0
   

Has the Schiavo case Become a Political Football?

 
 
Dookiestix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 11:47 am
Quote:
By Dick Polman, Knight Ridder Newspapers

(KRT) - In the beginning, the architects of conservatism proclaimed their antigovernment creed.

Barry Goldwater said in 1964, "I fear Washington and centralized government more than I do Moscow." Ronald Reagan said in 1975, "The basis of conservatism is a desire for less governmental interference, or less centralized authority." And Newt Gingrich vowed in 1994 that a Republican Congress would hasten "the end of government that is too big, too intrusive."

But today, as evidenced by the Republican Congress' intervention in the Terry Schiavo case, it's clear that the traditional conservative credo no longer guides the GOP. The core mission has radically changed during the Bush era. "Small government" and "state's rights" are out; wielding federal power to advance moral issues at the local level is in.

The GOP's federal action over the weekend, which took the case away from the local judge in Florida (a southern Baptist and Republican) who had ruled that Schiavo should be allowed to die in accordance with state law and previous state court rulings, is merely the latest manifestation of the new party credo. And there is currently a vociferous debate, within conservative circles, over whether this historic shift is a victory for morality - or a betrayal of the movement.

The dramatic congressional intervention was clearly unusual, but, given the new governing philosophy, it should not be viewed as a surprise. Working with President Bush (and the religious right, which wields clout in elections), the GOP Congress has assumed an activist role on social values, with millions of dollars earmarked for federal programs that are designed, among other things, to promote traditional marriage and teach sexual abstinence.

But it's the Republican-led response to the Schiavo case, the use of the federal government as an agent of moral values, that is sparking fervent dissent in conservative ranks. The dissenters believe that the ruling GOP has betrayed the traditional conservative respect for local control and the rule of law. (The local judge, aided by outside experts, had ruled in favor of husband Michael Schiavo's desire to let Terry die; but House Majority Leader Tom DeLay said the other day, "I don't care what her husband says.")

Ryan Sager, a conservative commentator, said Tuesday that "the national Republican party has been corrupted by power, and has forgotten what used to be its beliefs," and that the GOP was guilty of "hypocrisy" for flexing federal muscle just like the Democrats whom they had always condemned.

Jim Pinkerton, a conservative thinker and ex-Republican operative, lamented Tuesday that "the social-issue core of the newly energized, southernized, and Christianized Republican party cares a lot more about its faith and its values than about the old verity of small government."

Meanwhile, on a conservative Web site, law professor Jonathan Adler of Case Western Reserve University argued Tuesday that the GOP action "creates a terrible precedent for ad hoc federal interference" in the numerous life-and-death cases that are typically decided by local courts. (Last weekend, some conservative legal scholars urged the Republicans not to intervene, but they were spurned.)

Marshall Wittmann, a centrist Democratic scholar who previously worked in various conservative venues (as a Christian Coalition lobbyist, a Heritage Foundation think tank fellow, and as an aide to Arizona Sen. John McCain), said Tuesday that the overhaul of conservatism can be traced to several factors:

"Conservatives have become intoxicated with power. It's easy to talk about `limited government' when you're out of power. But now that their appetites have been whetted, now that they have gained control of the leviathan state, they have found it to their liking, so they have tossed principles aside."

Also, he said, the balance of power within the GOP coalition has shifted. The business folks are as strong as ever. But the limited-government conservatives (who eschewed moral issues and stressed balanced budgets) don't wield the same clout that they enjoyed just 10 years ago; essentially, said Wittmann, they have been supplanted by the religious and social conservatives, "the most animated force within the Republican party today" - and a voting bloc that seeks a strong federal role in the promotion of morality.

Their power is self-evident. In the exit polls last November, roughly one-quarter of the electorate was comprised of white evangelicals and born-again Christians; among these voters, 78 percent chose Bush, 21 percent chose John Kerry. In the rest of the electorate, Kerry beat Bush, 56 to 43 percent.

Also, congressional Republicans, mindful that religious conservative voters will wield clout in the 2006 elections, may have seen a way to serve the bloc by jumping into the Schiavo controversy; witness the memo that billed her case as "a great political issue." (In response, some dissenters note that movement architect Barry Goldwater didn't like the religious right; in 1981, Goldwater said, "I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of `conservatism.'")

But defenders of the new conservative credo argue that core principles have not been dumped; they are merely being pursued in a new way. Rich Lowry, a conservative analyst, posted this argument online Tuesday: "If it is disorienting to see Republicans scrambling for federal intervention, at least they are acting on their deepest pro-life convictions ... preserving it is a paramount value."

Some analysts say that Ronald Reagan's small-government credo was a myth, anyway. Jack Pitney, an ex-Republican aide, noted Tuesday, "Reagan was going to reduce the federal government and cut some Cabinet departments. By the time he left office, he'd increased the government, and added a department."

But the Schiavo case is not a political winner; as reported in an ABC poll, 70 percent of Americans saw the GOP's intervention as inappropriate. Even evangelical Protestants, by 50 to 44 percent, opposed the move. GOP chairman Ken Mehlman said Tuesday that the party acted on principle, but Ryan Sager, the conservative dissenter, saw political danger in that principle, and a warning for the post-Reagan party.

He said, in an online posting: "Not a few people - especially boomers with aging parents - are going to see themselves in this (Schiavo) case, and they are going to picture Rep. DeLay in the hospital room with them, standing between them and their loved ones."

© 2005, The Philadelphia Inquirer.

From Knight-Ridder Newspapers:
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/
news/nation/11209090.htm
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 11:57 am
An article by Pat Bhuchanan in today's Editorial page in the San Jose Merc. "ECHOS OF NAZI GERMANY: THOSE WHO WANT TO EXECUTE HER HAVE A GRUESOM PRECEDENT." The second paragraph from his piece: "Ours is a nation where a judge may not sentence Beltway sniper John Malvo to death becaues he is too young to die, but can sentence Terri Schiavo to death because she is too severly handicapped to live." And his last sentence: "Hitler's doctors may yet prove to be the medical pioneers of the 21st century." MY COMMENT: It bothers me greatly that so many in this country believe as Buchanan on this Terri Schiavo case. They condemn all the doctors and judges who have looked at this case with great care as we would expect in our democratic republic, but the likes of Buchanan is ready to compare this with Hitler. How shameful.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 12:01 pm
It's sad that the only experts involved in this case are the ones being demonized...

You should re-post this to the 'hilterian slur deconstructed' thread... it seems it's not only the left who is responsible for it.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 12:05 pm
Not that there aren't good outcomes from it; at least people are waking up to the corruption in the American Taliban.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/23/politics/23repubs.html?

Quote:
"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."


Hardly a liberal, Shays.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 12:10 pm
http://www.unitedmedia.com/editoons/lane/archive/images/lane2008137750323.gif

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 12:23 pm
Bill wrote;

Quote:
The only way that isn't a Strawman tactic; is if you were no longer talking about the estimated percentage of people who would seek a divorce in Terri/Hillary's respective cases. If that's the case, you should have started another paragraph.
Geez. now we need to give lessons in reading comprehension. A paragraph deals with the issues in the paragraph. The statement you bolded would be about the example in the paragraph. The section you quoted is a complete paragraph in and of itself. The paragraph prior to this also did not deal with Schiavo. The issue it deals with is the validity of assuming that your opinion is the only possible "reasonable" opinion and your claim that my argument is 'intellectually bankrupt".

Then go back and look at YOUR statement about this. You claimed I made a strawman argment BEFORE I went to the example.
Quote:
Well written and seemingly well reasoned response Parados, right up until you consider and necessarily convert your Strawman into a realistic metaphor
Now compare that to your statement I am responding to here. First you claim I make a straw man argument before the metaphor. Now you point to my statement after the example as proof of the straw man. To actually use a metaphor: You are grasping at straws here in an attempt to prove yourself right.
0 Replies
 
Dookiestix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 12:51 pm
Quote:
http://www.earnedmedia.org/cfts0323.htm

Coalition Calls Upon Bush to Save Schiavo's Life by Using Police Powers
Press Conferences in Washington and Tallahassee on March 23 at noon.

To: National Desk

Contact: Joe Giganti, 703-928-9695, [email protected]

WASHINGTON, March 23 /Christian Wire Service/ -- The 11th Hour Coalition to Save Terri Schiavo's Life will hold simultaneous press conferences -- Wednesday, March 23 -- at 12 noon in Washington, D.C., and Tallahassee, Fla.

This ad hoc partnership of religious and political organizations -- which will gather in front of the White House and the Florida governor's mansion -- will call on President George W. Bush and Gov. Jeb Bush to use their executive powers to protect Terri Schiavo from starvation.

"There are two people in the United States who can save Terri Schiavo's life right now. The president of the United States and the governor of Florida have the authority to use the police services at their disposal to take Terri into protective custody, restore her food and hydration, and arrest anyone who would interfere," said Dr. Paul Schenck, executive director of the National Pro-Life Action Center on Capitol Hill. "For the sake of Terri's life, we cannot afford to wait while the courts dither over jurisdiction."


Here we go, folks. The Federal Government (which is being totally run by Republican neoconservatives now) is about to turn this country into a police state. Is martial law not that far off now?
0 Replies
 
Dookiestix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 12:56 pm
Bush also needs the Shiavo distraction for this as well:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/23/business/23cnd-econ.html?hp&ex=1111640400&en=4acf776cdcfc0ac6&ei=5094&partner=homepage
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 12:57 pm
That's okay; they're doing this to save one person in a vegetative state who would want Marshall Law to enforce their will on everybody else including the wishes of the husband, the doctors, and the 21 judges who have all supported Michael.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 12:58 pm
I had a feeling these neocons were going to destroy this country, but didn't expect it to happen so soon.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 12:59 pm
I'm just wonder who the Nazis are?
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 01:03 pm
Dookiestix wrote:
Quote:
http://www.earnedmedia.org/cfts0323.htm

Coalition Calls Upon Bush to Save Schiavo's Life by Using Police Powers
Press Conferences in Washington and Tallahassee on March 23 at noon.

To: National Desk

Contact: Joe Giganti, 703-928-9695, [email protected]

WASHINGTON, March 23 /Christian Wire Service/ -- The 11th Hour Coalition to Save Terri Schiavo's Life will hold simultaneous press conferences -- Wednesday, March 23 -- at 12 noon in Washington, D.C., and Tallahassee, Fla.

This ad hoc partnership of religious and political organizations -- which will gather in front of the White House and the Florida governor's mansion -- will call on President George W. Bush and Gov. Jeb Bush to use their executive powers to protect Terri Schiavo from starvation.

"There are two people in the United States who can save Terri Schiavo's life right now. The president of the United States and the governor of Florida have the authority to use the police services at their disposal to take Terri into protective custody, restore her food and hydration, and arrest anyone who would interfere," said Dr. Paul Schenck, executive director of the National Pro-Life Action Center on Capitol Hill. "For the sake of Terri's life, we cannot afford to wait while the courts dither over jurisdiction."


Here we go, folks. The Federal Government (which is being totally run by Republican neoconservatives now) is about to turn this country into a police state. Is martial law not that far off now?


Thank you, Dookie, for posting a notice for a press conference. It is very interesting .... If you find any other notices for press conferences, would you post those as well? As I said, they are very interesting, and I can certainly understand your highly charged reaction to reading this one.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 01:06 pm
/sarcasm?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 01:08 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
/sarcasm?

Cycloptichorn


Yes. Thanks ... I forget Dookie doesn't do sarcasm well.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 01:12 pm
Just making sure, lol

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 01:19 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Brandon

Quote:
Nonetheless, no matter how misguided, the family is clearly motivated by love, and horrified at seeing TS starved to death.


I don't think they are clearly motivated by love at all. If they really loved her, they'd have let her go a long time ago.

They aren't thinking about what is best or most comfortable to their daughter; after all, she won't be in any pain and will be released from her hellish prison of a body. No, they are thinking about themselves...

Cycloptichorn


You have to wonder what terri's death will do to contributions to her website.

Site
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 01:27 pm
Well, if we receive this much opprobrium for trying to stop a man from starving his "wife" to death, it's a good thing we're not trying to raise a fund to send orphans through college or trying to get the government to build soup kitchens for the poor. We'd probably be accused of being war criminals.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 01:34 pm
huh?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 01:40 pm
Bulimia, heart attack, brain damage..... This was all Michael's fault. Hang the bastard.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 01:51 pm
McGentrix wrote:
http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/050322/asay.gif

hehhehheh
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/22/2019 at 09:49:21