Has the Schiavo case Become a Political Football?

They all need to study the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights, although they may still not understand it's meaning.

What is the relevance in this case to specific provisions you may have in mind?

Fox, Debra, Brandon:

Do you really believe that Terri Schiavo was capable of eating orally?

Do you really believe that no testing was ever done? The October 2003 ruling by Judge Greer denied additional testing. I presume this means that testing was done.

So.

1. Lacking evidence to the contrary, I will believe that Terri Schiavo was incapable of ingesting food or water naturally.
2. Nutrition (food and water) through a surgically placed tube is artificial support.
3. She stated that she did not want to be kept alive artificially.

Therefore, she is, in effect, refusing medical treatment; she is not being killed.

Um.... Freedom?

Too bad you are forced to do all this presuming.


Lacking evidence. Good.


It's a matter of semantics.


Not really. She never wrote anything down and the testimony was contradictory.


First of all, she would have to make her wishes known to be refusing something, and she didn't. Furthermore, I can say that I want to be shot, but anyone who does it is still a murderer.

Where does it guarantee general freedom in either of those two documents, and what is the relevance of freedom to the Schiavo case? Be a teeny bit more specific. The preamble makes a generic reference to liberty.

It seems Congress doesn't understand what our Constitution says about the Separation of Powers. They not only passed legislation to tell the courts what to do, but criticized the court's decision because they didn't like the final decision.

Imagine criticizing the court for ordering the murder of a helpless woman! The cads!

How did they order a "murder" Brandon9000? I know what you mean of course but I'm going to call you out on it.

They starved her. They denied her water.

Ever hear of the Good Samaritan Law?




<I know. But, I'm going for it.>

Translation:

UNCLE!

rotflmao.

Political Groups Paid Two Relatives of House Leader
By PHILIP SHENON

Published: April 6, 2005


WASHINGTON, April 5 - The wife and daughter of Tom DeLay, the House majority leader, have been paid more than $500,000 since 2001 by Mr. DeLay's political action and campaign committees, according to a detailed review of disclosure statements filed with the Federal Election Commission and separate fund-raising records in Mr. DeLay's home state of Texas.



Most of the payments to his wife, Christine A. DeLay, and his only child, Dani DeLay Ferro, were described in the disclosure forms as "fund-raising fees," "campaign management" or "payroll," with no additional details about how they earned the money. The payments appear to reflect what Mr. DeLay's aides say is the central role played by the majority leader's wife and daughter in his political career.

Mr. DeLay's national political action committee, Americans for a Republican Majority, or Armpac, said in a statement on Tuesday that the two women had provided valuable services to the committee in exchange for the payments: "Mrs. DeLay provides big picture, long-term strategic guidance and helps with personnel decisions. Ms. Ferro is a skilled and experienced professional event planner who assists Armpac in arranging and organizing individual events."

Ms. Ferro has managed a number of her father's re-election campaigns for his House seat.

His spokesman said that Mr. DeLay had no additional comment. Although several members of Congress employ family members as campaign managers or on their political action committees, advocacy groups seeking an overhaul of federal campaign-finance and ethics laws say that the payments to Mr. DeLay's family members were unusually generous, and should be the focus of new scrutiny of the majority leader.

Mr. DeLay, whose title of majority leader makes him the second most powerful member of the House, has offered a vigorous public defense in recent weeks to a flurry of ethics charges made by Democratic lawmakers and campaign watchdog groups. The executive director of Americans for a Republican Majority and a key fund-raiser for the committee were indicted in Texas last year on illegal fundraising charges, and prosecutors there have refused to rule out the possibility of charges against Mr. DeLay in the continuing inquiry.

The payments to Mr. DeLay's family have continued into 2005; the latest monthly disclosure statement filed by Americans for a Republican Majority shows that Mrs. DeLay was paid was paid $4,028 last month, while Mrs. Ferro received $3,681. Earlier disclosure statements show that the two women received similar monthly fees from the political action committee throughout 2003 and 2004.

Mrs. DeLay has been intimately involved in her husband's political career and his fund-raising operations in Washington and Texas. In an interview in 2003 with Roll Call, a newspaper on Capitol Hill, a spokesman for Mr. DeLay explained Mrs. DeLay's role as "the final signoff of Tom's travel schedule, what events he attends and what his name appears on."

Mrs. Ferro has also helped manage Mr. DeLay's charity operations. Financial disclosure statements filed by Mr. DeLay's House campaign committees, which are separate from Americans for a Republican Majority, show that Mrs. Ferro and her political consulting firm, Coastal Consulting of Sugar Land, Tex., received $222,000 from 2001 through last year, reflecting her role in the re-election campaigns.

Although there has been no suggestion from prosecutors that Mrs. Ferro is under investigation by the grand jury in Austin, her records were subpoenaed in the inquiry, which is focused on the fund-raising activities of Texans for a Republican Majority, a state political action committee modeled on Americans for a Republican Majority. Mrs. Ferro received about $30,000 in fund-raising and consulting fees from Texans for a Republican Majority, the committee's records show.

"It's 'DeLay Inc.' " said Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a research group that has closely monitored Mr. DeLay and his campaign fund-raising and expenditures. "If it's not illegal, it certainly is inappropriate for members of Congress to use their positions to enrich their families."

<hee>

Have you heard about what they're doing to that poor girl's ashes? Her parents and her husband are having duelling funerals. What a sorry spectacle.

By mouth? Excuse me?

Wait!! I still need to send that video of this growth on my a$$ to Dr. Frist so's I can find out the diagnosis.

And NOW he's deferring to the courts?

Damn!!

Dookie--

I think that language did appear in one of the decisions. Everyone knows her feeding tube was through her bellybutton, but I'm almost sure her parents (through attys) made some reques that made an issue of food or liquid by mouth----It may have been the "mass" thing. I can't think of the word, now....The wine and unleavened bread thing.

They ended up putting a drop of wine on her lip---which likely rolled off....

Wow!

Then somebody should tell Debra_Law...

yes, please