot of vile, unchallenged, and unsupported statements lying around these days. Sounds to me like the right's been lying for quite some time. But I digress. Volokh, as you may not know, famously opined that he would support the death by torture of capital offenders just like they do in Iran. I was just curious if, in that analysis of that poll you linked to - which was a link to Volokh's site - whether Volokh had found any support for putting Schiavo to death in his preferred manner. I would have looked at the link myself but I have this slight problem reading anything by people who advocate torture. And Volokh, for all his pretenses of book larnin', not only advocated torture, but enthusiastically advocated it. If I were remaking The Pa$$ion of the Chri$t, I would cast him as the Roman soldier who sticks a spear in Christ's stomach on the cross (the one incident of sadism which, if I recall properly, St. Mel forgot to include). I gather Volokh's backed off a bit. At least in public. Still, he gives me the creeps. And well deserves the Grand Guignol treatment I have lavished upon him here. You can google up the details for yourself if you dont' believe me about Volokh.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#60)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 03:47:18 PM EST
    Paul, For heaven's sake, CLICK THE LINK.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#61)
    by roy on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 04:16:07 PM EST
    Sounds to me like there are a lot of vile, unchallenged, and unsupported statements lying around these days. Sounds to me like the right's been lying for quite some time.
    True.
    Volokh, as you may not know, famously opined that he would support the death by torture of capital offenders just like they do in Iran.
    False. Volokh did not recomment torture for "capital offenders" in general, only for particularly egregious crimes such as murdering and raping 20 children. The rest of your post is revisionism and whining...

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#62)
    by pigwiggle on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 04:32:09 PM EST
    I like the Volokh link. Fits my sense of parity in justice; the social contract some prefer to ignore, the defacto contract of revenge. Here is the thing with state sponsored justice. It seems to work like this; someone commits a crime against me and I want revenge, but you don’t really know the circumstances and are otherwise not comfortable with a potential overreaction/unjustified reaction on my part (who knows, could be you next, right?). So we do it all proper with impartial parties and whatnot. But in the end, what a victim really wants is for their perp to pay. Pay up on what they took, with interest. It’s crass, it’s base, but if someone were ever to torture, rape, or kill anyone I love, I would get justice one way or the other.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#63)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 04:34:46 PM EST
    The death penalty should not be determined on the bases of religion. THe death penalty is there to punish those for taking the life of an innocent victim. If someone murders, they should be killed, otherwise they just take up jail room and gov't money.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#64)
    by roy on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 04:47:18 PM EST
    Is Schiavo's brain really all that bad off? Some guy I've never heard of says maybe not! (Sorry for helping to derail the thread...)

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#65)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 05:56:13 PM EST
    Roy, Forgive me for forgetting the precise details under which Volokh enthusiastically advocates torturing people to death. Knowing that he would only restrict it to "particularly egregious crimes" -until he gets bored, of course, just as he is presently bored with killing people convicted of particularly egregious crimes by mere electrocution or injections - really makes me change my mind about his character. As for Schiavo's brain being not that bad off, this is almost certainly true. But that is only because genuine experts have concluded there is no brain -ie cerebral cortex - left at all. Therefore, her brain can't be that bad off. Go to pharyngula for details. PZ Meyers does know exactly what he's talking about and tells you exactly when he doesn't. And then sit and contemplate what a genuinely disgusting, revolting, and utterly obcene sideshow the rightwing has made out this whole awful affair. This is a wrenching moral dilemma, not an insane exercise in a grotesque display of who respects life more, who is holier than thou, who is more religiously correct. There isn't humor sick enough to properly mock and humiliate the rightwing fanatics responsible for this. As for revisionism in my post, where? Dunleavy really did call liberals traitors. I really am a liberal and if you find it offensive that I get furious when I'm called a traitor, too bad. St. Mel, as far as I can remember, really did forget to include the spearing of Christ in The Pa$$ion. I hedged in my post but I'll happily correct myself if I'm wrong. And I really think Volokh's the only guy to play the soldier in my remake of St. Mel's Holy Masterpiece. If I can get the rights cheap and a good chunk of the gross up front, of course.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#66)
    by Richard Aubrey on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 06:22:46 PM EST
    Some years ago, the Indiana Supremes heard a case about a kid with Downs syndrome and an esophageal problem. After much agonizing, the Hoosier Supremes allowed for the kid to die. I happened to be talking with a blowhard clergyman who claimed to have been deeply involved in the case, knew the family and so forth. So, I naturally asked him how come the kid had been condemned to die of hunger and thirst instead of getting an OD of Demerol. Ooops. He didn't know. Forget he said anything. Turns out the-then Surgeon General Koop, a pediatric surgeon, had developed a procedure for rerouting the esophagous issue and fixing things just fine. He has a reason I can't recall in his autobio for why he didn't say anything, but he did say that many ped surgs knew it. Sordid, by golly. As is this case. Why not a shot? We'd do it for a dog. In fact, if we didn't, we'd go to jail. Anybody want to answer why nobody involved in this wants to use an opiate? Whatever is left of her nervous system may still be able to feel pain. Go ahead, somebody. Anybody.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#67)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 06:25:28 PM EST
    CBS nightly news -video Life and Death Politics has Delay on tape calling Schaivo a gift from God to him to take the focus off his political trouble and that she is the symbol for the culture of life It's great lest there ever was any doubt and he is on tape so the right cannot say there were any doctored documents

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#68)
    by Kitt on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 07:03:57 PM EST
    "Whatever is left of her nervous system may still be able to feel pain. Go ahead, somebody. Anybody" Richard - It's your brain, specifically the brainstem and the structures that make up the brain stem (the medulla oblongata, etc) that are responsible for the pain pathways. There's a couple of good neurological sites that explain the brain's function. The medulla oblongata (part of the brain stem) is also responsible for certain motor, cardiac & respiratory but swallowing, gagging, coughing, and some other stuff. So...if Terri Schiavo's brain stem is 'liquified' or CSF has replaced the brain matter, then it's unlikely she feels much pain if at all. I'm willing to bet money she's comfortable - the medical staff will make it as easy as possible. Personally, I would rather it be quick instead of waiting for the obvious end.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#69)
    by nolo on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 07:13:58 PM EST
    Richard Aubrey, pigs must be flyin', because I am hearing you. I don't know why on earth the poor woman can't just be given a nice big dose of Demerol or morphine (both of which I've had occasion to need, so I know what they can do) and be let to go to God. But to be fair, my understanding is she'd get palliative care (i.e., painkillers) during the last days -- just not enough to make it faster.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#70)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 07:26:34 PM EST
    Nolo that is called murder in some nation states that still have the rule of law, killing a helpless person is something done by the Reds and nazis..but maybe most people are at heath just that. oh well lived way to long, where the drugs nolo?

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#71)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 07:37:13 PM EST
    Richard Aubrey: Long time! I know this is futile, but I have to try anyway. I'll be completely serious, out of respect for our old, no-holds-barred arguments. I expect you to blast me, but at least I can say I tried: You don't know what you're talking about when it comes to Schiavo's medical condition. No offense, neither do I. Nor does DeLay or Bush. The only people who do are the highly qualified medical personnel who examined her in person, at length. Hope is the thing with feathers, Dickinson wrote. I'm sorry, truly sorry, but hope flew out the window for Terri Schiavo a long, long time ago. We agree: it's horrible. But she is not brain-dead or damaged, except in a legalistic sense. She is, according to everyone who's examined her and who can claim medical expertise, brainless. You want to quibble? Fine. Essentially brainless. The only people who have any right to an opinion on Schiavo are those directly involved. They have made their conflicting opinions and desires known. A court heard and weighed all the evidence and the loved one's desires and made a decision. It was reviewed. And reviewed again. And reviewed some more. And some more. It is a terrible tragedy, but it is a personal tragedy. Whether you believe in miracles or not, the Church teaches that miracles do not happen in the way you hope they will for Schiavo. I haveen't read the full statement, but from the reports, apparently it is not the serious prospect for a miracle that underlies the Pope's position, but something very different. That makes sense. I may disagree with the Pope's statements as reported, but they are clear-headed. He knows hope is an illusion. The cultural tragedy, the one that should concern all of us, is that an awful moral dilemma has been turned into an obscenely disgusting spectacle not by you, not by me, not by genuinely pious and/or moral men and women of all faiths and beliefs, but by power-drunk right wing extremists and ghoulish opportunists. Can the left be extreme and ghoulish? Of course. But in Schiavo's case, it was the brothers Bush, DeLay, and all the other truly corrupt and worthless bottom feeders who elevated this moral dilemma first into a travesty, then to the status of a culture war and finally right to the brink of a constitutional crisis. Again, there is no hope for Schiavo. Make whatever argument you want about the sanctity of human life, reaffirm your faith and your values all you want, but there will still be no hope for Schiavo. That is a fact. However, as for saving the constitution from the body blow DeLay and Bush just landed on it, hope is not a plan. Hope that the country will recover its democracy after what just happened is absurd. Until Americans realize how seriously its political life has been damaged by what these damn fools have just done, our future will remain a grim and ugly one. That, too, is a fact. These are not Republicans in any meaningful sense. These are crazy people. It is no sign of political weakness to refuse to support them. Cut them loose, please. They are rapidly destroying everything they touch. I have no hope you will listen to me, or to voices of reason you surely respect much more than mine. But at least I tried. And Richard, I've never been more serious than I'm being right now. DeLay and Bush have just led us into a truly frightening civil abyss.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#72)
    by Kitt on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 07:49:14 PM EST
    No group hugs or anything, please.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#73)
    by Sailor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 07:51:34 PM EST
    "On Palm Sunday, three Republican Senators voted on SB686, a special bill directing a Federal Judge in Florida to hear an appeal from Terri Schiavo's parents regarding the 18 March removal of her feeding tube. "The Sun Sentinel reports that there were three Senators present for the "unanimous" vote: Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-TN ; Senator John Warner, R-VA ; and Senator Mel Martinez, R-FL." Constitution Art 1 Sec 3 Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members, and a Majority of each shall constitute a Quorum to do Business; Sure seems like it was unconstitutional just on procedural grounds.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#75)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 08:11:15 PM EST
    JL - "Let god heal her or let god take her." Huh? What is that? A joke? The state is killing her by removing the tube. tristero - Why do you immediately go to politcis? Isn't this a dispute? And don't we have enough information to say that the dispute should be looked at, again? Why are you so eager to let her die? kitt - "then it's unlikely she feels" Tell us kitt. If it was you, would you be willing to settle for "unlikely" in a medical procedure. I can see it now. We will operate on you tomorrow. It is unlikely you will feel pain... Sure, Uh Huh. Hypocritical, eh? RA - Because if they go for the quite needle and a quick death, and if it is later discovered that she should have been saved, they can show their clean hands hands. Strange, I thought hand washing went out of style 2000 years or so ago. Evidently not. tristero - No, I noted in my comment that you weren't smart enough to have written that. That is what "embarrass yourself" was all about. My comment was a nice way of telling you that. Too subtle, eh? But I am glad to be able to help your self esteem. Heaven knows you need some. That's "help" and "esteem." out - "no wonder your frequently referred to as disingenuous." Can you tell me this? Do I own "frequently?" And if I do, would you like to buy a vowel? Actually, commenting on someone's typing/english mistakes is kind of snarky. But you deserve it. BTW - What politics have I put into it.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#76)
    by Che's Lounge on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 08:20:55 PM EST
    I don't know why on earth the poor woman can't just be given a nice big dose of Demerol or morphine As unfortunate as it is, the medical profession cannot legally give a patient any medication which will hasten the death of the patient. It's just like the tube feedings. We have to let nature take it's course.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#74)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 08:57:34 PM EST
    Tristero Blah, blah, blah. Would it kill you to keep your posts less than 2 pages long? And don’t ‘double post’, as you did earlier today. You’ll eventually get censored (or should), I did. You think Bush and Delay have created this ghoulish spectacle? How about Michael Shiavo? The man left Terry 10 years ago; he has a new wife, 2 new kids, money coming his way upon Terry’s death, and waited 7 YEARS to tell anyone that Terry allegedly wanted to die. His integrity is clearly compromised. Terry has no Living Will, yet he fights for her death, despite her family who is willing to care for her. How about your own part in this macabre scene? Instead of taking the lead of 3/4 of the Democrat Party, here you are, kicking and screaming, fighting tooth and nail to smear Bush. Typical, and not unexpected. BTW – Anytime you want to remind us how “women with brains” get abortions, or how you hold obvious contempt for Condi Rice because she is, according to you, a virgin; you just let me know. I can repost your previous comments if you like. We’ll talk. Nolo Hearing you beg for censorship does make smile my lips. You wouldn’t get censorship in the courtroom, you wouldn’t get it on the street, yet you beg for it here. But don’t you worry – you have your free speech, and I have my four posts per day. I guess Free Speech, for a Liberal, is Free only so long as it is in agreement. Et all - Please Consider this. The only thing obligating Terry’s death are the words of her husband, who has had a fulltime girlfriend for 10 years, 2 new kids with the girlfriend, and has 'remembered' Terry's 'wishes' ONLY 7 years later, when the insurance money appeared. If this were a death penalty case, and the only evidence 'convicting' the 'accused' was the testimony of this man.. Clearly the murderer would be spared. But not this innocent, incapacitated woman; surely she is "The Least Among Us". In your sick world, She must Die. TL I believe I continue to abide by your policy. I have taken care to ensure this is not a ‘double post’. [Thanks, Horse. Just remember, four a day.]

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#77)
    by Richard Aubrey on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 09:01:18 PM EST
    Tris. You screwed up again. I said nothing about a miracle for Schiavo. Nothing. Nada. You screwed up. I merely asked why not give her a shot. You have nothing to go on in the way of expertise, you tell us, yet you also tell us she has no function left with which to feel pain. So what's the problem with a shot? Now, I know you all like international law, when it suits you, so why not haul in Dutch euthansia law? Che is right, unfortunately. But so is Lileks, who says the righties might be useful chocks when the truck you started down the hill threatens to run away with you. Or over you. Careful what you ask for. Tools, as I've said before, don't ask who is their master or to what end they are put. Affirmative action was supposed to be solely for blacks, but Cuban-Americans got their hands on the levers in some places and there isn't much you can say about it. Because it's a tool, just waiting for a clever master. Ditto the right-to-die thinking. Personal: My father-in-law died recently, and I--having been a grunt--was not in any way rooting for him to live, seeing his condition. As I said to my wife, I don't feel guilty rooting for a guy to die. It's a difficult issue, and you'd better not turn it into a tool, because, to mix a metaphor, it might get loose.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#78)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 09:37:45 PM EST
    "Volokh did not recomment torture for "capital offenders" in general, only for particularly egregious crimes such as murdering and raping 20 children." So what time does Bush's torture begin? He has killed 20,000+. The Horse asks "Where is your compassion?" That's funny, in a ghoulish sort of way. Haven't heard you gush over Fallujah, Horse. Where's your compassion? Probably next to your Racism bone, over by the Rightwing tumor that crowded out your Conscience gland. Richard: "you also tell us she has no function left with which to feel pain. So what's the problem with a shot? Why, would a shot hurt? Is that what you think? This woman has been dead for fifteen years. The right want to pray over her like she's the Virgin Mary on a showerdoor. Superstition mongering is not moral. As for blaming the widower, that's par for R hypocrisy. Why aren't they praying for his release from a nightmare extended by medical science? Oh, because that would be praying for the LIVING, and you ravens only pray for the hopeless, while killing the innocent. Happy Easter, Pontius.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#79)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 09:48:46 PM EST
    That 'codeblue' link from above---hilarious. The author opines that she was possibly the victim of a violent crime, and not a heart attack. This they arrive at through the theory that she originally had a hematoma which caused the hypoxia. Gee, would the doctors treating her infarction have noticed the elevated clotting factors such an injury would produce? Ya think? Such an injury would be visible, of course, but in the quest to attach blame to the widower, no holds barred. The rightwing have earned the name whackos. The rightwing Congress could use her case to push through new funds to treat eating disorders. They might even make some money for their backers, and help some people. Meanwhile, millions of kids in America go to sleep hungry. Why is the R Congress starving those kids?

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#80)
    by Kitt on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 09:59:46 PM EST
    Those areas 'missing' in Schiavo's MRI are atrophied not fluid-filled.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#82)
    by Tony on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 11:41:01 PM EST
    Appeal denied, 2-1, by the 11th Circuit, per CNN.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#83)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 22, 2005 at 11:41:17 PM EST
    By two to one Tuesday's appeal has been denied. The dissenting judge held that denying the appeal frustrated the intent of Congress.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#84)
    by Andreas on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 12:30:01 AM EST
    Those who led the American Revolution and wrote the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution had risen up in revolt precisely against rulers supposedly deriving their authority from God. They declared that governments derive their legitimacy, not from religious sanction, but from the consent of the governed, expressed through popular votes. Scalia, DeLay and Bush would repudiate more than 200 years of US constitutional and democratic tradition, in favor of a theocratic dictatorship of the most backward and reactionary Christian fundamentalist elements.
    The Schiavo case: Bush and Congress trample on science and the Constitution By Patrick Martin, 23 March 2005
    The Democratic Party has once again demonstrated its complicity in the assault on democratic rights in the United States and its prostration before the Republican right. Congressional Democrats were instrumental in ensuring passage Monday morning of legislation overriding the rulings of the Florida courts in the case of Terri Schiavo, bringing the family dispute over the severely brain-damaged woman into the federal courts.
    Democrats complicit with Christian right, Republicans in Schiavo case By Joseph Kay, 23 March 2005

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#85)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 03:32:23 AM EST
    Horse: Care to answer my questions now? That's right. Women with brains get abortions. And I surely meant ONLY women with brains get abortions (sarcasm). That's right. I have contempt for Rice. But not because she is, presumably, a virgin. I assume she must be a virgin, because you admire her and according to your opinion on sexual abstinence outside of marriage, she would have to be. As for smearing Bush: First, It is my right to say whatever I want about the president of the United States. I will exercise that right whenever and however I please. Second, I told it like it is.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#86)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 03:35:04 AM EST
    As if it matters, Andreas. You really have no grasp of politics. The Rs run this morality play every time they're beating the rushes for their base. Politically, it's the hot potato of a 'no-brainer,' meaning an appeal to an unthinking, hot button, constituency. What a surprise, Kennedy didn't show up to vote against this majority party dog and pony show. How outrageous, your link says. I'm sure he had an important bowel movement to attend to. Then again, your pure and perfect fairies in government also didn't show up.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#87)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 03:45:39 AM EST
    Richard Aubrey: I screw up a lot. Only God is perfect. Oops! I nearly forgot to add - And his avatar on Earth, George W. Bush. "I merely asked why not give her a shot." You are right. I missed that. I thought you were arguing for a chance of recovery. "You have nothing to go on in the way of expertise, you tell us, yet you also tell us she has no function left with which to feel pain." Now, YOU screwed up. In fact, I specifically said I have no expertise. Neither do you. I NEVER addressed whether she could feel any pain or not. I have absolutely no idea. All I know is that she has no brain. " So what's the problem with a shot?" I have no idea one way or another. Neither do you. I would agree that as a layman, it sounds like one reasonable solution, IF I had an opinion on her fate, which I do not. But I have NO medical expertise, Richard. Neither do you. And the only people who have a right to an opinion on what to do are the ones the courts listened to.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#88)
    by Richard Aubrey on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 04:54:54 AM EST
    That's what I said, Tris. You said you have no medical expertise. The people who do know what's going on, depending on which group in the position to know you prefer to believe, are precluded from giving her an OD of demerol. My question is why. The point about no facility for feeling pain is that, if true, she is in no pain. But, as we know, we don't know that. There may be neurological tests which tell us if pain receptors are firing, I suppose. But if not true, she is in pain. What measures are being taken about that?

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#89)
    by Kitt on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 05:03:12 AM EST
    Paul - I don't know what I meant. I was interrupted. I should say CT rather than MRI, however.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#90)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 07:46:07 AM EST
    Richard Aubrey: I'll address your last post second. But first, I notice that you have not spoken to my other major point which is the cultural tragedy I perceive. That is, of course, the behavior of DeLay and Bush in elevating the Schiavo mess right to the brink of a constitutional crisis. I'm fairly sure you don't share my acute sense of alarm and crisis, but I suspect that since you didn't try to address it, there are aspects of this, which climaxed in the Palm Sunday House decision, which are of concern to you. Am I wrong (again!) in sensing concern about this on your part? Do you think that the Congress and Bush acted properly? Or are you troubled by any of it? You've been forceful and direct in our exchanges here, but not partisan (neither have I: for the record, the Dems who enabled this travesty are insane, but this seems to have been primarily a DeLay/Bush-driven circus). So I'm curious what your take on the politics of it might be. "The point about no facility for feeling pain is that, if true, she is in no pain. But, as we know, we don't know that. There may be neurological tests which tell us if pain receptors are firing, I suppose. But if not true, she is in pain. What measures are being taken about that?" As you say, you are not a physician. Even if you were, you haven't carefully examined Schiavo. You (and of course, I) have, therefore, no qualifications that require anyone to take your medical speculations seriously. (Again, true of me as well). We don't know what physicians do or don't know in any substantive sense. You have no genuine understanding of what a "neurological test" tests; dollars to donuts most physicians don't either. Or of what a "pain receptor" might possibly be or how it works. I'm sure that both of us can find the same medical sources, however, and come to a conclusion, and both of us may very well end up speculating in agreement. So what? That still doesn't mean we know what we're talking about. And that is my point. Schiavo's case, and what to do, can only be properly addressed by the parties directly involved. The courts have looked at it. Those decisions have been reviewed. The review has been reviewed. About public matters - politics, war, schools, whatever - we must speak out if we are responsible citizens and we can educate ourselves enough to do so persuasively. On a private medical matter, we rely on the testimony of experts. Schiavo was examined by many such experts. They could be wrong, true, and you (and I) could be right. But that would an accident. And a miracle.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#91)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 08:09:11 AM EST
    Tristero I never opined as to Ms. Rice's sexual history (you did), and truth be told, I couldn't care less. You were the one who set her afire in effigy, and the match you struck was her supposed virginity. That speaks volumes about you. And please repost my words where I provided my opinion about sex outside of marriage. If you can't - Then keep your logical fallacies to yourself, lest I start putting words in your mouth.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#92)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 08:09:57 AM EST
    PPJ: fre·quent·ly ( P ) Pronunciation Key (frkwnt-l) adv. At frequent intervals; often. have no idea what spelling/english you could possibly correct. what are you talking about? yeah, that is pretty petty on your part.
    What politics have I put into it.
    again, the disingenuous of your comments, now engulfing your character. but you deserve it! your funny, mate!
    Affirmative action was supposed to be solely for blacks,...
    that would be the description you would like people to believe, one immediate group that is was also designed to benefit was females (particularly white, the glass ceiling an all). like the way you wingnuts drop in those off topic comments and opinions, two can play that game, unlike the other liberals here, i enjoy playing in the mud.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#93)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 09:25:23 AM EST
    Horse with no name: "You were the one who set her afire in effigy" Well, perhaps someone should set her afire someday. Y'know that slip about Bush (eeeeuw!) being her husband; that was, I dunno...well, it was so sad that it almost made me forget how utterly incompetent she was as NSA. But hey, whatever floats her boat, as I've said. Aren't you the guy who opined that the only foolproof way to make sure you don't get an STD is abstinence? (You can look it up in the abstinence thread last week. But I sure as heck won't bother wasting my time doing your research for you.) Aren't you the guy who held up Rice as the exemplar of Republican womanhood? I cannot believe that the person you, yes you, chose as THE exemplar of Republican womanhood would be anything but abstinent outside of marriage (check your comment, Horse, that was the precise article you used). So I assume she simply must be a virgin or you wouldn't have picked her. Wow! What an awful role model Rice would make for all those young, nubile, Republican women in their crinoline and petticoats (be still, my heart!) if she foolishly risked getting an std (not to mention that she'd be violating the holy sanctity of matrimony) merely for the sake of such a cheap, transient gratification. Now, in my opinion, for a Republican (or fellow traveler) to anoint a single, childless woman as the exemplar of Republican womanhood strikes me as objectively insane (don't you just love that adjectival "objectively?" Since Insty, I think, called me "objectively pro-Saddam" I can't resist using it). Why? Because if all those young, nubile, crinolined cuties followed Rice's example and didn't breed spanking fresh new Republicans on a regular basis, your party would be kaput in a generation or two. Of course, I'd be perfectly happy if all your young nubile, etc etc stayed chaste, but that's no way to populate a Big Tent. No, I'm not mocking Rice. I'm mocking YOU - and I'm mocking you cruelly and intentionally - for holding such patently idiotic views on just about everything you comment upon. You simply handed me the means to skewer your preposterous opinions on sex and sex education by mentioning Rice. Had you mentioned, I don't know, Phyllis Schafly, I would have found a way to mock some of the other things you've said. You're the target and there are infinite ways to mock you, Horse. But this has grown tiresome. So be a good horse and go answer my questions or go away.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#94)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 10:05:06 AM EST
    Tristero Add the following to your detailed list of 'credentials', as evidenced in your last post. You are objectively stupid if you don't agree that the only foolproof way of avoiding STDs is abstinence. You are objectively bigoted if you think Ms. Rice is not an excellent Role Model and her accomplishments are not worthy of being strived for. You are objectively delusional if you think you've been mocking anyone around here.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#95)
    by Dark Avenger on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 10:05:38 AM EST
    Actually, commenting on someone's typing/english mistakes is kind of snarky. But you deserve it. But if I note that it seems to take place with PPJ when he's getting emotional, that's double bad horrible snark. So I guess that PPJ deserves to have his emotional "Miss Scarlet" moments pointed out. Thanks for finding me something to do, PPJ!

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#96)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 10:32:02 AM EST
    Answer my questions, Horse, or trot away.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#97)
    by glanton on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 10:43:05 AM EST
    PPJ: Hopefully you're still following this thread. I've reread your posts on the Shiavo case numerous times, and in answer to your question, "what politics have I put into it," I confidently answer that you have put minimal if any. Your position is a humane one and I respect that. While I stand by my earlier comment that the media needs to stop inundating us with this kind of stuff and focus instead on policy matters that affect everybody everyday, I have to admit that eventually the inundation worked, somewhere along the line I became captivated. I don't know what I think anymore. I know I'm certainly not celebrating her death by any means, life is extraordinarily precious and that's the bottom line. But I also believe the doctors who say she'll never recover; as O'Reilly (whom I for the most part loathe) has been preaching all week, fifteen years is indeed a long, long time. And like it or not the husband, which legally he still is, gets the final word on such matters. So saddened as I am by all this I cannot condemn the Courts for upholding Michael's argument.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#98)
    by glanton on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 10:48:08 AM EST
    And PPJ: The other thing that I have been thinking a lot about, in this case, beyond how utterly sad it all is, is the fact that unlike you, the Congressional members and Jeb and Dubya all vaery much stepped in out of pure political motivation. Abortion is at the center of all of this, appeasing a base that itself cares far less about Terri than it does about its hatred for Roe. Surely you know this. Let me ask you something else. What if Terri had had no insurance and therefore unable to get onto the feding tube in thwe first place, would Delay and Dubya and their ilk be screaming then? Most assuredly not. What about uninsured people who cannot get on a list for a liver transplant or who have AIDS have no access to state of the art medication. Such die quietly everyday and the media says not a word about it. Presidents don't cut short their vacations because of it, Delay doesn't utter a peep about it. So this is all ideological, it's not about saving Terri or any other person. That's why I was proud of the Demos who simply ignored the call to come back and vote on this. I wish they would do far more abstaining from these red meat charades that the GOP like to put on from time to time. Peace

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#99)
    by glanton on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 11:29:32 AM EST
    "You are objectively bigoted if you think Ms. Rice is not an excellent Role Model and her accomplishments are not worthy of being strived for." This is one of the most ridiculous statements I've seen in a long, long time. Surely there are millions of role models superior to a woman whose career has largely consisted of pimping for the corporate BORG and then moving on to the still more rapacious world of politics, where she played a central role in sticking our nation into a violent cesspool from which we may never extricate ourselves. But hey, she's black, so you have to love her! What a strange planet Horse occupies.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#100)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 11:36:23 AM EST
    is condi a virgin? i can fix that! for free even!

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#101)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 12:38:15 PM EST
    glanton Don't be ignorant. Here's what I love about Condi. 1. She hails from Birmingham, Alabama, and rose from a racist time in American History to become the US's Chief Diplomat. 2. She has a PhD and SEVEN (7)! honorary PhDs. 3. Sat on the board of directors for multiple Fortune-50 companies. 4. She was Senior Director of Soviet and East European affairs during the final days of the Soviet Union. 5. She has written 4 books on Soviet Intelligence and published numerous articles. 6. She is a professor of political science, and served as Stanford's provost, and has won 2 of the Universities most prestigious awards. I'll admit I'm obviously not as acquainted with her accomplishments as I ought to be, and as such can't pontificate on her biography with justice.. But for you, glanton, to deny Ms. Rice's accomplishments, is the height of ignorance!

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#103)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 01:39:23 PM EST
    glanton The word I used was "bigoted", and it has more connotation than you are apparently aware of. bigoted adj : blindly and obstinately attached to some creed or opinion and intolerant toward others; "a bigoted person"; "an outrageously bigoted point of view" My point was that Tristero was 'bigoted' towards Condi because she was intolerant of Condi's supposed virginity (as evidenced in a previous thread, and perhaps here also). I'm sorry I couldn't have made it clearer - I'll take responsibility for that.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#104)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 01:40:57 PM EST
    One final point: on pain. IF she is experiencing pain, to what purpose? Terminal cases are casually morphined into unconsciousness as a common form of euthanasia. But a living person might prefer to die in some or even considerable pain, in order to RETAIN their conscious function unimpaired. Rampant drugging of the terminal is probably a moral crime. But Terri S. HAS no reason to suffer. Her pain has no payoff. It is not that she has 'no brain,' as Tristero (?) said above. She has a brain, just not the prototypically human part. Forcing a human being to live on as a decorticated fish is truly inhumane.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#105)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 01:59:48 PM EST
    Horse, Answer the questions. What's the matter. You a chicken instead of horse?

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#106)
    by glanton on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 02:04:30 PM EST
    Horse: Thanks for the clarification. Really, I suppose I ought to have given you the benefit of the doubt on that one instead of assuming the worst. I wish I were a better man than I am. I've just grown accustomed to seeing pundits (Hannity, Coulter, O'Reilly, Rush, Beck, Malkin, you name em') charge as "racist" those who loathe Condi or Colin, for example, because of their policy stances. I need to remember that--thank heavens!-- such combative personae are not every voice, by a loing shot. We ourselves, then, appear to be left only with a clear disagreement as to Condi's character and policy stances. I somehow doubt we'll ever resolve that one! ;-)

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#107)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 02:06:40 PM EST
    "It is not that she has 'no brain,' as Tristero (?) said above. She has a brain, just not the prototypically human part." The difference is, according to the experts, academic. You have no idea if the fluid that's left inside of Schiavo's head registers pain. Neither do I. You may be right, you may be wrong, you're speculating. The only people who have a chance of knowing the medical situation are the doctors who examined her directly. Not a quack cat-killer like Frist. Not a nurse who's looked at an edited video tape. The courts looked at all the qualified data. They came to a decision. It was reviewed again and again and again. Neither you nor I nor DeLay nor Bush are in any way, shape, or form have any legal, scientific, or even moral standing. We are not close enough. That is my point.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#108)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 02:12:32 PM EST
    "I suppose I ought to have given you the benefit of the doubt on that one instead of assuming the worst." Nah. But I'm sure you'll learn. Horse is a liar. And apparently, quite an intellectual coward. He doesn't respond to questions, can't tolerate criticism, and has no sense either of history or humor. Oh, and he's a prig, but then that always goes along with an absence of humor. Tis' a pity.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#109)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 06:08:25 PM EST
    PIL - It is my understanding that none of the tests for the enzyme in the blood that proves a heart attack was made. Then there is always the possibility that a heart attack occurred at the same time, and because of, the attack. You see Paul, there is just too many little things that don't add up. glanton - "Used to be that diplomats and (gasp!) even elected officials.." Who? And BTW. The reason you don't like Rice is that she is a Repub. Quit fibbing to us. And (maybe) yourself. Tristero - You don't know. I don't know. The judge doesn't know. So why not look at it all one more time? What harm is in that? Or will your ego permit you to be wrong? Or are you more interested in playing attack politics? et al - All the article say that there is no pain in dying from starvation and lack of water. So why are we worried about all the poor people? As they die they will feel no pain, and will experience a sense of eurphoia.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#110)
    by glanton on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 06:52:21 PM EST
    PPJ: I'm depressed that you respond to my comments about Rice but apparently ignore my two posts to you earlier in this thread about Shiavo. But when you say "because shes a Republican" you treat that as if it doesn't bring with it an entire set of values, and it does. And they are values with which I strongly, strongly disagree, the party is highly dangerous in my view. So yes, you're right , but not for the reasons that you think. It's not like I have a problem with her because she's a Stanford gal and I'm a Carolina boy. Anyway, I'd live to get your feedback on my Shiavo posts.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#111)
    by glanton on Wed Mar 23, 2005 at 06:53:45 PM EST
    Oops, "live" is a little strong, even for me. I meant "like" to get your feedback.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#113)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 03:39:30 AM EST
    Answer my questions, Horse. PPJ: First of all, as Nino Scalia, a fellow traveler of Opus Dei, of the most extreme cults in Catholicism, said: To a Christian, death is no big deal. "So why not look at it all one more time? What harm is in that?" The future of American democracy, ppj. That's all. The extreme right in charge of this country's legislative and executive branch just demonstrated it has both the will and the power to overturn ANY court decision it disagrees with. Only a fool would think they won't do this again the next time they disagree with the courts on something. As for the "you dunno, i dunno, judge dunno" argument, you're right on the first, right on the second, completely wrong on the third, And it's judges - plural. That was a sleazy rhetorical trick on your part. You don't check the tail of Hale Bopp one more time because some insane group of fanatics like Heaven's Gate asserts there's a UFO there. You don't overturn the the American system of government because an insane group of fanatics thinks some of the most eminent neurologists AND some of the most eminent judges in this country MAY be mistaken. Besides, to a Christian, death is no big deal. One more thing, ppj: As long as you side with fanatics hellbent on destroying my country's government, I can no longer respond to your posts. To do so is to imply that such arguments may have some speck of legitimacy. They don't.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#114)
    by Jlvngstn on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 05:10:46 AM EST
    PPJ: Hell no it is not a joke, funny how christians use god (calling her an angel earlier in this thread) or the women that talked down the atlanta gunman with her jesus speak and all the ministers were giving god credit etc. If there is a god, pray to him/her and tell him/her to make the decision, either she lives or dies. That is what god does no?

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#115)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 05:59:35 AM EST
    jvlngstn: "If there is a god, pray to him/her and tell him/her to make the decision, either she lives or dies. That is what god does no?" Actually, no. That's not really what god does, at least in any kind of western theology worth its salt. But that is an entirely different discussion.

    Re: Open Thread: Schiavo (none / 0) (#112)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 07:08:52 PM EST
    deleted, filled with personal insults to another commenter. This commenter has now been banned from talkleft.