The Divine Right of Kings

Here's a little primer (and I mean little) on something you may or may not be familiar with, a medieval concept that grew out of the Dark Ages in Europe and northern Africa called the divine right of kings. It's a quaint concept, resuscitated from the Age of Torture in the name of the Church by a good subject-social philosopher under King Louis the XIV of France ("I am the state" -- compare with House Emperor Tom DeLay, "I am the law") that establishes autocratic rule in the hands of a monarch who takes his orders from an Invisible Man in the Sky and answers to no one else:

[A] group of thinkers led initially by Hugo Grotius (1583-1645), believed that natural laws governed states and their relations. Drawing on the thought of Greek and Roman Stoicism, where the idea of "natural law" originates, Grotius and others believed that there were constant and immutable rational laws which should be applied to all governments.

Okay, got that so far? It's an Enlightenment principle. The key word here is "rational" -- as in Rationalism. The Enlightenment is also known as the Age of Reason. It's where modern science and medicine were born, among other things. The key phrase is "constant and immutable rational laws which should be applied to all governments." In other words, these thinkers were taking Enlightenment social philosophical principles and applying them to their political systems as a direct response to the political chaos they were experiencing at the time (the seventeenth century). But they were only ONE group:

On the other hand, Jacques-Benigne Bossuet (1627-1704) reinforced medieval notions of kingship in his theory of the Divine Right of Kings, a theory which argued that certain kings ruled because they were chosen by God to do so and that these kings were accountable to no person except God.

Beginning to sound familiar? Who was it that said he speaks directly to God on a regular basis, and God tells him what to do, and that he always takes God's advice, which is why he always "follows his gut" and always "has good instincts" instead of listening to his Royal Advisors? Oh I remember, George W. Bush. So let's see, I hope I get the math right: 4 years + 1 year = 350 years ago. Or put another way, 1 America + 2 Americas = Medieval Europe:

The origin of this concept extends as far back into European, Middle Eastern, and Northern African history as the practice of monarchy does; as a legitimation of authority, the idea that monarchs are divinely chosen . . . . The problem for Europe, however, is the fundamentally anti-political nature of early Christianity, this anti-political aspect of foundational Christianity threw the institution of emperorship and kingship into question. If Christ rejects all political actions and institutions, how can one justify having a monarch?

Good question. Let the theologians answer it. Because God says so, it's all in the Divine Plan. No kidding. That's the best they could come up with:

[T]he City of Man was instituted by God, according to Augustine, in order to secure the safety and security of the members of the City of God. Therefore, monarchs are placed on their thrones by God for a specific purpose. Although they may be ungodly, to question their authority is in essence to question God's purpose for both the City of Man and the City of God.

That works, doesn't it? At least it does if you're The King beholden to The Church:

Bossuet, however, was reacting to an extreme situation and carried this argument to its farthest extent in his doctrine of the Divine Right of Kings. Not only did God bestow power on certain monarchs (and he argued that his king, Louis XIV of France, was one such monarch), but the bestowal of this power legitimated autocracy (rule by one person). The king ruled by virtue of God's authority; therefore he should be obeyed in all things. No group, whether they be nobles, or a parliament, or the people in the street, have a right to participate in this rule; to question or oppose the monarch was to rebel against God's purpose. This doctrine of absolutism would follow a tortured course through the eighteenth century culminating in the French Revolution of 1789-1792 and the beheading of Louis XVI, the king of France.

One can only hope. In the meantime, let us all have some more cake, because The King made the pie higher; so high, in fact, the pie is entirely out of reach.

The Divine Right of Kings, Part 2: Absolutism

This idea states that the best form of government is an autocracy, or rule by a single person, who is not to be questioned or disobeyed; this is known as absolutism, since the monarch rules with "absolute" power -- that is, unshared power, and its best-known champion is Thomas Hobbes, a.k.a. Dick Cheney, who from the following description must have been born in 1588. In fact I think he was:

Hobbes' central argument was that all humans are driven by two and only two impulses: fear of death and desire for power. If left unchecked, human beings would act on these impulses and live violent, brutish, inhumane, and solitary lives. In order to keep these impulses in check, human beings, according to Hobbes, drew up a social contract, which ceded authority to a single person in exchange for a level of security. The single ruler would control the violent and selfish impulses of individual members in a society through brute force; individuals would lose their liberty, but they would gain security and community. Hobbes didn't care what form this single rule might take, whether a monarch or a dicatator, only that absolute power was required to keep society together.

The key phrase here is "Hobbes didn't care." No he doesn't.

You hear a lot of talk these days about the Republicans' reversing the clock to before FDR's "Great Society" -- well it's true. We've taken one giant step back to the Middle Ages. That's one small step for Bush, one giant leap backward for Mankind.

- Michael 8:47 AM - [PermaLink] -

----

Alas DeLay, Frist, and Bush do not want Terri Schiavo to have the same right.

Pope is "serenely giving himself to the will of God"

THE POPE is “serenely abandoning” himself to God’s will, according to a senior Vatican cardinal. Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, the head of the Congregation of Bishops, made his comments during a sermon at a Maundy Thursday Chrism Mass at St Peter’s, in Rome, where he was standing in for the ailing Pope John Paul II.

- rob 1:29 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

Well its been about 5 months, so I figured it was about time I updated the TCS Store

Now there are many shirts to buy and some have this:


on the front


on the back

Our founding fathers knew the dangers of mixing religion and government. Our "more perfect union" was built in a way to avoid that. When religion and politics become one and the same - interpretations of the bible can decide your daily existence - whether you believe in it or not.

We are treading near the dangerous waters our founding fathers wanted us to avoid. When you become a theocracy religion isn't only a pretext to disrupt harmony between two nations, it becomes the pretext to disrupt the harmony within our own nation.

- rob 1:13 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

Found via Daily Kos:

Two groups claim Texas blast, FBI sees no foul play

DUBAI, March 24 (Reuters) - Two Islamist groups have said they caused Wednesday's explosion at a Texas oil refinery which killed 15 people but the U.S. FBI said there was no evidence of "any criminal or terrorist activity".

An unknown group, calling itself al Qaeda Organisation for Holy War in the United States of America, said it would issue a detailed statement and video of the attack later. The statement was posted on the Internet on Thursday.
...
BP said on Thursday it could not pinpoint the cause of the explosion, but ruled out a terrorist attack on the complex.

They don't know why, but they do know it wasn't no terrorist. How do they know that? Because Bush is keeping us safe from them terrorist "folks," ergo: no terrorist attack. QED

- rob 5:15 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

Found via Daily Kos:

Two groups claim Texas blast, FBI sees no foul play

DUBAI, March 24 (Reuters) - Two Islamist groups have said they caused Wednesday's explosion at a Texas oil refinery which killed 15 people but the U.S. FBI said there was no evidence of "any criminal or terrorist activity".

An unknown group, calling itself al Qaeda Organisation for Holy War in the United States of America, said it would issue a detailed statement and video of the attack later. The statement was posted on the Internet on Thursday.
...
BP said on Thursday it could not pinpoint the cause of the explosion, but ruled out a terrorist attack on the complex.

They don't know why, but they do know it wasn't no terrorist. How do they know that? Because Bush is keeping us safe from them terrorist "folks," ergo: no terrorist attack. QED

- rob 5:15 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

Capitol bill aims to control "leftist" profs
THE LAW COULD LET STUDENTS SUE FOR UNTOLERATED BELIEFS.

TALLAHASSEE - Republicans on the House Choice and Innovation Committee voted along party lines Tuesday to pass a bill that aims to stamp out "leftist totalitarianism" by "dictator professors" in the classrooms of Florida's universities.

The Academic Freedom Bill of Rights, sponsored by Rep. Dennis Baxley, R-Ocala, passed 8-to-2 despite strenuous objections from the only two Democrats on the committee.

Oh, I don't know if you all were aware of this but the constitution was Amended a few years back, and all bills much have a name that means exactly opposite of what the bill is about.

While promoting the bill Tuesday, Baxley said a university education should be more than "one biased view by the professor, who as a dictator controls the classroom," as part of "a misuse of their platform to indoctrinate the next generation with their own views."

The bill sets a statewide standard that students cannot be punished for professing beliefs with which their professors disagree. Professors would also be advised to teach alternative "serious academic theories" that may disagree with their personal views.

Being a noble prize nominee (see below post), I think pretty much any theory I come up with would qualify as a serious academic theory, so expect to see Florida professor's teaching: Rain is God's tears because you must have done something bad, and the thunder... um, God is hungry becomes you didn't sacrifice a goat for him you cheap bastard. It'll require two semesters to teach it I believe.

But Baxley brushed off Gelber's concerns. "Freedom is a dangerous thing, and you might be exposed to things you don't want to hear," he said. "Being a businessman, I found out you can be sued for anything. Besides, if students are being persecuted and ridiculed for their beliefs, I think they should be given standing to sue."

During the committee hearing, Baxley cast opposition to his bill as "leftists" struggling against "mainstream society."

"The critics ridicule me for daring to stand up for students and faculty," he said, adding that he was called a McCarthyist.

Baxley later said he had a list of students who were discriminated against by professors, but refused to reveal names because he felt they would be persecuted.

"We need more frivolous lawsuits" declares Republican Baxley.

I'm really starting to worry that the ruling party has been so infiltrated by the religious extremists that they believe they are being persecuted like Jesus was. As they sat in the theaters last year watching Mel Gibson's movie they said to themselves, "that whip tearing apart his flesh is like listening to a liberal professor. That crown of thorns is hurts as much as an editorial against Bush. Oh why must they torture Bill O'Reilly so!"

- rob 4:33 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

More from Media Matters

Dubious doctor touted as Nobel Prize nominee by Hannity, Scarborough

Fox News host Sean Hannity and MSNBC host Joe Scarborough both promoted Dr. William Hammesfahr's false claim that he is a Nobel Prize nominee.

Hammesfahr, a Florida neurologist disciplined in 2003 by the Florida Board of Medicine who claims he can help Terri Schiavo, testified during an October 2002 court hearing on the Schiavo case that his claim to be a Nobel nominee is based on a letter written by Rep. Mike Bilirakis (R-FL) recommending him for the prize. But Bilirakis is not qualified to make a valid nomination under the Nobel rules.

Yes, if anyone at MSGOP or FAUXNEWS bothered to spend twenty seconds they would have learned how a real nomination is done.

Nomination

The process of selecting a winner of the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine starts in September, about a year before the prize announcement. At this time, the prize-awarder in Stockholm (The Nobel Assembly at Karolinska Institutet) sends out invitations to about 3,000 people who are allowed to propose winners. These are mainly members of the Nobel Assembly, previous prize winners, and a selection of professors at universities around the world.

Gee... going to the Nobel Prize site itself for information... who'd of thunk it.

Now back to Media Matters to see how outlandish this false nomination is brandied about:

HANNITY: And we're going to talk to a doctor who spent 10 hours with her tonight, and he says that he believes, in his expert opinion -- this is a man that was nominated for a Nobel Prize, by the way -- that she could be rehabilitated.

[...]

HANNITY: And coming up later in the program tonight, we're going to meet a doctor who actually spent 10 hours examining Terri Schiavo. He was nominated for a Nobel Prize. He believes that she could be rehabilitated.

[...]

HANNITY: You were nominated for a Nobel Prize in medicine?

HAMMESFAHR: Yes.

[...]

HANNITY: You were nominated to get a Nobel Peace Prize in this work. Are you saying that this woman could be rehabilitated?

I'd just like to note that a Nobel Peace Prize in Medicine is a unique award indeed. It was given only to the inventor of LSD because when people took it they were all like "peaceful"

HANNITY: How is it possible we're in this position if you have examined her? You were up for a Nobel Prize. This is mind boggling to me.

[...]

HANNITY: Well, this is what I want to understand. This is your area of expertise that got you nominated for one of the most prestigious awards in medicine, the Nobel Prize.

...

SCARBOROUGH: And a Nobel Prize-nominated neurologist who has treated Terri Schiavo, he says Terri should live and that her husband is perpetrating a hoax that is just aimed at killing his wife.
...
SCARBOROUGH: So, what is Terri Schiavo's true medical condition? Here to help us sort it out is Dr. William Hammesfahr. He's a neurologist who was nominated for a Nobel Prize for his work in medicine. And he's one of the doctors who has treated Terri Schiavo.

It should be noted that I have a letter from Michael nominating me for a Nobel Prize, and I've nominated him for a Nobel Prize too (and one for Alex, Jer, B, and that fine liberal arctic bird [Greg] as well), so if you ever quote TCS, please note that it is the blog written by over 5 Nobel Prize nominees.

TCS: More Nobel Prize nominees then any other blog written with white type over black! (now that is a slogan!)

- rob 3:01 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

Media Matters is an amazing source. Unfortunately it is like looking at termite infested beams and knowing it is those beams that support your home.

Without a diligent media, how will America's freedom survive? (God help us if it is just the blogs - but at least there is that)

Unfortunately our nation's reporters are too busy grooming to do any research whatsoever. Please folks even if you use Google for 1 minute you'd realize you are reporting lies.

Or do they already know that.

Memo to CNN's Franken, Phillips: Ex-Schiavo nurse's charges aren't new, and a judge dismissed her affidavit as "incredible"

Anchor Kyra Phillips wrongly claimed on the March 23 edition of CNN's Live From... that Carla Sauer Iyer, a former nurse for Terri Schiavo, came forward for "the first time" the previous day with allegations that Terri's husband, Michael Schiavo, was a "threat" to her caregivers. In addition, CNN national correspondent Bob Franken incorrectly stated that no one had responded to Iyer's charges, then repeated other rumors of abuse without offering support for his allegations.

In fact, as Media Matters for America documented following an interview Phillips conducted with Iyer on the March 22 edition of Live From..., Iyer's charges are at least as old as her 2003 affidavit, and several news sources have discussed them since then (examples here and here).

Contrary to Franken's claim that Iyer's charges have not been answered, Florida circuit court judge George W. Greer considered Iyer's claims and, in a September 2003 order, rejected them as "incredible."

PHILLIPS: Bob, real quickly, just since you're outside the hospice there -- those who are caring for Terri Schiavo at this time. Yesterday, as you know, for the first time a former -- or a nurse who formerly cared for Terri Schiavo came forward -- not from this hospice but from another convalescence center-- just talking about Michael Schiavo and how she felt he was a threat to those caring for Terri Schiavo. Anybody responding to that? Anybody talking about that?

FRANKEN: No

Thousands have come forward about Fox News being the propaganda arm of the GOP: Anybody responding to that? Anybody talking about that? Well unlike a discredited nurse... there is something to that.

- rob 2:40 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

In response to Michael's post below is a comment (not my lame one, the one after that) that brings to my attention an interesting article, I think you too will find it interesting. I promoting the comment to the main page to make sure more people read it (I hope you don't mind James):

Michael,
Please hang in there. You, and the blogosphere are our last best hope of countering the lies and deception and rank EVIL that IS bu$hco.

I believe this, truly, and coincidentally Google News has an article about the use (and importance) of blogs in Nepal from www.telegraphindia.com. Forgive me for posting a portion here.

Nepal scribes evade censors with blogs

New Delhi, March 23 (Reuters):

Journalists in Nepal are going hi-tech to sidestep tight censorship imposed after last month’s royal coup.

Outspoken web logs, or blogs, are springing up and being widely quoted and linked to in the “blogosphere” — the mushrooming cyberworld rapidly establishing a place for itself as an alternative source of news and information.

“I feel that our very own survival, intellectually and mentally, depends on freedom,” says Dinesh Wagle, a newspaper journalist who runs United We Blog! (www.blog.com.np).

“I don’t want to live like a dead soul. So these days I am blogging for a peaceful and democratic Nepal,” (emphasis mine) he said in an email interview. King Gyanendra seized power on February 1, arresting government and political leaders, rights activists and journalists.

He also banned media criticism of his move, which he said was aimed at ending a nine-year Maoist revolt that has killed 11,000 people and shattered the tourism and aid-dependent economy.

But United We Blog! and another popular blog, the anonymous Radio Free Nepal (freenepal.blogspot.com), publish interviews with arrested political leaders and news about anti-king protests that the mainstream media cannot.

“I am blogging the truth as I see and as I think,” says the print journalist running Radio Free Nepal.

“I am telling my audience there are pro-monarch rallies and the true story behind them (compulsory participation) ... and also that there is not much participation in anti-monarch rallies, along with my feelings that there should be democracy and the king should step down,” he said by email.

**************************
The King should step down. The King should step down. The King should step down. Oh to dream.

Regards, James

- rob 12:45 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

Who the Rest of Me Is

It's getting more depressing by the minute, and I'm not speaking for myself this time. Part of my family works in DC, and my cousin reads this page, and he sent me the following:

Last summer I worked at [a] grotesquely large law firm and had the "fortune" of meeting Robert McNamara. This meeting came a few weeks after I had viewed The Fog of War, and thought it might be interesting to hear what good ole Bobby had to say. After his lecture on how most of what we are doing in Iraq is right, and the excessive use of Vietnam-related lingo to discuss the War on Terror, he had a brief question and answer period. I worked up the balls to ask McNamara, in front of about 60 partners and 200 other legal staff, what exactly he meant when he stated in the documentary that, "When I am asked a hard question I don't want to answer, I pretend I heard the question I would have liked to hear, and answer that." I was quickly cut off by Mr. McNamara before I finished my question and he became boiling mad, extremely aggressive, and went off on how the entire movie was an awful hatchet editing job and how he didn't say half the things they put in it. This was quite interesting to me, since if you've seen the movie, you know it is mostly direct quotations. Needless to say, his answer verified my question ... and the quotation for that matter. Anyways, I thought you might find that little episode interesting.

PS. Here's a recent quotation from Foreign Policy:

"Kissinger has been heard to describe Rumsfeld as the 'most ruthless man' he ever met while in government. It is a view that is disputed by almost no one ... Another NSC staffer from George W. Bush's first term said that 'OSD was nuts, We would say they were out of their fucking minds both from a policy perspective and from a process perspective. In effect, Rumsfeld said, 'I don't give a shit what NSC staff says, I am going to do whatever I feel is in my right to do as the chain of command to the president ...'"

So I wrote back to him:

If you're interested in that subject, I recommend Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers by Daniel Ellsberg (Viking, 2002). He's not the greatest writer on earth, but his story is compelling. And anyone who tells
you that "Iraq is not Vietnam" is completely full of shit. These are all the
same people doing exactly the same thing, for different reasons (Vietnam was
political; this war is strictly for loot, even though ideology is involved
in both wars, and both of them were started by lying to Congress and the
body politic). Nationalism is probably the single most destructive force in
the history of people, worse than the splitting of the atom. It should be
ground out and crushed the moment it raises its murderous head. Once
religion gets dragged into the mix, all bets are off. It won't be over until
every city is burned to rubble, straight down to the ground, and most of the
civilian population murdered. Think Dresden, multiplied a thousandfold.

Yeah, I read the Kissinger quote in the paper when he said it.
Kissinger's one to talk. There's a pretty good documentary called The
Trials of Henry Kissinger that's an eye opener for anyone who didn't live
through that. Nobody has any sense of history here. We've got collective
amnesia. Most Americans think we won WWII single-handedly. And Vietnam is
being spun as we speak. It's a nightmare. I'm so down about it I can hardly
write anymore. It sickens me, this complicity. I wouldn't be surprised if
men showed up and seized my computer and threatened me with jail, I really
wouldn't. My wife thinks I'm nuts. The fact is, we're in the top 15th
percentile in the poliblog universe, and we're being monitored, because we
have links to Democratic Campaign headquarters and I sign petitions all the
time, and I recently read an article that Republicans want to shut down and
fine liberal bloggers who contribute money to political parties through the
Internet. It's being bounced around in Congress right now. And the Democrats
there are about as effective as a fly against a herd of stampeding
elephants. You heard it here first.

- Michael 9:58 AM - [PermaLink] -

----

It was all just politics with a family's suffering simply a prop

Frist Urged Changing The Definition of Brain Dead to Include Babies Born With Condition Comparable to Schiavo's

Frist wrote a book in 1989 called Transplant where he advocated changing the definition of "brain dead" to include anencephalic babies. Anencephalic babies are in the same state as Terri Schiavo except that she suffered a physical trauma that put her into a vegetative state while the anencephalic babies are born that way.

"Near the end of the book, for example, Frist suggests changing the legal definition of 'brain death' to include anencephalic babies, who are born with a fatal neurological disorder but show just the slightest hint of brain-stem activity. Such a change would make it possible to harvest their organs for transplant--something the Catholic Church and pro-life groups oppose. 'Three thousand anencephalic babies were born a year, enough to solve our demand many times over--but we never used them.'" [The New Republic, 1/27/03]

- rob 4:55 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

I've written an entry over at my blog that I think would interest our readers. It's about what the gay right's movement lacks, why it's failing and how it can be successgful. Find it right here. First an excerpt.

Excerpt: My favorite historical period is the 1960s, the time of protests, the only time in modern American history where "the people" was more than just a political slogan. These people accomplished a lot, and they did so in the face of much popular resistance. Civil rights was not popular by any stretch of the imagination, and neither were the protests against the Vietnam War. History, however, has vindicated these people as having been right from the start.

Watching the gay rights movement, I can't help but feel a sharp hint of disappointment, much like I feel when I watch the anti-war "movement" of today's day and age. I'm not particularly militant either way about gay marriage, and I've come to see the Iraq War as something that must continue until the end, as the situation could be worse and is indeed improving. But the anti-war movement is so pitiful that I cry for history's sake.

The gay rights movement is, unfortunately, in an even worst state - laying on the floor, coughing up blood, begging for mercy. Or at least it should be, given the condition it's in. Here's why, and what the gay rights movement can do to change that. I've never been to a gay pride parade, though I have caught a few glimpses on TV. From what I'm told, and the little I've seen, they're boisterous, pep-filled affairs that ooze energy and raw sexuality. And therein lies the problem.

- ThePoliticalPenguin 4:51 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

The GOP empires is build on pandering and lies... is it finally crashing under its own weight?

Conservatives: G.O.P. Right Is Splintered on Schiavo Intervention

Some more moderate Republicans are also uneasy. Senator John W. Warner of Virginia, the sole Republican to oppose the Schiavo bill in a voice vote in the Senate, said: "This senator has learned from many years you've got to separate your own emotions from the duty to support the Constitution of this country. These are fundamental principles of federalism."

"It looks as if it's a wholly Republican exercise," Mr. Warner said, "but in the ranks of the Republican Party, there is not a unanimous view that Congress should be taking this step."
...
"My party is demonstrating that they are for states' rights unless they don't like what states are doing," said Representative Christopher Shays of Connecticut, one of five House Republicans who voted against the bill. "This couldn't be a more classic case of a state responsibility."

"This Republican Party of Lincoln has become a party of theocracy," Mr. Shays said. "There are going to be repercussions from this vote. There are a number of people who feel that the government is getting involved in their personal lives in a way that scares them."
...
The Republican Party has long associated itself with limiting the power of the federal government over the states, though this is not the only time that party leaders have veered from that position. Most famously, in 2000, it persuaded the Supreme Court to overturn a Florida court ruling ordering a recount of the vote in the presidential election between Al Gore and George Bush.

But now the Schiavo case is illustrating splinters in the conservative movement that Mr. Bush managed to bridge in his last campaign, and the challenges Mr. Bush and Republicans face in trying to govern over the next two years, even though they control Congress as well as the White House.

- rob 1:14 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

Earlier this week it was Monday: The Top Ten Conservative Idiots, No. 190

2. George W. Bush
Over the past couple of weeks Our Great Leader has been pottering around the country on his "Abandoning Social Security Helps America" Tour (ASSHAT), and unfortunately his little jaunt is already suffering from poor attendance and cancellations. The majority of Republicans in Alabama's congressional delegation said "thanks but no thanks" to an invitation to join the president during his stop in Montgomery, and Bush was forced to cancel his trip to Sarasota after even Rep. Katherine Harris - she of the perpetual Bush brown nose - decided that having the Chimp stop by would be more trouble than it was worth. (Harris then pretended that she had nothing to do with the cancellation.)

Meanwhile Republicans were busy making excuses for Bush, saying that he'd received "bad advice" on the Social Security issue, therefore putting the blame squarely on the shoulders of, um, someone else, I guess. Quote of the week came from an unnamed Republican senator in the Washington Times, who said, "The message coming out of the White House is that we'll fix Social Security by raising your taxes and cutting your retirement benefits and, to get something passed, we'll forget about the personal retirement accounts we promised." He then said that's like telling voters, "Never vote for Republicans again - we lie." Sounds about right.
...
6. War Profiteers
Last week the House of Representatives approved yet another $80+ billion request by Our Great Leader to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. That's about $300 billion or so we've spent on these wars since Bush came to power. Impressive. Of course, all the money is going to a good cause, right? I mean, surely its worth cutting child services, education, and health care in this country so that the Iraqi people can elect an Islamic theocracy, thus severely punishing the people who attacked us on 9/11... wait a second, that doesn't sound right.

Anyway, there's no need to worry at all about where this money might be going because helpful corporations such as Halliburton will be taking care of it. Why, just last week it was revealed that Halliburton had bought liquefied petroleum gas from Kuwait for $82,000 and then charged the Pentagon $27 million to transport it into Iraq. In fact, Pentagon auditors reckon the amount of overbilling by Halliburton on fuel imports alone adds up to $108 million dollars.

So as you can see, destroying Iraq was the smart thing to do. Not only do companies with extremely close ties to the Bush administration now get to make vast profits off the backs of the American taxpayer, we also get to cut programs at home for those who need them the most! It's a win-win situation!

- rob 12:49 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

Schiavo: 'Come down, President Bush'

Weary after an emotional visit with his wife, Schiavo said he is astonished that politicians want to interfere in such a private matter.

"Instead of worrying about my wife, who was granted her wishes by the state courts the past seven years, they should worry about the pedophiles killing young girls," Schiavo said, referring to a local case. "Why doesn't Congress worry about people not having health insurance? Or the budget? Let's talk about all the children who don't have homes."

He said U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, who is leading a charge to extend Terri Schiavo's life, is a "little slithering snake" pandering for votes.

"To make comments that Terri would want to live, how do they know?" Schiavo said of the members of Congress who want to keep his wife alive.

"Have they ever met her?" Schiavo said. "What color are her eyes? What's her middle name? What's her favorite color? They don't have any clue who Terri is. They should all be ashamed of themselves."

Schiavo said he was going to stay at his wife's side through the entire ordeal and said he wouldn't back down in his fight to have her wishes carried out.

"Terri died 15 years ago," Schiavo said, referring to the collapse and cardiac arrest that doctors say virtually destroyed her brain. "It's time for her to be with the Lord like she wanted to be."

I already see DeLay's next campaign bumpersticker

DeLay 2006: Keeping Americans away from the Lord - one soul at a time

- rob 5:01 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

In Schiavo case, Congress trespasses on private tragedy

Congress suddenly seems intent on practicing medicine without a license. Or is it just practicing politics?
No member of the House or Senate has ever examined Terri Schiavo, the Florida woman who has been in a persistent vegetative state with no hope of recovery since suffering severe brain damage 15 years ago.
...
Courts have reviewed the case for 12 years and ruled consistently that the husband should be entrusted with her care and that his decision to remove the feeding tube that sustains her life should stand.

But Congress thinks it knows better. Early Monday, President Bush signed a special bill opening the federal courts for a rerun of the family fight over whether Schiavo should be allowed to die. The latest round began with a hearing Monday in Tampa and seemed destined for appeals.

It is shameful political grandstanding. It also is an appalling precedent for political interference in the most painful decisions any family can face. An estimated 14,000 to 35,000 Americans are in persistent vegetative states. Does Congress plan to meddle in the medical and legal judgments on each one?
...
Those most active in politicizing the case are Republicans who typically proclaim their devotion to reducing the interference of the federal government in people's lives. These include Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, both potential candidates for a future Republican presidential nomination.

Frist, a heart surgeon and one of the few physicians in Congress, even presumed to offer his own optimistic diagnosis of Schiavo's prospects based on viewing a few clips from a family-provided videotape. That's a dubious method for practicing medicine. Medical specialists say the occasional eye movements and reflex actions that Schiavo's parents and their supporters see as encouraging are common signs of false hope.

For House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, whose professional expertise is in pest control, not terminal-care decisions, the issue is a convenient distraction from allegations about ties to unsavory lobbyists and a Texas fundraising scandal.
...
President Bush said Monday it's "wise to always err on the side of life." There's no reason to doubt the sincerity of their beliefs or that of others who voted for the bill. But it is not their judgment to make.

Given that Bush has shown no previous interest in errirng on the side of life - I think it is fair to doubt the sincerity of their beliefs.

Here's the talking points that may also make one doubt the sincerity of their beliefs.

This is a great political issue, because Senator Nelson of Florida - has already refused to become a cosponsor and this is a tough issue for Democrats.

- rob 4:58 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

erring on the side of life?

From This Modern World

In his five years as governor of Texas, the state has executed 131 prisoners -- far more than any other state. Mr. Bush has lately granted a stay of execution for the first time, for a DNA test.
In answer to questions about that record, Governor Bush has repeatedly said that he has no qualms. "I'm confident," he said last February, "that every person that has been put to death in Texas under my watch has been guilty of the crime charged, and has had full access to the courts."

That defense of the record ignores many notorious examples of unfairness in Texas death penalty cases. Lawyers have been under the influence of cocaine during the trial, or been drunk or asleep. One court dismissed a complaint about a lawyer who slept through a trial with the comment that courts are not "obligated to either constantly monitor trial counsel's wakefulness or endeavor to wake counsel should he fall asleep."

This past week The Chicago Tribune published a compelling report on an investigation of all 131 death cases in Governor Bush's time. It made chilling reading.

In one-third of those cases, the report showed, the lawyer who represented the death penalty defendant at trial or on appeal had been or was later disbarred or otherwise sanctioned. In 40 cases the lawyers presented no evidence at all or only one witness at the sentencing phase of the trial.

In 29 cases, the prosecution used testimony from a psychiatrist who -- based on a hypothetical question about the defendant's past -- predicted he would commit future violence. Most of those psychiatrists testified without having examined the defendant: a practice condemned professionally as unethical.

Other witnesses included one who was temporarily released from a psychiatric ward to testify, a pathologist who had admitted faking autopsies and a judge who had been reprimanded for lying about his credentials.

Asked about the Tribune study, Governor Bush said, "We've adequately answered innocence or guilt" in every case.

- rob 4:53 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

Jon Stewart at his very best: Daily Show - 03/21/05 - Terry Schiavo
I'd cry but I'd have to put a condom on my face.

Thanks to OneGoodMove.

- rob 4:49 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

Via Kos

Then and Now

The 2000 Republican Platform: "Medical decision-making should be in the hands of physicians and their patients."

The 2004 Republican Platform: "We must attack the root causes of high health care costs by: ... putting patients and doctors in charge of medical decisions."

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, March 17, 2005: "So our -- Congress has acted tonight and the House of Representatives acted last night. ... It is clear to me that Congress has a responsibility since other aspects of government at the state level have failed to address this issue."

House Majority Leader Tom Delay, March 19: "For one person in one state court to make this decision is too heavy. ... It does take all of us to think this through."

- rob 4:34 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

Wow, these are indeed interesting times - I agree with David Brooks.

Brooks: Masters of Sleaze

Back in 1995, when Republicans took over Congress, a new cadre of daring and original thinkers arose. These bold innovators had a key insight: that you no longer had to choose between being an activist and a lobbyist. You could be both. You could harness the power of K Street to promote the goals of Goldwater, Reagan and Gingrich. And best of all, you could get rich while doing it!

Before long, ringleader Grover Norquist and his buddies were signing lobbying deals with the Seychelles and the Northern Mariana Islands and talking up their interests at weekly conservative strategy sessions - what could be more vital to the future of freedom than the commercial interests of these two fine locales?

Before long, folks like Norquist and Abramoff were talking up the virtues of international sons of liberty like Angola's Jonas Savimbi and Congo's dictator Mobutu Sese Seko - all while receiving compensation from these upstanding gentlemen, according to The Legal Times. Only a reactionary could have been so discomfited by Savimbi's little cannibalism problem as to think this was not a daring contribution to the cause of Reaganism.
...
The sleazo-cons thought they could take over K Street to advance their agenda. As it transpired, K Street took over them.

- rob 4:20 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

TCS Clipping Service

For those who wish to take a break from the doubly sad case of Mrs. Schiavo (1. for the loss to her husband and family... even though they lost her over a decade ago, they've been losing her over and over again. 2. for America's loss of a constitution), we thought we'd link to other articles that will interest you or anger you in other ways (that's what we're here for)

• British troops 'were supplied with blank ammunition'
  Report reveals devastating logistical failures, as anti-war protesters march in London
• St. Petersburg 5-year-old cuffed after school outburst
  (Just another day in Jeb's Florida)
  
  
• Let's keep science out of science museums!
  A New Screen Test for Imax: It's the Bible vs. the Volcano
  
  
• Army raises enlistment age for reservists to 39

- rob 1:41 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

GOD DAMNED POLITICAL SHITS

Here's an e-conversation that took place yesterday among a group of invisible U.S. citizens who are now Sworn Enemies of the State:

R: The husband has gone through hell.

but hey, let's score political points!

Meanwhile bush as gov said "if they don't have money - KILL THEM!"

J: This whole fucking thing makes my blood boil, none more so then when ihave to actually see pictures of the fucking anti-christ, exterminatornazi fuck delay.

A-M said this morning that michael schiavone should just say "whatever". let his family keep the vegetable alive. He had an"ulterior motive"? He fucking waited seven years before he married hiscurrent wife!

If you have not made a living will, and informed all of your closestrelatives and friends as to what you want to happen to you if you arein that situation, you better do it soon.

A: Given the political words wasted on this case, I'm sure comeone in Congress is already working hard on a bill calling for making DNR in a living will illegal.

B: This fucking case is the ultimate hypocrisy of the whole “culture of life” scam. Sine 1972 (I think that’s when Roe was decided), the principle guiding the fascist right to life movement has been based on federalism — that each state ought to be able to regulate these decisions consistent with its own moral compass. This reactionary view really stems from the Civil War (how dare a national government outlaw slavery), and was continued through the civil rights movement when these good Christian white men “argued” for the states to be supreme on issues of social and “moral” matters. Well, the Schiavo case was resolved precisely the way the reactionaries want for abortion — a Florida matter decided by Florida courts without Federal interference — and lo and behold they abhorred the result and immediately scrambled like a lynch mob to Federalize it in the most sinister way: a federal law so narrowly tailored as to be useless for any facts other than Terri Schiavo’s pathetic saga. It’s so bad I actually think this has a chance to be the Right’s “jumping the shark” moment. A majority far more robust than the one that put the chimp back in the White house (60-40) support right to die legislation broadly defined, and the shite law just passed is going to most likely keep Terri’s feeding tube in while this horror is appealed and porously delayed until it reaches the Supreme Court (years in the news cycle) where Scalia will twist the law so self servingly as to keep Terri alive indefinitely and simultaneously overturn Roe. This is not what most Americans want, dumb as we are. Here’s to hoping a horrific situation leads to something good...

What makes the Schiavo case harder, though, is federalizing these issues, albeit in the “right” way, is precisely what we want. We want the Feds to say this a private matter of personal choice, like the decision to have an abortion. Sadly, I’d sacrifice Terri Schiavo if the Democrats got smart and capitulated on Schiavo but drafted broader legislation saying that while one cannot infer these issues for anyone else, one can choose for himself the matter and time of his exit in certain circumstances. That is what the Oregon law does that the Bushies hate so much, so DeLay and Frist are ripe for the taking now by saying no to the husband but yes to anyone else that writes a living will...but alas, the Democrats all went home for Easter and are too timid to inject themselves when the country needs them most.

M: I wish they would all inject themselves. Then we could start from scratch.

Here's what some of the last sane fellow Americans think, from today's New York Times:

Re "Congress Passes and Bush Signs Schiavo Measure" (front page, March 21):

Performing a medical procedure against a patient's will (or that of the patient's legal surrogate) is unethical and illegal.

If Terri Schiavo's feeding tube is now reinserted, the government institutions and individuals responsible will be guilty of assault and should be held accountable.

Every person has the moral and legal right to accept or reject offered treatment. As Ms. Schiavo's legal guardian, her husband, Michael Schiavo, has the responsibility to make such decisions. Ethically and legally, this is a decision to be made by him in consultation with her caregivers.

The actions of Congress and the president this weekend are outrageous and set a dangerous precedent.

Stephen T. Mernoff, M.D.
North Smithfield, R.I.
March 21, 2005
The writer is a clinical assistant professor of neurology at Brown Medical School.

--

Re "The Schiavo Case" (editorial, March 19):

As a husband, I understand Michael Schiavo's drive to carry out what he believes are his wife's wishes. And as a father, I comprehend the Schindlers' crusade to keep their child alive at all costs. But I agree with you that it is inconceivable for the United States Congress to be injecting itself into this family tragedy.

State and local courts all around this country face profoundly sad marital, parental and custodial issues every day. These courts weigh evidence and make tough and often painful decisions; appeals courts dissect these decisions and decide their fate. Congress has no business casting this legal system aside to advance its political agenda. It's pitiful that the federal government feels compelled to intrude into one Florida family's calamity.

--

Matthew Lepore
Washington, March 19, 2005

I applaud your March 19 editorial as a much-needed injection of sanity into the media circus surrounding this tragedy.

An ABC News poll shows that 78 percent of respondents would not want to be kept alive if they were in Terri Schiavo's condition.

It's clear that the extreme right wing is out of the mainstream. Republicans are flouting the rule of law and trampling on individual privacy just to score points with this constituency.

Millions of Americans find their grandstanding to be a ghoulish spectacle that sets an alarming precedent.

Yet major media outlets ignore the majority opinion and give undue coverage to this group of bullies, apparently because they scream so loudly.

Lisa Renaud
Santa Monica, Calif. March 20, 2005

--

This case shows political grandstanding at its most blatant. Think: Three and a half years ago, the president received a memo warning of a noted terrorist's determination to attack America within its borders. He remained in Crawford, Tex., and did nothing.

But to sign cobbled-together legislation to interfere in a matter that should have remained a personal family tragedy and to appeal to his religious political base, the president flew to Washington immediately.

This is a leader who puts political payback before the law or the good of the country.

Elizabeth Bass
Portland, Ore., March 21, 2005

--

Washington's intervention in the Terri Schiavo case is a grotesque spectacle. The only person qualified to make a decision in this tragic situation is her husband. So much for the sanctity of marriage.

William C. Brown
Urbana, Ill., March 21, 2005

--

In the debate in Congress about the Terri Schiavo case, a number of legislators have mentioned the pain and suffering that would be caused by discontinuing the feeding tube.

It is an accepted medical practice to withhold tube feedings and intravenous fluids from terminally ill cancer patients. In 23 years of oncology practice, I cannot recall a patient whose suffering was increased by withholding tube feedings and intravenous fluids. In these cases, patients generally die from renal failure, which is perceived to be a painless way to die.

Peter D. Byeff, M.D.
Southington, Conn., March 21, 2005

And finally, this: blow to the rule of law:

. . . President Bush signed legislation yesterday giving Ms. Schiavo's parents a personal right to sue in federal court. The new law tramples on the principle that this is "a nation of laws, not of men," and it guts the power of the states. When the commotion over this one tragic woman is over, Congress and the president will have done real damage to the founders' careful plan for American democracy.

[S]upporters of Ms. Schiavo's parents, particularly members of the religious right, leaned heavily on Congress and the White House to step in. They did so yesterday with the new law, which gives "any parent of Theresa Marie Schiavo" standing to sue in federal court to keep her alive.

This narrow focus is offensive. The founders believed in a nation in which, as Justice Robert Jackson once wrote, we would "submit ourselves to rulers only if under rules." There is no place in such a system for a special law creating rights for only one family. The White House insists that the law will not be a precedent. But that means that the right to bring such claims in federal court is reserved for people with enough political pull to get a law passed that names them in the text.

The Bush administration and the current Congressional leadership like to wax eloquent about states' rights. But they dropped those principles in their rush to stampede over the Florida courts and Legislature. The new law doesn't miss a chance to trample on the state's autonomy and dignity. . . .

Republicans have traditionally championed respect for the delicate balance the founders created. But in the Schiavo case, and in the battle to stop the Democratic filibusters of judicial nominations, President Bush and his Congressional allies have begun to enunciate a new principle: the rules of government are worth respecting only if they produce the result we want.

And its Siamese-twin editorial

The sight of Congress and President Bush intruding into the sufferings of the Schiavo family was appalling. Washington had years to properly consider the agonizing dilemmas that cases like this one raise for uncounted, less publicized American families. But the Republican leadership did nothing until the issue ripened to a maximum moment for simplistic political exploitation.

. . . Whatever the range of opinion on the underlying issue, polls show that the public recoiled at the sight of elected officials racing to make hay of this family's private pain. Those findings only underline the hubris of the House majority leader, Tom DeLay, and the other G.O.P. leaders. Their egregious pandering was directed not at the bulk of the populace, but at their base vote among the evangelical and fundamentalist conservatives who have been demanding greater deference since working to deliver Republican victories last year.

The political timidity of potential opponents was woeful. No one dared even demand debate in the Senate [emphasis mine]. In the House, many opponents seemed simply to prefer to stay away. Arguments against the bill were led by Florida Democrats, who had the most reason to be offended by Congress's crude overriding of state government.

Sanctimonious rhetoric rang out about the value of each individual life even as a strategy memo was reported circulating among G.O.P. lawmakers cynically relishing the points to be scored with the right-to-life political machine in next year's elections.

So there you have it, people: It's perfectly okay with Christian extremists to utterly chuck the rule of law and states' rights when it comes to imposing your own intolerant religious views on other Americans. Why separate church and state when Church is the State -- and when there isn't a God Damned thing we can do about it?

(this is a post from Michael - I just posted it - though I agree with all it)

- rob 12:59 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

You too can e-mail the 4439 people who made donations and opted to receive e-mails from the Terri Schindler-Schiavo Foundation Active Donors. Only $500 for the list!

- Alex 11:54 AM - [PermaLink] -

----

To Sum Up

Daily KOS, Atrios, and others are all over the Schiavo issue. Here's two posts I think say what needs to be said:

Daily Kos :: Today's Bateman cartoon: Schiavo & GOP's culture o'life



and

Digby at Hullabaloo has his say in this post:The Days Of Our Lives

By now most people who read liberal blogs are aware that George W. Bush signed a law in Texas that expressly gave hospitals the right to remove life support if the patient could not pay and there was no hope of revival, regardless of the patient's family's wishes. It is called the Texas Futile Care Law. Under this law, a baby was removed from life support against his mother's wishes in Texas just this week. A 68 year old man was given a temporary reprieve by the Texas courts just yesterday.

Those of us who read liberal blogs are also aware that Republicans have voted en masse to pull the plug (no pun intended) on medicaid funding that pays for the kind of care that someone like Terry Schiavo and many others who are not so severely brain damaged need all across this country.

Those of us who read liberal blogs also understand that that the tort reform that is being contemplated by the Republican congress would preclude malpractice claims like that which has paid for Terry Schiavo's care thus far.

Those of us who read liberal blogs are aware that the bankruptcy bill will make it even more difficult for families who suffer a catastrophic illness like Terry Schiavo's because they will not be able to declare chapter 7 bankruptcy and get a fresh start when the gargantuan medical bills become overwhelming.

And those of us who read liberal blogs also know that this grandstanding by the congress is a purely political move designed to appease the religious right and that the legal maneuverings being employed would be anathema to any true small government conservative.

Those who don't read liberal blogs, on the other hand, are seeing a spectacle on television in which the news anchors repeatedly say that the congress is "stepping in to save Terry Schiavo" mimicking the unctuous words of Tom Delay as they grovel and leer at the family and nod sympathetically at the sanctimonious phonies who are using this issue for their political gain.

I apologize for quoting so much, go read the post. It is well worth your time.

- rob 4:24 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

The GOP Jumped the Shark

The Republican Congress just had its "mission accomplished" moment?

This pandering to the religious right is going to scare people and make them really look at what DeLay et al are doing (I hope)

ABC News: Poll: No Role for Government in Schiavo Case

March 21, 2005 -- Americans broadly and strongly disapprove of federal intervention in the Terri Schiavo case, with sizable majorities saying Congress is overstepping its bounds for political gain.

The public, by 63 percent-28 percent, supports the removal of Schiavo's feeding tube, and by a 25-point margin opposes a law mandating federal review of her case. Congress passed such legislation and President Bush signed it early today.

That legislative action is distinctly unpopular: Not only do 60 percent oppose it, more — 70 percent — call it inappropriate for Congress to get involved in this way. And by a lopsided 67 percent-19 percent, most think the elected officials trying to keep Schiavo alive are doing so more for political advantage than out of concern for her or for the principles involved.

- rob 12:43 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

The GOP

States rights? (just a political phrase)

Sanctity of marriage? (just a political phrase)

Respect for the constitution? (just a political phrase)

Trial By Legislation

QUESTION: What does all of that mean? Explain it to me like I'm a fifth-grader.

ANSWER: It means that Congress has literally made a "federal case" out of the Schiavo dispute. It means that Schiavo's parents now have a right to assert essentially the same claims they already have asserted in state court in Florida in a new forum-- federal court-- and applying federal constitutional principles instead of state constitutional principles. It means that the federal trial judge who presides over the case must review all of the facts and law from scratch, without deferring to the legal judgments and factual conclusions the Florida courts have reached after many years of litigation-- and 21 separate, written, published rulings in the case. It means that the federal trial judge may order the tube reinserted into Terri Schiavo almost immediately upon getting the case. It means that Congress has interjected itself into a state law dispute, at the end of that dispute, on the side of one litigant over another.
...
QUESTION: Let's start first then with Michael Schiavo's expected arguments. Does he stand a chance of getting this law declared unconstitutional?

ANSWER: Absolutely he has a chance. There are plenty of serious constitutional issues raised by this law. First, it applies only to one family and thus may create equal protection problems-- after all, why shouldn't other people who want to keep their loved ones on life support over the objections of others not also received tailor-made legislation? Second, as Harvard Law School Professor Laurence Tribe points out, it arguably deprives Terri Schiavo herself of the constitutional right to "halt the unwanted bodily invasion by a tube" and does so without any due process to her (and her husband and guardian). Third, it raises big separation of powers problems and also federalism concerns-- the Supreme Court in particular hasn't been receptive to federal intrusion into matters normally resolved by the states-- matters like guardianship laws.

QUESTION: So you are saying that it is not a slam dunk that this effort by Congress ultimately will succeed even in getting another round of substantive hearings on the merits of Terri Schiavo's rights?

ANSWER: That is exactly what I am saying. And I will go a little further. I'm also saying that there are probably some smart folks on Capitol Hill who are supporting this legislation knowing that ultimately the courts will strike it down. That way, being the politicians that they are, they will be able to blame the heartless judiciary for the result and still will be able to say to their constituents that they tried their best. It is the politics of cynicism at its very best (or very worst).

QUESTION: Okay, settle down.

Okay okay so Checks and Balances are being sacrificed for political ploys and a family's heartbreak is being used as a gimmick, but you don't have to get so "excited" about it - just settle down... let's talk about Michael Jackson instead.

- rob 12:37 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

Sometimes a politician lets their true thoughts come out.

(from the Washington Post article linked in the post below this):

House Majority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) told reporters that he is "going to look at my living will that I haven't looked at for about 10 years and be sure it still says exactly what I wanted it to say."

Living Wills

Schiavo case underscores importance of a living will

TAMPA -- Terri Schiavo didn't have a living will. But because of her, thousands of other Americans won't make that same mistake.

Lawyers and organizations that promote the importance of living wills and advance directives say the bitter legal battle over the severely brain-damaged woman has led many people to put their end-of-life wishes in writing.

Here is a great source for you, including links to living wills tailored for the state you live in (most local state bars have Living Will forms available on their websites):

Living Wills (Advance Directive)

- rob 12:29 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

Political Pornography

Congress and the President officially sacrifice their souls and our constitution to the idol of a false god (Eris - Goddess of discord, strife and political expediency)

Congress Passes Schiavo Measure

Frist called the measure "a unique bill" that "should not serve as a precedent for future legislation." Some Democrats objected to an earlier, broader version that might have applied to many cases of incapacitated patients.

And I guess the bill that rounds up anyone not jingoisticly American enough shouldn't serve as a precedent for future legislation either. Because filling the prisons and beating "potential terrorists" to death is pretty damn well the definition of "culture of life."

In his Senate speech yesterday, Frist denounced an unsigned memo circulated to Republican lawmakers over the weekend calling the Schiavo case "a great political issue."

Frist said he had not seen the memo, adding: "I condemn the content of the memo and reaffirm that the interest in this case by myself, and the many members of the Senate on both sides of the aisle, is to assure that Mrs. Schiavo has another chance at life."

Oh yes, dear Frist, because you are so concerned about life. Maybe you should talk to Bush about that.

Baby born with fatal defect dies after removal from life support

The baby wore a cute blue outfit with a teddy bear covering his bottom. The 17-pound, 6-month-old boy wiggled with eyes open and smacked his lips, according to his mother.

Then at 2 p.m. today, a medical staffer at Texas Children's Hospital gently removed the breathing tube that had kept Sun Hudson alive since his Sept. 25 birth. Cradled by his mother, he took a few breaths, and died.

"I talked to him, I told him that I loved him. Inside of me, my son is still alive," Wanda Hudson told reporters afterward. "This hospital was considered a miracle hospital. When it came to my son, they gave up in six months .... They made a terrible mistake."

Sun's death marks the first time a hospital has been allowed by a U.S. judge to discontinue an infant's life-sustaining care against a parent's wishes, according to bioethical experts. A similar case involving a 68-year-old man in a chronic vegetative state at another Houston hospital is before a court now.
...
Texas law allows hospitals can discontinue life sustaining care, even if patient family members disagree. A doctor's recommendation must be approved by a hospital's ethics committee, and the family must be given 10 days from written notice of the decision to try and locate another facility for the patient.

That law? Signed by then Governor Bush.

It is only politics. And it is disgusting.

This is millions of our tax dollars gone! You say, "but a life has no price!" I have three questions to ask you:

1) Is Mrs. Schiavo truly going to have a life to lead, or is she just going to be a shell that continues the false hope and suffering that all who loved her?
2) Congress was in session this weekend for this measure, Bush flew back from Texas to sign it. We're talking millions here. Do you think more lives would have been saved if that money was used to buy equipment in under funded emergency rooms in poor urban areas?
3) What if Mrs. Schiavo was a black man convicted of killing another person in a drug deal gone wrong, despite having witnesses placing him in a different location, despite having a state appointed lawyer that fell asleep during the proceedings, and despite the only evidence the prosecution had was witnesses who were testifying so their own sentences could be reduced; would you still want her "saved"?

- rob 12:24 PM - [PermaLink] -

----

Subscribe to the TCS Feed

Having trouble with some of the poor English on this site?
Imagine what it looks like when translated by a machine:

Search TCS

Archive

Archive Index Page

What is this?

This is a "team" blog.  We are a bunch of Americans, whose rising distress in our leader's decisions brought us together to make this site.  As Bush said, he's a "uniter."  Many of us have never even met.
That's the internet for you.

This Century Sucks Store

Buy our cool stuff.
And tell everyone what you feel.  

We have a little Store you can visit.  

Our store's selection of items is constantly growing. Come see what we have.

 

We're also Amazon Associates, so if you want to buy something from Amazon, please search for it below, and we will get a few bucks from the sale.

Search Now:

Sites we often like:

Tin Foil Caps

The Free Speech Zone

The office of the independent blogger

Buzzflash

Tom The Dancing Bug

VerifiedVoting.org

Get Your War On

This Modern World

Eschaton / Atrios

Daily Kos

Contribute to America's Future

It is now more important then ever.

Donate to the Democractic Congressional Campaign Committee

Donate to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee

Some More Site Mottos

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American people."
- Teddy Roosevelt



"Government has a final responsibility for the well-being of its citizenship. If private cooperative endeavor fails to provide work for willing hands and relief for the unfortunate, those suffering hardship from no fault of their own have a right to call upon the Government for aid; and a government worthy of its name must make fitting response."
 - Franklin Delano Roosevelt



"I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and Constitutions, but laws must and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors."
- Thomas Jefferson



"The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home."

"All men having power ought to be distrusted to a certain degree."
- James Madison



"I believe in human dignity as the source of national purpose, in human liberty as the source of national action, in the human heart as the source of national compassion, and in the human mind as the source of our invention and our ideas. It is, I believe, the faith in our fellow citizens as individuals and as people that lies at the heart of the liberal faith. For liberalism is not so much a party creed or set of fixed platform promises as it is an attitude of mind and heart, a faith in man's ability through the experiences of his reason and judgment to increase for himself and his fellow men the amount of justice and freedom and brotherhood which all human life deserves."
- John F. Kennedy



"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are [a] few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid."
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

More Sites we often like:

more coming...

"There's nothing wrong with America that can't be fixed by what's right with America." - Bill Clinton.