Wednesday, March 30, 2005
No wonder judges won't allow either the Ten Commandments or any other mention of God on public property. They want to get rid of all the competition.
lood stains are hard to get out once they've set in. The only way to reduce all obvious appearance of them on one's clothing is to obscure their blots by wearing black. Such is more clear today than I have ever known it to be in my lifetime. Inequality. Injustice. Over lawyered. No need to recarve that above the entrance to your star chambers
. It's there in plain sight for everyone to see.
How equal are the rights of a little girl to live unthreatened and unmolested, to those of the piece of filth that tortured, raped, and murdered her, when you enable early releases and dismissals on technical grounds of such filth? Why is it a federal district court has authority to come in and all but undermine any state's law intended to protect children like her, thus providing criminals the loophole they need to murder more, but not when it comes to protecting the lives of unsuspecting citizens?
What justice are you offering an innocent, physically healthy women you've sentenced to a barbaric and painful form of death after leaving her choices and life at the mercy of a most untrustworthy "spouse," while sadistically dangling out hope for her and her parents then immediately snatching it away once again? Where was your protection for another woman who pleaded for it from you "weeks before her husband stabbed her to death"?
Who can hope to find justice in your courts so long as your refuse to grant any to the accosted and threatened citizens hoping for it, but instead allow the dangerous and criminally unremitting the freedom to roam our streets unrestrained?
When will we remove our nation out from under your
utopian hellish, Parthenonic one of lawyers, and return her solely to one, under God, of laws?
One of life's common grounds.
eaders and activists on the left are not all the same, as the effort to actually protect the civil rights of Terri
Schindler manifestly illustrates. (De)composing
the other side, those "The Courts Have Spoken—'Nuff Said" defenders, are such notables as Revolutionary Communist Youth Brigade
, the pro-euthanasia group End-of-Life Choices (formerly Hemlock Society), ACLU
, New York Times
and, apparently, our president George Walker Bush as well as his brother Jeb, Florida's "
can't won't do nothin'
The humane beings willing to do whatever they can to protect Terri's rights include Alan Dershowitz, Tom Harkin, Joe Lieberman, Lanny Davis, and David Boies. Folks whom one would not normally accuse of being bible-thumping, arch-conservative Rove-puppets.
Now Jesse Jackson is on the scene actively trying to secure the support of key Florida state senators for passing a law that will preserve, protect and defend Terri's rights and the rights of others like her. In a matter of hours, Florida could very well have in place adequate safeguards against many of the abuses of the disabled, especially the mentally impaired, like the ones America has had the shameful misfortune of witnessing these past two weeks. Make no mistake, if this final effort succeeds at preserving Terri's rights, it will be entirely due to the leadership of one man: Jesse Jackson. For that, I join Darrell at Southern Conservative in saying,
- God bless you, Reverend Jackson. My dislike for your politics will forever be tempered by this brave, just act on your part.
Anyone just tuning in, here's a summary of the undisputed facts: Young wife collapses, becomes brain damaged (not brain dead). Husband sues medical folks, asking for tons of dough in order to rehabilitate her (no mention at all of her wish to die). Husband wins case, gets dough, subjects wife to highly experimental treatment (which of course fails), starts new family with another woman, effectively stops wife's treatments (including any that could help her to eat orally), and *doh!* suddenly remembers wife's wish to die! One court—one judge—says,
"How come you didn't bring this up 7 years ago?" "Good thing you remembered. Okay, out with her feeding tube!" Wife's parents appeal, 19 courts say, "Sorry, looks like that judge followed all the procedures so we can't won't re-examine any of the underlying facts of the case." Wife's feeding tube removed, court forbids all medical treament—including any attempt to feed or hydrate her orally.
Problem is, "Spoon-feeding is not medical treatment." It is certainly not, by any means, "heroic medical intervention." However, that same judge whose orders the 'Nuff Said folks are blindly upholding, says such simple, ordinary, non-medical feeding is not allowed. He won't let anyone even attempt it.
Not surprisingly, the lamestream media has imposed a Facts Brownout® on practically all such information, leaving the American public with only a dim view of who, what, when, where, how, and why it is that the judge got to divine—second-hand, no less—"Terri's wishes." At least one liberal, Joseph at the talking dog, understands this:
Most of the public would be appalled if they saw films of Terri Schiavo sitting up and interacting with her parents (albeit at an infantile. or perhaps advanced Alzheimers, level), because most people assume what they think they have been told: that Terri Schiavo is a vegetable in the Karen Ann Quinlan sense of unconscious and hooked up to machines that go beep (or worse, that the court order precludes attempts to feed her by spoon). None of this is true, of course. Most Americans would be appalled if they saw a severely retarded, conscious person as a candidate for euthenasia-- and apparently a rather bitter and spiteful one at that. Liberals (yes, you know who you are) to their nearly universal discredit (Jesse Jackson, btw, called the Terri Schiavo situation "nothing short of murder" and now Ralph Nader has demanded that feeding resume immediately) will either point out irrelevant or hotly disputed facts (such as "the MRI" [a single blurry Computer-Aided Tomography scan, actually] that purportedly shows a liquified brain) or just deny the actual facts (did you know that liberal darling Michael Schiavo euthenized Terri's cats as soon as she got sick?). [Emphases in original]
What I've seen from much of the "newly merged MSMosphere
" amounts to another great public disservice.
The more one examines how Terri's plight and its outcome, whichever it may be, have consequences affecting more than a single person's life or death; how the miracle of Sarah Scantlin who began speaking after spending 20 years in a coma-like state, or of Kate Adamson who recovered after being in a persistent vegetative state and who experienced suffering during her eight days without a feeding tube, shows that the medical arts are far from the competent source of best answers in all cases; how Florida's definition of "life support" (and Terri's understanding of it) was changed to include feeding tubes nine years after Terri's collapse—even the state's In re Browning decision (that medical privacy also involves feeding tubes) wasn't made until seven months after she became mentally impaired; how the only judge who has tried Terri's current case (without a jury) apparently dismissed critical testimony showing that Terri's actual wishes are to live; how that judge allowed an adulterous "husband" who's residing with another woman and producing illegitimate kids, to be the spousal guardian of a brain-damaged, voiceless woman; and how the judicial system is punishing Terri and forcing her to suffer, literally to death, because her state's laws are clearly inadequate when it comes to affording her rights and those of other similarly handicapped persons the equal protection all citizens deserve;—the greater the alarm one has that the injustices now harming Terri portend worse treatment under the law for all of us, as we are each, to one degree or another, susceptible to the same dangers which visited Terri and unfortunately left her in such an incapacitated, totally-dependent condition.
It's not just about Terri. The frustration of her full rights are felt by both liberal and conservative leaders. They know that what the courts are doing to Terri will affect everyone, because when the rights of one are diminished, all are.
As long as there are courts in this land which render futile, on technical, sophistic or face-saving grounds, every attempt to afford life the benefit of the doubt, our lives are all at risk. They can discard affidavits of licensed medical professionals who have first-hand knowledge about our actual medical treatment, such as Carla Sauer Iyer's below:
- I was employed at Palm Garden of Largo Convalescent Center in Largo, Florida from April 1995 to July 1996, while Terri Schiavo was a patient there....To the best of my recollection, rehabilitation had been ordered for Terri, but I never saw any being done or had any reason at all to believe that there was ever any rehab of Terri done being only a second or two long. When I told her humorous stories about my life or something I read in the paper, Terri would chuckle, sometimes more a giggle or laugh. She would move her whole body, upper and lower. Her legs would sometimes be off the bed, and need to be repositioned. I made numerous entries into the nursing notes in her chart, stating verbatim what she said and her various behaviors, but by my next on-duty shift, the notes would be deleted from her chart. Every time I made a positive entry about any responsiveness of Terri's, someone would remove it after my shift ended. Michael always demanded to see her chart as soon as he arrived, and would take it in her room with him. I documented Terri's rehab potential well, writing whole pages about Terri's responsiveness, but they would always be deleted by the next time I saw her chart. The reason I wrote so much was that everybody else seemed to be afraid to make positive entries for fear of their jobs, but I felt very strongly that a nurses job was to accurately record everything we see and hear that bears on a patients condition and their family. I upheld the Nurses Practice Act, and if it cost me my job, I was willing to accept that.
This, in turn, fosters an environment of bigotry which many disabled people perceive to be increasingly and harmfully affecting them, as expressed by Harvard student Joe Ford who has severe cerebral palsy (Penraker)
- Our country has learned that we cannot judge people on the basis of minority status, but for some reason we have not erased our prejudice against disability. One insidious form of this bias is to distinguish cognitively disabled persons from persons whose disabilities are "just" physical. Cognitively disabled people are shown a manifest lack of respect in daily life, as well. This has gotten so perturbing to me that when I fly, I try to wear my Harvard t-shirt so I can "pass" as a person without cognitive disability. (I have severe cerebral palsy, the result of being deprived of oxygen at birth. While some people with cerebral palsy do have cognitive disability, my articulation difference and atypical muscle tone are automatically associated with cognitive disability in the minds of some people.)
The result of this disrespect is the devaluation of lives of people like Terri Schiavo. In the Schiavo case and others like it, non-disabled decision makers assert that the disabled person should die because he or she—ordinarily a person who had little or no experience with disability before acquiring one—"would not want to live like this." In the Schiavo case, the family is forced to argue that Terri should be kept alive because she might "get better"—that is, might be able to regain or to communicate her cognitive processes. The mere assertion that disability (particularly cognitive disability, sometimes called "mental retardation") is present seems to provide ample proof that death is desirable.
Essentially, then, we have arrived at the point where we starve people to death because he or she cannot communicate their experiences to us. What is this but sheer egotism? Regardless of one's religious beliefs, this is obviously an attempt to play God.
This lends merit to the argument
that what we are seeing is more likely, in effect, the attempted murder of a disabled person by our own court system, which Aaron at Free Will ably points out:
- Indeed, if we used the whim of one frustrated individual to disallow the care of everyone who lacks the ability to interact with the outside world normally, Rainman would've been a very short movie. Even Ralph Nader, the ultimate watermelon (green on the outside, red on the inside), and Jesse Jackson, as leftoid as they get, agree that Terri should live, and I think most good-hearted people agree that Schiavo's death is, on it's surface, wrong. When the Pope, Jesse Jackson, Ralph Nader, and George W. Bush are all on the same page about an issue, it's reasonable to assume there's something to it. The judges have interpreted the law correctly, but the law itself is broken. We have laws in order to create justice and peace, not to create outrage, and that's what wrong with this picture.* * *Every single one of us would die if someone did to us what Michael Schiavo did to Terri. In the end, she will have died simply because her own husband refused her food and water, and made sure that no one else could help her, either. If anyone else did such a thing to their wife, no one would doubt for a moment that it's an act of murder.
Nor are the leaders of this movement to preserve, protect and defend Terri's rights the only ones frustrated as well as disgusted by what they are seeing
- Our politicians are useless, our courts are platforms for egomaniacs..our people are selfish and for the most part ill informed and... yes I will say it......ignorant.
The media would not know truth if it walked up and slapped them in the face. My dog would get more human kindness should she be ill then Ms. Schrivo. Starvation of a living, loving human being shows to the dept to which our society has sunk. I cannot cheerfully go about my day knowing this woman is starving.
I cannot cheerfully go about my day, either, while our civil rights are unnourished by a judicial branch, both state and federal, which demonstrates more concern for the procedural or technical formalities of the law rather than its real purpose and intent: that of both securing and elevating our fundamental, unalienable rights, including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness
This fight for justice for Terri is about all our civil rights as well as her own. It is a fight that we, for the sake of our free country and everyone who will be born or naturalized as citizens of it, are obligated to win.
Nat Hentoff, writing in yesterday's Villiage Voice
, also opposes this Judicial Murder:
- Months ago, in discussing this case with ACLU executive director Anthony Romero, and later reading ACLU statements, I saw no sign that this bastion of the Bill of Rights has ever examined the facts concerning the egregious conflicts of interest of her husband and guardian Michael Schiavo, who has been living with another woman for years, with whom he has two children, and has violated a long list of his legal responsibilities as her guardian, some of them directly preventing her chances for improvement. Judge Greer has ignored all of them.
In February, Florida's Department of Children and Families presented Judge Greer with a 34-page document listing charges of neglect, abuse, and exploitation of Terri by her husband, with a request for 60 days to fully investigate the charges. Judge Greer, soon to remove Terri's feeding tube for the third time, rejected the 60-day extension. (The media have ignored these charges, and much of what follows in this article.)
[Please read the whole article.]
(Slobokan's Site O' Schtuff
Another supporter of our fight for Terri's rights:William Jefferson Clinton
It's official. This is no longer about left or right. Just rights.
How willing are liberals to side with judges and a "husband" who choose life?
achiavelli Schiavo, under the following imaginary scenario, is still an adulterous scumbag, cohabitating with his other wife and children while remaining the guardian of his in-name-only wife Terri Schindler (Schiavo), who is mentally handicapped but not terminally ill.
Except he's got a court order allowing Terri to live, while her parents have been fighting for her "right to die with dignity." The presiding probate court judge in their case has received campaign donations from all but two members of the "husband's" legal team, has relied solely on the "husband" and his two sibling's hearsay testimony that Terri would still want to live even under these circumstances, and has practically ignored numerous witnesses who dispute that testimony.
Imagine, also, that each house of Congress is made up of mostly Democrats and there is a President Hanoi John F'in' al-Qerry occupying the White House. (Insert shudder.) And they all believe that Terri should have a new trial of her case in federal district court so her due-process and other constitutional rights will be protected. So Congress passes a limited law affording her such a day in court and the president signs it. Terri's parents immediately take her case to federal court. The district and appeals court judges, however, drag their feet in an effort to thwart the new law.
Even in this instance I would be saying let Terri have her day in court. Let the issues regarding her federal civil rights be fully examined and resolved. Remove the adulterous scumbag as Terri's guardian and find a disinterested individual to take his place. Just as important, do not allow judges to willfully and blatantly undermine a duly enacted law that hasn't been declared unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction. Give justice a fair chance.
Would the notACLUers, NOWers and other lefties share the same view then? I believe they would.
The difference is that Terri must be quickly rescued from dying from forced starvation/dehydration if she's ever going to get that shot at justice. But folks on the left hope she'll hurry up and die so she never gets that chance. Is it a wonder then that a growing majority of voters don't want such people in any public positions of power?
Dramatic executive-branch intervention superseding both state and federal court rulings was supported by liberals when Janet Reno did it
. (New England Republican)
Florida's executive branch, as well as its legislative one, is obligated to not only protect individual rights but curtail judicial abuses.
eparation of powers and the other constitutional principle of checks and balances, makes the Office of Governor immune from any contempt-of-court threat by the judiciary. The legislature may impeach him or the people themselves recall him or vote him out of office. The usurpatious judiciary, in the meantime, can just go jump itself.
Alan Keye's essay points out how, in cases of judicial abuse, it is the executive authority who must use his constitutional power to intervene and face those constitutional consequences, if any, of using that power:
- If, as chief executive of Florida, Jeb Bush believes that starving Terri Schiavo to death is a violation of her right to life, then to defend her life, as recognized in the Florida constitution (Article I, Section 2), he has the same obligation to defend constitutional right as he would in the [case of a court-sanctioned] lynching....
Unlike the Legislature, he would not act in order to overturn or reverse the action of the judiciary, but in order positively to fulfill his obligation as chief executive, by preventing the destruction of a citizen's most basic constitutional right. * * *
When time is of the essence, necessity authorizes the executive to safeguard the security of the constitution before citizens and the polity suffer irreversible damage.
Terri Schiavo's survival depends on Gov. Bush's faithful execution of this responsibility, and the survival of American self-government on the willingness of all those in a like position to faithfully execute the duties of their high office.
In times like these, calculating politicians are not good enough. Enlightened statesmen are needed at the helm. God help us if we do not soon choose to find them there.
How can a state judge order that someone not be given water and fed liquefied food through her own mouth?
aralysed below the neck, a bedridden man becomes so depressed that he tells his wife, "I just want to die." Ever since his release from the hospital a year or so ago, she has been feeding him because he is unable to lift a fork or spoon to his mouth. Although he's not terminally ill, the doctors say he's going to be like that for the rest of his life. Fortunately, he is still able to talk and clearly express his wish to die. So his wife says, "OK, honey. I'll just stop feeding you and giving you liquids. You will die a peaceful, beautiful, elegant death in about 10-14 days."
Two weeks later, she calls 9-1-1 to inform authorities that her husband is dead. They ask, "How did he die, ma'am?" She says, "He was paralyzed and unable to feed himself, but he wanted to die. So I stopped feeding him and giving him water." They come to her house, examine the body, confirm that his death is indeed the result of starvation and dehydration, and...arrest the wife!
"But—but—that's what he told me he wanted," she sputters. "I was just honoring his wishes."
The police officer leads her away in handcuffs. "Tell that to the judge," he says.
"Who's the judge?" she asks.
"Ol' Hemlock himself," answers the police officer. "Judge Greer."
"Thank goodness," she says with a sigh of relief.
Negligent homicide? Assisted suicide? Or simply someone exercising his "right to die with dignity"?
Terri Schindler (Schiavo) can swallow her own saliva. She's not terminally ill. Yet she's being refused all liquids. All because her estranged, adulterous (ex)husband who has her under his utter control has said, "that's what she told me she wanted," and a lowly state probate judge believed him.
It's the kind inside our gates right now. Liberals for Terri has a solid plan for kicking it right back out forever. Given the real facts of Terri's case, President Bush would wind up a hero if he followed it.
This bears repeating:
- Diane Alden
Friday, Oct. 17, 2003
Termination by starvation and dehydration has been used many times before. Reports on elder abuse and news accounts from around the U.S. reveal that it is one of the most notorious ways to kill feeble elderly. It has also been used on disabled and brain-damaged younger people and babies.
It was also used in Auschwitz, Bergen-Belsen, Treblinka and the Soviet gulags. Stalin used starvation as a means of control. Nazi doctors experimenting on unwilling "patients" adopted all kinds of cruel techniques. One of those techniques was starvation and dehydration. It is recorded in the records of the Nuremberg Trials.
More recently, there were the deaths of other millions in the laogai, the Chinese gulag system. In North Korea reports of mass starvation have been rampant and it is used as a tool, a utilitarian political and demographic tool. The operative word here is utilitarian.
* * *
Behind this devaluation of human life is the philosophy of utilitarianism and materialism. That philosophy is the heart of both Nazism and Communism: The value of an individual is measured by his or her usefulness to the group.
In the Netherlands, where euthanasia has become routine, it accounts for almost 10 percent of all deaths there; more than half of those people did not ask to be killed. Not only do physicians perform assisted suicide on terminally ill patients, but they also kill newborn infants and hospitalized seniors whose quality of life is judged to be too poor.
There is increasing concern about involuntary euthanasia among Dutch citizens with disabilities. Many of them are joining the Dutch Patients’ Association, which issues a wallet-sized card stating that it is "intended to prevent involuntary euthanasia in case of admission of the signer to the hospital." [www.pregnantpause.org/euth/compass.htm]
* * *
Don't anyone write to me and say it can't happen here. Don't tell me about having to remove Uncle Sid from life support and what a difficult decision it was. I have been in that position, at the end of my mother's life. That is not what Terri Schiavo's case is about.
Death for those who are not terminal happens every day.
It is simply called something else: futile care, death with dignity, partial-birth abortion, rule of law, "choice," or elder abuse. It happens as the legal, intellectual and financial system finds reasons to continue to expand the death culture. Meanwhile, the establishment elite and dumbed-down, secularized, decadent culture looks the other way.
I am here to tell you we are in a very similar position to that of Germany during the Weimar Republic prior to the rise of Hitler and the Third Reich. Problem is that left, right and libertarian, government, business, education, churches and associations, foundations and universities are greasing the slope toward that statist tyranny.
Contemplating those Nuremberg documents has convinced me that the bioethics departments in most universities are akin to the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute in the Weimar Republic and the Third Reich. The doctors and "scientists" at the Institute gave scientific legitimacy to one of the most grisly, evil barbaric rampages in the history of mankind.
That rampage is happening in America without the Gestapo and SS. We have the courts and our institutions willing to couch the horror in legalism and euphemisms.
* * *
This appetite to snuff the unproductive, the disabled, the less than perfect, the inconvenient, the clinically depressed will gather steam as it has in the Netherlands and in the United States in states like Oregon, as the society ages.
Thus, in a few short years, we have gone from a nation believing it is a kindness to dispense with heroic efforts to keep someone alive, to a country that intervenes directly when someone's "quality of life" doesn't live up to certain standards. The various instruments and agents of death surround it in euphemisms like "futile care" theory.
Futile care theory controls many major health-care institutions, insurance companies, nursing homes, and even that paragon called hospice care.
Futile care theory will take on the same import as other perversions of the law in the United States and Europe. As the Boomers age, the fervor to send us to our Maker will grow. It will be gauged by how much we are costing the system, or whether or not our relatives want us out of the way, or if some committee of the anointed, doctors or HMOs, concludes we are a burden and don't fit the standard they set for "quality of life."
I guarantee the day is coming when Boomers will be coerced to end their lives or someone else will make the decision for them. Some tribes of American Indians used to send the old and feeble into 40-below weather. It was a kinder death than what the cultural, legal and medical elites have devised for us.
* * *
The Aug. 11, 2003, video taken of Terri Schiavo by her father, Bob Schindler, shows a woman who is alive and aware. She knows her mother and she tracks a balloon from one point to another. Terri's father defied Judge George Greer's court order to take that video of Terri. Because of it he may face jail time.
Nonetheless, Terri's dad did what I would do in similar circumstances. There are instances when the only thing to be done is to defy authority, including the courts. There is, after all, a higher law.
Fortunately, it unintentionally set the precedent for doing "what we had to do."
magine. A federal appeals court affirms a guardian's claim that he should retain custody of his ward. The ward is not competent to make decisions affecting his own welfare. The administration in Washington isn't content to follow the court's ruling on the matter. It instead sends in agents in a pre-dawn raid on Easter to take federal custody of the ward in order to "rescue" him from his "unreasonable" guardian's clutches and "reunite
" him with his loving parent so they would both have "a chance to heal
," stating that "we did what we had to do."
As Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz noted, it set the "precedent that the administration can act without court approval." That was the case of Elian Gonzalez five Easters ago.
It is only fitting then, coupled with a huge helping of poetic justice to boot, that another Gonzales—this time having the first name of Alberto—repeat that history this Easter, in order to enforce the rule of law and not of unmanly judges.
Federal law says Terri Schindler-Schiavo "shall" have a new trial of the facts in her case. (This law has not been declared unconstitutional.) The judicial branch is saying, "No way, not if we can help it." The courts are clearly violating that law. It is the President and our Attorney General's duty to enforce every federal law, no matter who or what may be violating it. With regard to protecting citizens from violations of their federal civil rights under color of law, the FBI's own Web site says,
- In making arrests, maintaining order, and defending life, law enforcement officers are allowed to utilize whatever force is "reasonably" necessary. The breadth and scope of the use of force is vast. The spectrum begins with the physical presence of the official through the utilization of deadly force. While some types of force used by law enforcement may be violent by their very nature, they may be considered "reasonable," based upon the circumstances.
The executive branch has power to protect our federal civil rights. It must act to protect Terri's now if her rights aren't to be violated by a few obstructionist federal judges.
I don't want to live under a system of judicial tyranny, where courts—not We the People™ through our duly elected representatives and the laws they pass—have the final word on everything.
President Bush, please preserve, protect and defend Terri's rights and our nation of laws. Before it's too late for everyone.
Update: Before saying, "I wouldn't want to live like that"—or the not so subtle alternative, "no one should have to live like that"—please read this. (Dean's World)
By allowing Terri Schindler-Schiavo's adulterous husband Heir to Her Remaining Fortune & Insurance Beneficiary to remain her guardian while she's incapacitated, Judge George W. Greer is, under color of law, willfully depriving her of her federal civil rights to live and have proper legal representation—a crime for which the FBI should arrest him.
lthough Dhimmoonbats don't consider adultery immoral, Florida law
- Title XLVI - CRIMES
Chapter 798 - ADULTERY; COHABITATION
798.01 Living in open adultery.--Whoever lives in an open state of adultery shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. Where either of the parties living in an open state of adultery is married, both parties so living shall be deemed to be guilty of the offense provided for in this section.
|Attempted murder by any other name...|
Jodi Centzone, the publicly announced fiancée of Michael
Schiavo Starvo (aka Terri's alleged "husband"), has been impregnated at least twice by this lady-killer. He says he really wants to marry Jodi, and would if his inconvenient "already dead" wife were out of the picture and her $50,000+ still left in her trust fund were in it. Plus—and this appears to concern Dirtbag Mike even more than any money—if a single state court judge, along with his collegues accessories to attempted murder in our injustice system, allows causes Terri to die she'll have no chance whatsoever of somehow getting better and communicating to the rest of the world what really happened to her on the night of February 24-25, 1990. Especially if, as "Get Rid of the Evidence" Mike intends, he has her cremated contrary to her Catholic tradition. Even if she's allowed to live, as long as she doesn't receive any kind of real therapy, Terri won't be talking.
|...would just plain stink.|
None of this attempted-murdering would be happening to Terri were it not for the unpardonably harmful rulings of one Florida
judge executioner, George Waste'Em Greer. No other court in the land, state or federal, has actually re-tried the facts in her case or otherwise subtantively reviewed on the merits the evidence on which Mr. Greer—when he wasn't examining the campaign contributions he received from Starvo's attorneys ([George] Felos & Felos, P.A., $250.00 on 5/7/2004; Hamden H. Baskin III, $500 maximum on 3/22/2004 and $250 on 5/19/1998; Deborah A. Bushnell, $250 on 3/12/2004; Gyneth S. Stanley, P.A., $200 on 7/2/2004 and $150 on 4/2/2004; and Steven G. Nilsson, $250 on 7/14/2004 and $250 on 3/14/2004)—based his decisions. All the courts which have been asked to do so have essentially said they don't want to hear it.
Due process for Terri? As an incapacitated person she "retains the right to receive necessary services and rehabilitation" (Florida Statutes, section 744.3215(1)(i)). Yet her cheating "spouse" hasn't given her a real chance to receive any during the last ten years. He hasn't even allowed her bedsores or decaying teeth to be prevented. She's not dying, but chronically disabled. Nonetheless, he has placed her in a hospice, a facility solely designed for the terminally ill. All this neglect was approved by Executioner Greer.
husband greedy scumbag who has continuously committed adultery against Terri since 1995, has effectively renounced his marital vows to her. He has no legitimate claim to be her spouse, much less her guardian. If he were petitioning for guardianship of a child, Florida's courts would instantly call into question his moral fitness. However, Hydrate-em-Low Greer allows an adulterer to be the guardian of the person against whom that guardian is committing adultery.
Due process for an incapacitated person must include, at the very least, that she be legally represented by someone who isn't self-interested in seeing her die, who doesn't stand to gain some undue windfall, financial or otherwise, from her death, and who is completely impartial—personally—when it comes to making life and death decisions on her behalf. In other words, someone who shows they are both capable and willing of honoring your own true wishes. Otherwise, you as a totally-dependent ward are forcibly subjected to the unconscionable circumstance where the guardian's selfish wishes would likely become more important than yours whenever he makes decisions affecting your life and health.
At least one Michigan legislator gets it.
In Terri's case, an openly adulterous
husband slime (my apologies to the legless variety for lumping such a creature with them) who wants to marry his live-in mistress of ten years is too untrustworthy when he pronounces that he knows what Terri's wishes would be. Did she ever say she would want to die from lack of simple food and water if she weren't actually dying? Apparently not.
Incredibly, that is exactly what our alleged justice system is forcing her to do as I write this. A handful of unelected
federal judges arrogant oligarchs would rather thwart a recently enacted federal law by causing Terri's death through their own merciless inaction, than do what is right and required to protect her life so she may truly have her day in their courts. Although it's clear again how much liberals want to abort yet another life as well as full justice, just standing by and allowing their effort to succeed places each of you in danger should, our Lord forbid, you find yourself in any situation where you are as voiceless and choiceless as Terri.
It's time for our Federal Bureau of Investigation to raid the Woodside Hospice in Pinellas Park, Florida, take Terri Schindler-Schiavo into protective custody, and find and arrest George W. Greer.
Only now, the robe's color has changed.
Before it's too late.
erri Schindler-Schiavo has the right to a new trial in federal district court under the law enacted last Monday
. However, she will not be able to exercise that right if she is allowed to die before her case can be fully heard and decided.
Moreover, it is the duty of the federal government to ensure that no state or federal official, under color of law, deprives any citizen of the United States of his rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. Such official includes a judge.
Therefore, in accordance with the constitutional requirement that he take care that the laws be faithfully executed, the President of the United States is authorized to order appropriate law enforcement officials to ensure that Terri Schindler-Schiavo is able to exercise her right to have that new trial. This includes protecting her against harm from a denial of food, water, medicine, and proper treatment.
In order to fulfill this duty and defend her life, as well as secure substantial justice, it is necessary that those law enforcement officials take her into protective custody and provide for her health-care needs while her case is in the federal judicial system.
Wednesday, March 23, 2005
Justice willfully delayed in Terri Schindler-Schiavo's case is justice permanently denied.
f the liberal judges in our federal courts who are wanting to be willing accomplices in Terri's
murder before she gets the chance to even make her case, are not overturned by the full 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, there won't be a nuclear option when it comes to judicial confirmations and appointments. It's going to be a matter-antimatter explosion.
Terri's guardian, who is only technically her
husband greedy dirtbag widower-wannabe, has been committing open adultery against her over the past ten years—a misdemeanor under Florida's criminal statutes. The state judge in her case, George W. Greer, has received campaign contributions from the guardian's attorneys. These are just a few of the issues that our federal courts should hear and address on the merits under applicable law.
But the courts won't be able to hear these issues unless they order that Terri be kept alive while a proper hearing is scheduled and held where both sides are given a fair chance to present all their facts and arguments before the court tries to reach an impartial decision.
Stall, delay and obstruct. That's the liberals' answer. Where justice and a person's life and future well-being are concerned, it's the one answer that has no place in our federal courts.
Except for liberals, it's been a very utopianish year.
ister KKKonstitution and Demokkkrat Ikkkon Senator Robert Kleagle Byrd, sent the first of many emails I received Friday from liberals congratulating my humble blog on its special day:
|Subject:||Magna Carta and Web Logs|
|Date:||Today, 10:34 AM|
Dear Hitler-type Person:
Not since the Magna Carta was signed by King John at Runnymede in June 1215, has there been a more pretty, pretty, pretty example of democratic expression than my sincere wish that people like yourself be totally disallowed from spreading any such messages of opposition against my poor, once majority—but now minority—party as you so unconscionably post so consistently on your so-called Web log.
And just what is a Web log, Madam President? I tell you it is not to be found anywhere in our illustrious constitution. Indeed, not even in the Bill of Rights itself. Where does it say, for instance, that there should be no law abridging the freedom of the Web log? Or the right of the people to post messages thereon? It doesn't. Nay, not one tittle about all these wanton postings by all these pajama-clad, literary hucksters on all these numerous "blogs"—as the purveyors of these digital nuisances, not just to my own but to all diminishing political parties in a country for which I weep today, so often call themselves. And I defy any such blogger, through whatever twisting machination of so-called fact-checking they may wish to employ, to show me that any of our Founding Parents™, including the author of that great Bill of Rights himself, James Madison, had any knowledge of, or in mind any thought about such devilish Web logs when they drafted, and in 1791 ratified, our constitution's first amendment. They didn't, Madam President. That's why it is so important that we, in this body, pass whatever legislation is needed to rid our electronic medium, once and for all, of every last vestige of these bloggers' scurrilous screeds; and I am prepared to lead the Senate in an even longer filibuster than my record-breaking, fourteen hour and thirteen minute one in 1964, until we do. It is necessary that the order be promoted immediately and in every state of the Union...I mean, help is on the way as to the possibilities of rebuilding the Klan in the Realm of West Virginia...er, that is, rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds.
So I demand that my colleagues consent to outlawing such Nazi-like tactics by these bloggers, Madam President.
I yield back the balance of my time.
White niggardly yours,
SEN. R. "SPECIAL-K" BYRD
Dem. President Pro Tempore (1989-1995; January 3, 2001-January 20, 2001; June 6, 2001-2003)
Dem. Leader (1977-1988)
Another well-wisher is the old Chappaquiddick lifeguard himself, Tedboat al-Qennedy:
|Subject:||Social Security Isn't Trapped or Drowning|
|Date:||Today, 12:07 PM|
Dear Redstate-type Person:
Regardless what you and your Evil Conservative Republican® friends say or do, we on this side of the aisle will not budge one inch on Social Security. No matter how much more irrelevant that makes us, or further alienates us from the mainstream of America's electorate, we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure there are no changes in that program.
You say there are not as many workers today to support the retirement incomes of Social Security beneficiaries as there were in the past. I have heard some say that there used to be roughly sixteen workers contributing to the program for every retiree receiving benefits from it, and that the ratio is now about three workers for every beneficiary, and that a few decades from now the ratio will drop to two workers per beneficiary. I have also heard that in about fifteen years Social Security payroll tax revenues will no longer cover benefit claims, and the program will have to draw funds from other parts of the budget to make up for a deficit that will only increase over time, until every cent in the program's so-called Trust Fund is entirely depleted. Well, I say so what?
Do you not know that by increasing taxes, reducing benefits, and raising the retirement age to about 75, we can save Social Security as we know it? Sure, this may cause some hardship and require us to make some tough decisions. But this is much better than letting people own or invest money from part of the accounts they're paying into, or see a much higher rate of return on their contributions than they ever could under the current system. Who cares whether all that invested money remains locked in the system, supporting the incomes of current beneficiaries, until the contributor dies or retires him or herself? Or whether future contributors will be similarly supporting the program once he or she does? I don't care. We don't need to change it. It is fine just the way it is. Leave it alone. Don't bother it or, indeed, us with any bad news. There is no problem. There is no crisis. There is nothing that needs to be done other than some good old-fashioned tax increasing, benefit reducing, and retirement-age raising.
We reject your Nazi-like tactics to give Americans greater control and ownership of their own retirement accounts. We should let the government continue to have total control over them. That way we won't have anything to worry about when we reach that ratio of two workers per beneficiary.
My party will continue to shout No! on any plan that would steer us away in even the slightest degree from where Social Security is headed.
SEN. T. "DRIVING MISS MARY JO" QENNEDY
However, I was very surprised to hear from Her Nibs, the cattle-futures baroness:
|Subject:||I'm A Conservative Too|
|Date:||Today, 2:10 PM|
Dear Fellow Staunch Conservative:
As you may know, I am now more a conservative than Tom Delay, Rick Santorum, or even Ann Coulter could ever dream of being. I am originally from a Red State and currently the United States Senator from a state that has a Republican governor. So you see, I know what it's like to have some conservatives around and to appear to like it.
For example, I am now totally in favor of understanding those who want to outlaw abortion under every conceivable circumstance (pun not intended), including when the life of the mother is in danger. I also believe that life begins at conception, just as it does when young children in our public schools plant those watermelon seeds of theirs inside dirt-filled milk cartons during biology class and watch them grow and sprout leaves before tossing the whole thing away in the dumpster once they get their A's. I am sure you remember doing the same thing yourself when you were in grade school. I also understand the fragility of life, like the many times I witnessed a fly tragically lose its wings—I can't at the moment recall exactly how it lost them—and it sputtered and spun around in excruciating pain until it finally keeled over and died. Those are just some of the memories I will always
cherish carry with me of how easily life can be plucked away from us.
I respect moral values as well. All right, I admit it could be possible that my senate campaign may have somehow illegally, if not inadvertently, underreported in-kind contributions from its Hollywood Gala fund-raising concert in 2000. But that was just to make our books look like we were keeping our costs down. You know, wanting to be frugal with our money and all that. Republicans can appreciate such a desire, I'm sure. My only regret is that Barbra Streisand showed up unexpectedly, without my prior knowledge, to perform at that concert. (See, I don't like Barbra Streisand, either.) In fact, I don't even know who organized the concert. Paul- or Peter-something or another. I can't recall. Nonetheless, I am very, very, very disappointed that someone I didn't know raised millions of dollars which benefited my campaign, during a concert by people I didn't know would be performing in it. Goes to show you that you just can't trust a liberal (which I'm not, by the way).
I also believe in God. No, really. In fact, I recently got into a heated discussion with Bill Moyers about the merits of the Rapture Index. I told him that no matter what he thinks, he should—as I always do—keep in mind the 2002 TIME/CNN poll showing how 59 percent of the American people believe that the prophesies in the Book of Revelation will someday come true. I'm just glad I'm not the one on any known record making public statements that totally discount something believed in by such an overwhelming majority of Americans.
Yes, I, like you, am a conservative. The staunchest of the bunch, as a matter of fact. I even vote in favor of wars and stuff. I support people having values. So the religious right has nothing to fear from me. Indeed, I am seen as someone who appears to like religion a lot. I will also fight for every child that's born, whether they're raised in a village or some blighted urban area. I will provide them all with food, clothing, shelter, and universal health care. That's just the kind of person I am. Kind, and caring, and providing. You know, a conservative. Because when it comes down to it, it's all about The Children™.
Here's wishing our utopia a very happy birthday.
Vast right-wing conspiratorially yours,
SEN. H. "REDNECK" QLINTON
Co-President Co-Spouse (1993-2001)
Dem. Watergate Lawyer (1974)
Even got one from Mickey, the Moors' Fifth Columnist:
|Subject:||Bush Is Evil|
|Date:||Today, 4:11 PM|
Dear Jesusland-type Person:
Bush is evil and a miserable failure. He misled us into war but refused to go after and capture Osama bin Laden. He has no plan on what to do in Iraq, which has descended into the third level of a hell we used to call Vietnam. Because of him, the Iraqi people hate our troops. He believes in having the government pry into everything, even our iPods. He wants to stop minorities before they can rise to such prominent positions as top presidential campaign adviser, National Security Advisor, White House Counsel, Education Secretary, HUD Secretary, Transportation Secretary, Labor Secretary, or Secretary of State, as well as cut federal funding at historically black colleges and Hispanic educational institutions. Wait—that last one might not be literally factual, but it's so close to the truth that I could produce one of my full-length Best Picture of the Year® documentaries on it.
Anyway, as I was saying, Bush is evil and doesn't drink beer. Beer, I tell you! How un-American is that? Also, there's not a slacker bone in his body. Geesh! You think you'd want someone as president who at least knows how to throw a hellacious kegger in the White House—like the husband of a certain junior U.S. senator from New York we all know but who shall remain nameless. (Go Hillary!) Heck, he doesn't even know how to windsurf. Who cares that polls say most people like that. I say the polls are wrong. They're all over the map like diarrhea.
Now what was I talking about? Oh, yes. Bush is evil and, I gotta tell ya, there is a hell of a lot of unrest around the country, except for all those scary angry stupid white people of course. Everyone knows we're stuck in a deadly, daily quagmire in Iraq. I don't care how many purple fingers we see. It doesn't matter how many Syrian troops pull out of Lebanon, how many weapons of mass destruction Libya destroys, or how many Egyptian presidents decide to hold that country's first-ever open election. It's all a quagmire, I say. A quagmire! Thanks to Bush and his forces of evil.
So go ahead and cut another slice of your Jesusland-blog birthday cake. You better save about 1,400 pieces of it for the ones who won't be coming home to eat any.
M. "ACADEMY AWARDS NON-NOMINEE" MOORON
Dem. USA Today guest columnist
The birthday message I got from Howard the
Dhimm was much more succinct and to the point:
|Subject:||I Could Just Scream|
|Date:||Today, 8:06 PM|
Happy birthday to yooooooooooaaarrrrggggghhhhhhh
Happy birthday to yooooooooooaaarrrrggggghhhhhhh
Happy birthday dear LUuuuuaaaaarrrrrgggghhhhhhhhhhhhh!
Happy birthday to yooooooooooaaarrrrggggghhhhhhh
And I hate Republicans and everything they stand for.
GOV. H. "HOWLIN' MOONBAT" DEAN
The above are just a few samples of the messages I received showing how well-wishing liberals can be when they put their
minds feelings to it. We here at Liberal Utopia (i.e., me) were genuinely warmed by their outpouring of vituperative verbiage on this special occasion.
This blog will continue to strive earning more such liberal sentiments as it begins its second year.