March 19, 200521 yr The story about the her husband being abusive & all that garbage is such a bunch of crap... Even if it were true, he could be a boy scout troop leader and the mayor of the local town and the leader of the church choir, it wouldn't make any difference. The people protesting this don't care if her husband has a videotape of her wishes regarding this situation, or if she has a living will, or that he did or didn't mistreat her. Terry herself could scribble "pull the plug please" & they still wouldn't accept it. They don't like anything that sniffs of euthanaisa, & that's that. All this other stuff's just smoke & mirrors. 714903[/snapback] Exactly. The challenges to the Oregon right to die law and the uproar over Million Dollar Baby are more evidence to this.
March 19, 200521 yr I just think it's ironic how conservatives support the death penalty, but are way against abortion. 714521[/snapback] Ha, and it's even worse that liberals are the other way around. I ask you, which makes more sense? 714684[/snapback] Not all liberals are in favor of abortion. I figured you would realize that by now. 714791[/snapback] Not all conservatives are in favor of the death penalty. I could go on, but I don't dodge the bullet (no pun intended) when errors in my ideology are plainly pointed out. Can't say the same for you.
March 19, 200521 yr Author I just think it's ironic how conservatives support the death penalty, but are way against abortion. 714521[/snapback] Elaborate please. 714523[/snapback] They're in favor of killing some people, but not others? 714559[/snapback] Why don't you stay on topic. Support of killing unborn babies but not known murderers is much more contradicting anyways. Also, let's just stop discussing abortion on this site. Some of us see it one way, some of us see it the other way. We have our views, and no one is going to change them.
March 19, 200521 yr Shiavo should starve to death b/c shes an innocent women in a vegetative state. The lethal injection is too brutal and inhumane for scott peterson
March 19, 200521 yr Republicans are supposed to be the party of federalism yet we have seen countless examples of a larger federal government encroaching on state's rights. Look at the new law about class action lawsuits and forcing them into federal courts. What ever happend to "we dont like big government?" 714697[/snapback] eh, i would imagine their disdain for excessive litigation and a broken system that makes it as easy as humanly possible to sue outweighs their misgivings about having to put more cases in federal court. i'd say it's more an issue of priorities than outright hypocrisy.
March 19, 200521 yr Republicans are supposed to be the party of federalism yet we have seen countless examples of a larger federal government encroaching on state's rights. Look at the new law about class action lawsuits and forcing them into federal courts. What ever happend to "we dont like big government?" 714697[/snapback] eh, i would imagine their disdain for excessive litigation and a broken system that makes it as easy as humanly possible to sue outweighs their misgivings about having to put more cases in federal court. i'd say it's more an issue of priorities than outright hypocrisy. 715143[/snapback] So federalism is a convenient philosphy. Ill make sure to take note of that when I hear someone say "I dont like big government." We all like the federal government when they play their role. And less so for excessive litigation and more so for protecting corporate interests.
March 19, 200521 yr Republicans are supposed to be the party of federalism yet we have seen countless examples of a larger federal government encroaching on state's rights. Look at the new law about class action lawsuits and forcing them into federal courts. What ever happend to "we dont like big government?" 714697[/snapback] eh, i would imagine their disdain for excessive litigation and a broken system that makes it as easy as humanly possible to sue outweighs their misgivings about having to put more cases in federal court. i'd say it's more an issue of priorities than outright hypocrisy. 715143[/snapback] So federalism is a convenient philosphy. Ill make sure to take note of that when I hear someone say "I dont like big government." We all like the federal government when they play their role. And less so for excessive litigation and more so for protecting corporate interests. 715168[/snapback] it was about as common-sense and bipartisan as any bill can get nowadays--surprising, considering who holds the purse-strings of the democratic party....but we won't get into that.
March 19, 200521 yr Republicans are supposed to be the party of federalism yet we have seen countless examples of a larger federal government encroaching on state's rights. Look at the new law about class action lawsuits and forcing them into federal courts. What ever happend to "we dont like big government?" 714697[/snapback] eh, i would imagine their disdain for excessive litigation and a broken system that makes it as easy as humanly possible to sue outweighs their misgivings about having to put more cases in federal court. i'd say it's more an issue of priorities than outright hypocrisy. 715143[/snapback] So federalism is a convenient philosphy. Ill make sure to take note of that when I hear someone say "I dont like big government." We all like the federal government when they play their role. And less so for excessive litigation and more so for protecting corporate interests. 715168[/snapback] it was about as common-sense and bipartisan as any bill can get nowadays--surprising, considering who holds the purse-strings of the democratic party....but we won't get into that. 715199[/snapback] Something being bipartisan doesnt make it common sense. Common sense should be a self defining idea. It was a bill of political convenience. And we need not discuss who contributes to which party. This bill was aimed primarily for the protection of big corporations and not the average consumer. Just look what non profit consumer protection agencies had to say about this crap. But youre right. We dont have to have a debate about tort reform in this thread. As long as I dont hear Bush talking about how we have to leave state matters to the states.
March 19, 200521 yr Something being bipartisan doesnt make it common sense. Common sense should be a self defining idea. obviously. common sense dictates the system shouldn't be abused to allow someone to find the most lawsuit-favorable boonie-town court in which to file his class action suit against a company. This bill was aimed primarily for the protection of big corporations and not the average consumer. Just look what non profit consumer protection agencies had to say about this crap. 715503[/snapback] in that case, 3/4 of the senate has apparently chosen corporate interests over regular folks like us. but yeah, i guess this isn't the thread for this.
March 19, 200521 yr Something being bipartisan doesnt make it common sense. Common sense should be a self defining idea. obviously. common sense dictates the system shouldn't be abused to allow someone to find the most lawsuit-favorable boonie-town court in which to file his class action suit against a company. This bill was aimed primarily for the protection of big corporations and not the average consumer. Just look what non profit consumer protection agencies had to say about this crap. 715503[/snapback] in that case, 3/4 of the senate has apparently chosen corporate interests over regular folks like us. but yeah, i guess this isn't the thread for this. 715522[/snapback] Political plays. Dems are giving the Republicans their low their lowing hanging fruit. I never said these were top of the agenda stuff for Dems nor should they be, If Im Harry Reid, I rightfully save the blast it all out battle for the more important stuff like judicial nominees, social security, and other Bush items that leave more marks. That way its harder to make the obstructionist argument. Why do you think dems are grinding their teeth on this Schiavo thing? Its not common sense here. They really dont want to get involved. They just dont want to waste their VERY limited resources on the more minor battles. Cost benefit analysis. Frankly if this is the worst hit the consumers take from the tort reform movement, then its ok. Like I said, just because they pass it doesnt mean there arent many caveats to it. So many factors are weighing in that you just cant make in issue that is passed automatically common sense. Want the best example? The Iraqi war in the post 9-11 enviroment. Dems supporting Bush had more to do with politics then some realization that it was the right policy to take.
March 19, 200521 yr Like I said, just because they pass it doesnt mean there arent many caveats to it. So many factors are weighing in that you just cant make in issue that is passed automatically common sense. 715532[/snapback] i thought it was clear the second time, but apparently you still misunderstood me. because something is bipartisan or passes by a large margin doesn't necessarily mean it's common sense. that's obvious. no argument there. class action reform is common sense on its own merits.
March 20, 200521 yr Author This is getting ridiculous. Schiavo has no awareness or intelligence left. Why do her people want to keep her alive. Do her parents find it amusing?
March 20, 200521 yr DeLay and some Republican congressmen would like to introduce legislation and undo two centuries of common law and just have you ignore it, thank you very much. This country sees a man and wife as one. That's the way it is. All the conservatives going on & on this past year about the "sanctity of marriage"??? Well here it is front and center. Well surprise surprise, the sanctity of marriage is important ONLY when the situation fits them, as usual. I don't understand how some republicans can back the intrusion of Congress here into what it a family matter. The parents have had 10-15 years to find a solution through the Courts if there was any evidence to be found that showed the husband to be evil or abusive or whatever.
March 20, 200521 yr I am in no way saying that the Democrats have it right. Because they don't. But HC, you're absolutely right about the Republicans in Congress.
March 21, 200521 yr I am in no way saying that the Democrats have it right. Because they don't. But HC, you're absolutely right about the Republicans in Congress. 715970[/snapback] :thumbup hey the Dems are full of crap too, but I'm just talking about this issue in general.... I was watching Meet the Press this morning and even George Will came out & ripped these guys a new one.
March 21, 200521 yr This is getting ridiculous. Schiavo has no awareness or intelligence left. Why do her people want to keep her alive. Do her parents find it amusing? 715882[/snapback] http://www.drudgereport.com/
March 21, 200521 yr A sad, sad story that no-one is going to look back on with any pride in the future. Bottom line is that the Republicans have a huge grass-roots following in the religious, 'right to life' sector of society. A following that they've deliberately cultivated over the years. To not react on this issue would kill their standing and credibility within this influential group. They just can't be seen to do nothing.
March 21, 200521 yr A sad, sad story that no-one is going to look back on with any pride in the future. Bottom line is that the Republicans have a huge grass-roots following in the religious, 'right to life' sector of society. A following that they've deliberately cultivated over the years. To not react on this issue would kill their standing and credibility within this influential group. They just can't be seen to do nothing. 716443[/snapback] well, the washington republicans didn't have to overstep their bounds and act, since this was clearly viewed as a state matter. the ire of the religious right-to-life crowd would have fallen upon the state legislators--who couldn't agree to enacting another terri's law last week--had they failed to intervene this week.
March 21, 200521 yr There is a debate on C-Span right now in the House. Its interesting to watch republicans dance around the fact they are trying to push through what is basically a ex post facto law, a type of law that is forbidden by the constitution. It is also notable the legislation they are trying to push through on the federal level mind you is specifically for this situation and this unique situation only.
March 21, 200521 yr Most interesting note that came out in this debate so far: Terri's parents said they would not remove her nutrition even if Terri had told them pointe blank before all this happend in this situation she would want her nutrition pulled.
March 21, 200521 yr that is interesting Phish.... by no means would it be an easy thing for a family member to make that kind of decision. even when a living will or some direct communication had been made prior, to actually play a part in ultimately ending the life of a family member.... not something I envy.
March 21, 200521 yr Most interesting note that came out in this debate so far: Terri's parents said they would not remove her nutrition even if Terri had told them pointe blank before all this happend in this situation she would want her nutrition pulled. 716466[/snapback] denial.
March 21, 200521 yr Actually the rrpublicans being active on this matter is an effort to appease the religious right. In fact this is the repub's ticket out of having to push the gay marriage ban amendment. Federalize right to life and shaft the irrelevant gay ban that bush doesnt like. This is brilliant really.
March 21, 200521 yr Actually the rrpublicans being active on this matter is an effort to appease the religious right. In fact this is the repub's ticket out of having to push the gay marriage ban amendment. Federalize right to life and shaft the irrelevant gay ban that bush doesnt like. This is brilliant really. 716623[/snapback] Especially when Tom Delay is using this case to move attention away from all of his problems. He has been the most public supporter of this legislation, from what I have seen.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.