3/29/2005
Captain Ed has a great take on Paul Krugman’s latest display of idiocy. Apparently Jesse Jackson and son, as well as the Village Voice are now a part of the great right wing Theocracy plan to destroy America as we know it….. well, as Krugman imagines it anyway.
Pass Social Security Reform Now Or Pay For It Later
Brendan Miniter makes a good point in his Opinion Journal piece today. Imagine what would happen of Bush doesn’t pass his ownership society plan in the next four years. Chances are it wouldn’t die with this administration but would live on to the next Democratic administration (Hillary in 08?) to become our worst nightmare. A sickening mix of big government, higher taxes, reduced benefits, and “diversified risk” with publicly invested money, or at least that’s the way things appear to be shaping up. The article is well worth the read, and Republicans both on and off of Capital Hill should be fore warned.
3/27/2005
NY Times And Fellow Democrats Are Trying To Politicize The Schiavo Case
It’s disgusting what they’re trying to do. Yesterday, in a hit piece disguised as news, the New York Times tried their best to turn the tragic Schiavo story into a political hand grenade for the Republicans.
In their opening paragraph authors Carl Hulse and Adam Nagourney opine that DeLay had been dodging cameras until the Schiavo case showed up. Now, sadly the case appears to be decided and Delay has disappeared again.
WASHINGTON, March 25 - Early this week, Tom DeLay assumed an uncharacteristically visible role in the Terri Schiavo case, pressing Congress to intervene, invoking God and attacking Ms. Schiavo’s husband before television cameras and on the House floor. Now, with the prospect that she will be kept alive essentially dashed in the courts, he has slipped out of the spotlight.
They then spend the next eight paragraphs beating up om primarily Tom DeLay, but the rest of the party (including the President) as well.
3/26/2005
Great Unbiased Look At The Remaining Appeals
SCOTUS blog has a great unbiased look at the current court actions in the Schiavo case . As usual, here’s the key ‘graphs.
Original complaint, filed March 21 after Congress authorized a new federal court lawsuit by the parents. It alleged that these rights of Mrs. Schiavo had been violated: a due process right to a trial on her fate before an impartial judge (Count I), a procedural due process right to have a guardian ad litem and an independent attorney (Count II), an equal protection right not to be treated unequally because she is an incapacitated person (Count III), a right under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act to the free exercise of religion to safeguard her Roman Catholic beliefs about ending life (Count IV), and a right under the First Amendment to the free exercise of religion (Count V).
Status: Whittemore on Tuesday found the parents unlikely to win on those claims. They remain a part of the lawsuit, should it go to trial.
First amended complaint, filed March 22. It added alleged violations of these rights: a right to proper treatment as well as food and water, under the Americans with Disabilities Act (Count VI), a right to adequate care under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Count VII), a due process right not to have someone else decide she would not want to be kept alive in her present condition (Count VIII), and a right under the Eighth Amendment not to be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment in the withdrawal of nutrition (Count IX).
Status: Whittemore was reviewing those at the Thursday evening hearing as to whether the parents are likely to prevail on those, if the case goes to trial. They remain a part of the lawsuit.
Second amended complaint, filed Thursday. It added an allegation of a violation of a “right to life†under the Fourteenth Amendment, meaning a right to food and water to sustain her life (Count X).
Status: This newest allegation is also under review in the Thursday hearing on whether the claim is likely to succeed at trial. It remains a part of the lawsuit.
3/25/2005
This letter from a Marine, Father, and Grandfather to Terri is so touching that one can hardly get through it without breaking down. I assure you though, it’s well worth the read.
Hat Tip: Mt. Virtus
3/24/2005
In her latest column Ann Coulter discusses the tragic case of Terri Schiavo. Here’s the key ‘graph.
President Andrew Jackson is supposed to have said of a Supreme Court ruling he opposed: “Well, John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it.” The court’s ruling was ignored. And yet, somehow, the republic survived.
If Gov. Jeb Bush doesn’t say something similar to the Florida courts that have ordered Terri Schiavo to die, he’ll be the second Republican governor disgraced by the illiterate ramblings of a state judiciary. Gov. Mitt Romney will never recover from his acquiescence to the Massachusetts Supreme Court’s miraculous discovery of a right to gay marriage. Neither will Gov. Bush if he doesn’t stop the torture and murder of Terri Schiavo.
Survive it has, will Terri?
Today, George Felos, the attorney for the murdering Michael “When’s the bitch gonna die” Schiavo urged the Schindler family to stop their legal quest to keep their daughter alive. He said that their time would be better spent in reflection.
What kind of an arrogant jerk does it take to tell parents what their time would be better spent doing when your the one trying to murder their daughter. I have said before, in private if not on this blog, that I give Mr. Schindler all the credit in the world. If I were him, I don’t know that I could have refrained from braining both Felos and Schiavo for their actions over the last several years. Michael continues to keep Terri’s family from seeing their dying daughter.
3/23/2005
I thought I would take some time to congratulate all of those who have worked so hard to see Terri murdered. Judge Greer, Judge Whittemore, and the rest of the 11th circuit, how hard it must have been for you to ignore the passionate pleas of her parents for mercy. How hard it must have been for you to ignore the contrary medical testimony of no less than 35 medical professionals. How difficult it must have been for you to ignore the fact that the husband has multiple conflicts of interest, and I absolutely cannot imagine how hard it must have been to ignore the will of the people as expressed by the United States Congress and the President of the United States.
Yes, you have reached a level of ignorance and coldheartedness I didn’t know was possible outside of the Third Reich.
To the news media, who have constantly misrepresented her condition, it has become obvious to those on the right that you are incapable of producing a fair and balanced story. Especially if it involves anyone on the right or their causes.
Yes, congratulations to you all. As of today, Terri has gone without food or water for over five days and she will soon die if someone doesn’t do something soon.
3/22/2005
If it’s all about states rights then why is this guy holding up a sign that says “Hey W! I see it’s payback time!”. People like this disgust me. Here we are debating the life of a human being, and for them it’s all about revenge and politics. I suspect much the same thing is going on amoungst the Democrats in Washington.
Usually I wouldn’t reprint an entire article, but this one is so spot on and related to current events that I will reprint this one.
In response to the GOP-led congressional action intended to restore Terri Schiavo’s feeding tube, those Democrats in opposition have attacked Republican hypocrisy in the case. Why suddenly, they ask, is the party of federalism and hostility to an overweening federal judiciary interfering in a state matter and handing the Schiavo case to a federal judge?
If it is disorienting to see Republicans scrambling for federal intervention, at least they are acting on their deepest pro-life convictions — life is to be treasured in whatever form it takes, and preserving it is a paramount value. The starkest inconsistencies are on the other side, on the part of liberals who ordinarily support the federalization of everything, but can’t bear the thought of a federal judge reviewing the facts of the Schiavo case to determine whether or not she should be starved to death.
Let’s stipulate for the sake of argument that the facts of the Schiavo case are in dispute (and they really are) — whether she is in a persistent vegetative state, whether she can improve, whether she had previously expressed a desire to die in these circumstances. Then, let’s tally the inconsistencies.
Federal habeas review. Death-row inmates, as a matter of course, appeal their cases in the federal courts, even after they have been in the state courts (like the Schiavo case) for years. Liberals have traditionally defended this federal habeas review, even when it drags on endlessly. In the 1990s, Republicans passed legislation signed by President Clinton limiting death-row inmates to one federal appeal. Democratic Rep. John Conyers attacked the bill as “inconsistent with our democratic system of laws.” Conyers was one of 53 House Democrats — half of all Democrats voting — to oppose giving Schiavo essentially the same right to have her case reviewed by a federal judge that he supports for convicted killers.
Civil rights. Under the Schiavo bill, a federal judge will review whether any of her federal civil rights have been violated. Since when do Democrats oppose federal scrutiny of potential civil-rights violations? They have consistently used the 14th Amendment to make what had previously been local matters — from voting rights to housing — the jurisdiction of the federal government on civil-rights grounds. They supported federal intervention in 2000 to investigate traffic stops on the New Jersey turnpike that allegedly violated motorists’ rights. Traffic stops! But federal judicial review of whether Schiavo should live or die is out of bounds?
The disabled. Liberals have, to their great credit, been defenders of the disabled. They passed the Americans with Disabilities Act in 1990, a sweeping federal law to prevent the disabled from, for instance, being denied access to movie theaters — a minor question, surely, compared with being denied sustenance. A principled Democrat in this regard is Sen. Tom Harkin (Iowa), an advocate for the disabled who supports taking “every precaution” in the Schiavo case.
Violence against women. In the early 1990s, Democrats championed legislation to create federal penalties for gender-related violence. In other words, every time some abusive husband slaps his wife, it is a federal matter. But when a husband — with motivations questioned by his wife’s family — wants to starve his wife, suddenly some Democrats become George Wallace-like opponents of federal power.
The death penalty. Whenever life-related issues arise, liberals ask: How can conservatives favor preserving life when they support executing people? There’s an answer for that (for another day), but the more acute question is for the other side: How can you oppose death sentences for killers, but support one, in effect, for Schiavo, whose only crime is not being capable of feeding herself?
Of course, it’s possible to oppose the Schiavo bill on principled procedural grounds, maintaining that it is not the business of Congress or the federal courts. But one suspects that as soon as they are considering anything other than the fate of poor Terri Schiavo, liberals will lose their newfound suspicion of federal action.
My pleas, and more importantly Terri’s family’s pleas went unheard. Early this morning Judge Whittimore issued his ruling in favor of murder. This is another example of a leftist judiciary out of control and out of touch with the law and the will of the people. Terri’s last hope is the 11th circuit court in Atlanta. Let’s hope they have more sense than the rest of these idiots.
UPDATE: Hugh provides a great review of Judge James Whittemore’s actions this morning. I’m glad to see that I have a lawyer agreeing with me in that the judges actions this morning were disgusting. Terri’s law clearly calls for a De Novo hearing of the evidence, why is it that Whittemore ruled without hearing a single wittness?
3/21/2005
An Open Letter to Judge James D. Whittemore
Your Honor,
Today you heard oral arguments for Terri Schindler - Schiavo’s case. I urge you sir to delay no longer. Every minute you delay your ruling, Terri gets weaker and weaker. To help you make your decision, here are some facts that may or may not have been presented to you in court today. There are thirty three doctors that say Terri could be rehabilitated against the four doctors who say she can’t. Those doctors were paid by Mr. Felos. As I’m sure your aware, money can buy most anything.
Terri is awake and responds to her parents. She speaks, she laughs, and she cries. Terri is not in a persistent vegetative state. As I’m sure your aware, there are videos out that show Terri tracking a balloon with her eyes. Would a person in a PVS be able to do that? I think not.
As for Mr. Schiavo, he has multiple conflicts of interest. The least of those being that he has moved on with his life and has cheated on Terri with another woman. They have two children together. There has also been evidence presented by Mr. Schindler (Terri’s father) that Terri has had multiple unexplained fractures. Fractures that in all likelihood were created by an abusive situation. And speaking of abuse, what kind of loving husband would refuse any and all kinds of therapy for his wife, including the simple act of putting a rolled up towel in her hand to prevent her hand from cramping ?
Terri has never had tests that would determine one way or the other that she is in a persistent vegetative state. Michael has refused to allow those tests to be performed. What would be the problem of immediately ordering an MRI or PET scan to put this issue to rest?
Mr. Whittemore, please enter this with a tender heart. Please hear and act on all the evidence available, a woman’s life depends on it.
Sincerely,
Jim C
Sole contributer to http://thinkingright.net
In one of the most bitter editorials I’ve ever seen in print, the LA Times attacked Republican lawmakers over the Schiavo bill passed last night. The article is fraught with inaccuracies about Terri’s condition as well as the motives of conservatives.
The mean spiritedness of the LAT editorial board has never been so evident as it is in this article. Even the title, “The Midnight Coup”, reeks of bias against and hatred of right to life causes and mainstream America.
Republican leaders, eying an opportunity to appease their radical right-wing constituents, convened Congress over the weekend to shamelessly interject the federal government into the wrenching Schiavo family dispute. They brushed aside our federalist system of government, which assigns the resolution of such disputes to state law, and state judges. Even President Bush flew back from his ranch to Washington on Sunday to be in on what amounts to a constitutional coup d’etat.
First of all, I wouldn’t consider myself radical right wing. Secondly, we did not brush aside the federalist system of government, this is done routinely with criminal cases before they are put to death. So, if we are willing to do this for our most heinous criminals, should we not be willing to do this for an innocent woman? Finally, the suggestion that this is a constitutional coup d’etat is ridiculous. Of course, of it really were a constitutional coup d’etat, that would mean that the Florida Judiciary is the government.
Conservatives are the historical defenders of states’ rights, and the supposed proponents of keeping big government out of people’s lives, but this case once again shows that some social conservatives are happy to see the federal government acquire Stalinist proportions when imposing their morality on the rest of the country. So breathtaking was this attempted usurpation of power, wresting jurisdiction over a right-to-die case away from Florida’s judiciary, that Republican leaders in the end had to agree to limit this legislation’s applicability to the Schiavo case.
I would hardly call this letting government acquire Stalinist proportions. We impose our morality as a society every day. Every time someone is convicted of murder, rape, or assault we assert our morality. Why is saving the life of one woman equated to a Stalinist government, where by the way, this wouldn’t be done because the rights of the individual don’t matter.
Last Friday, after years of litigation and medical evaluations, the Florida judge presiding over the case ordered the removal of Schiavo’s feeding tube, pursuant to her husband’s wishes.
That’s right, her husbands wishes. We don’t know what Terri’s wishes are though. Doesn’t that count?
House and Senate committees outrageously tried to intervene then by issuing subpoenas to the Schiavo’s and Terri’s doctors, and by asking federal courts to order the feeding tube reinstated. But since this was not a case within federal jurisdiction, their efforts failed. Hence the effort to wrest jurisdiction the old-fashioned way, by passing a law.
Clumsy yes….. outrageous no.
Congress does act in other extraordinary cases on behalf of a specific individual, such as when it grants someone U.S. citizenship. But here, Congress is breaking new ground, trying to overturn a judicial decision by altering the Constitution’s federalist scheme. This is the family law equivalent of the constitutionally banned “bill of attainder,” legislation that seeks to convict someone of a crime.
This does not alter the constitutions federalist scheme. It uses precedent already in place to offer Terri and her parents federal review of a case that by you own admission is a difficult one. Furthermore, this isn’t a bill of attainder, the authors of this legislation made a special effort to avoid that because they knew if they didn’t it would be ruled unconstitutional.
Bedridden for 15 years since she was resuscitated after she stopped breathing, Schiavo now breathes but is incapable of communicating or eating or drinking on her own. Her persistent vegetative state puts one in mind of the final stages of Alzheimer’s disease, except that it can last for decades. Whether she can experience the simplest emotion is now the purview of politics, not medicine.
Once again, we don’t know if she is in a PVS. The tests needed to determine this have never been done (MRI and PET scan). The only reason that this has now had politics interjected is because of judges who have ignored facts.
Schiavo’s parents stand on one side of the gulf, demanding that she be kept alive by a tube that puts nourishment directly into her stomach. Her husband, whose motives the parents question constantly, says she would not have wanted to live in this dark twilight between physical life and humanity. [emphasis added]
As well they should. Mr. Schiavo obviously has one big conflict of interest. That being the woman he has cheated on Terri with and their two kids.
The praying, chanting protesters outside the Florida hospital where this drama plays out are a hint that this is the new front in what began as the abortion war, an effort to translate religious dogma into law under the right-to-life banner.
Your dogma is my truth.
The feeding tube removed Friday at the order of a Florida state judge is not high medical technology. There are some people, children and adults alike, who may live nearly ordinary lives despite being forced to feed themselves or be fed through a tube because of other medical conditions. The line on removing such a tube is not as bright as removing a patient clearly at the end of life from artificial breathing or a heart machine. Ethical questions surrounding a case like Schiavo’s are blurry and difficult, evidenced by the years of waiting and hoping for a miracle that have passed since she collapsed.
This is all the more reason for an independent judge to review the case.
3/20/2005
BREAKING NEWS:Tonight the House passed S 686, giving her parents the right to be heard in Federal court. Ther bill was passed 203 to 58. The President is expected to sign the bill into law within the hour.
Michael Admits He Didn’t Know What Terri Wanted
In reviewing the transcript of Michael Schiavo’s appearance on Larry King Live on Friday the 18th, I noticed that he admitted he didn’t know what Terri wanted in terms of life support. This is just another reason why this action must be stopped and reviewed. Here is the key part of the transcript.
KING: Have you had any contact with the family today? This is a sad day all the way around, Michael. We know of your dispute.
M. SCHIAVO: I’ve had no contact with them.
KING: No contact at all?
M. SCHIAVO: No.
KING: Do you understand how they feel?
M. SCHIAVO: Yes, I do. But this is not about them, it’s about Terri. And I’ve also said that in court. We didn’t know what Terri wanted, but this is what we want…
KING: You’re not — it didn’t cost you anything. This is not something where you’re looking to save money?
M. SCHIAVO: No. There’s no money involved. We need to move on from that question. That question has been asked me 50 million times. There is no money!
KING: George, what do you think is going to happen? FELOS: Larry, this case has been so unpredictable, it’s impossible to say. But we have found a real ground swell of support, especially with that atrocious intervention by the Congress. We’ve gotten calls, letters, people e-mailed and a lot of people very upset about this.
I mean, it’s scary to think that the government, just because they may be ideologically opposed to your medical treatment choice, has a right to overturn what you want. And people are up in arms about this and they’re letting their Senators and Representatives know.
M. SCHIAVO: I want everybody to know. I want to know which Congressman, which House legislator would come down here and take Terri’s place? Who’s going to take her position? You won’t get an answer.
KING: Michael Schiavo and George Felos. Michael Schiavo the husband, George Felos the attorney. We’ll take a break and come back with Susan Vitadamo, Terri Schiavo’s sister, and David Gibbs the Schindler family attorney. And then we’ll have a debate on the topic. Don’t go away.
“We didn’t know what Terri wanted, but this is what we want…”. What a telling admission. In a recent update on Fox News, I found out that Michael at one point was refusing to let Terri’s parents in to see her. What kind of an animal would refuse to let parents see their dying child. I give Mr. Schindler all the credit in the world. If I were him I don’t think I could restrain myself from marching into that hospice and beating the cr#p out of that jerk.
I just finished watching the Democratic opposition press conference on Fox News. I have never seen such a bunch of misinforation and lies in my life. Once again, to clear up some of the misinformation being spread by the opposition.
What Michael Schiavo, his lawyer Felos, and Judge Greer are doing is disgraceful. Please write or call your representatives now and stop this.
More Important Information On Terri
Here is a must hear interview with someone with first hand information on Terri’s condition.
UPDATE: Just found this information. Would a husband that loves his wife say “When is that bitch gonna die?”
Terri’s medical condition was systematically distorted and misrepresented. When I worked with her, she was alert and oriented. Terri spoke on a regular basis while in my presence, saying such things as “mommy,” and “elp me.” “Help me” was, in fact, one of her most frequent utterances. I heard her say it hundreds of times. Terri would try to say the word “pain” when she was in discomfort, but it came out more like “pay.” She didn’t say the “n” sound very well. During her menses she would indicate her discomfort by saying “pay” and moving her arms toward her lower abdominal area. Other ways that she would indicate that she was in pain included pursing her lips, grimacing, thrashing in bed, curling her toes or moving her legs around. She would let you know when she had a bowel movement by flipping up the covers and pulling on her diaper.
[snip]
Throughout my time at Palm Gardens, Michael Schiavo was focused on Terri’s death. Michael would say “When is she going to die?,” “Has she died yet?” and “When is that bitch gonna die?”
[snip]
When Michael visited Terri, he always came alone and always had the door closed and locked while he was with Terri. He would typically be there about twenty minutes or so. When he left Terri would would be trembling, crying hysterically, and would be very pale and have cold sweats.
This is the narrative from Terri’s lawyer regarding her last visit with Terri. For those of you who foolishly think that Terri is in a PVS, would someone in a persistant vegitative state be able to scream out Ahhhhh Waaaaaa when asked to say I want to live?
When Terri Schiavo’s feeding tube was removed at 1:45 p.m. on March 18, 2005, I was one of the most surprised people on the planet. I had been visiting Terri throughout the morning with her family and her priest. As part of the legal team working throughout the previous days and nights to save Terri from a horrific fate, I was very hopeful. Although the state judicial system had obviously failed Terri by not protecting her life, I knew other forces were still at work. I fully expected the federal courts would step in to reverse this injustice, just as they might for a prisoner unjustly set for execution—although by much more humane means than Terri would be executed. Barring that, I was certain that sometime around noon, the Florida Department of Children and Family Services would come to the Woodside Hospice facility in Pinellas Park and take Terri into protective custody. Or that federal marshals would arrive from Washington D.C, where the Congress was working furiously to try to save Terri, and would stand guard at her door to prevent any medical personnel from entering her room to remove the tube that was providing her nutrition and hydration.
Finally, I was sure if nothing else was working, that at 12:59,just before the hour scheduled for Terri’s gruesome execution to begin, Florida Gov. Jeb Bush would at least issue a 60-day reprieve for the legislative bodies to complete the work they were attempting to do to save Terri’s life and to make sure that no other vulnerable adults could be sentenced to starve to death in America. I had done the legal research weeks before and was fully convinced that Gov. Bush had the power, under our co-equal branches of government, to issue a reprieve in the face of a judicial death sentence intended to lead to the starvation and dehydration of an innocent woman when scores of doctors and neurologists were saying she could be helped.
All morning long, as I was in the room with Terri and her family, we were telling her that help was on the way. Terri was in good spirits that morning. The mood in her room was jovial, particularly around noontime, as we knew Congressional attorneys were on the scene and many were working hard to save Terri’s life. For most of that time, I was visiting and talking with Terri along with Terri’s sister Suzanne Vitadamo, Suzanne’s husband, and Terri’s aunt, who was visiting from New York to help provide support for the family. A female Pinellas Park police office was stationed at the door outside Terri’s room.
Terri was sitting up in her lounge chair, dressed and looking alert and well. Her feeding tube had been plugged in around 11 a.m. and we all felt good that she was still being fed. Suzanne and I were talking, joking, and laughing with Terri, telling her she was going to go to Washington D.C. to testify before Congress, which meant that finally Terri’s husband Michael would be required to fix her wheelchair. After that Suzanne could take Terri to the mall shopping and could wheel her outdoors every day to feel the wind and sunshine on her face, something she has not been able to do for more than five years.
At one point, I noticed Terri’s window blinds were pulled down. I went to the window to raise them so Terri could look at the beautiful garden outside her window and see the sun after several days of rain. As sunlight came into the room, Terri’s eyes widened and she was obviously very pleased. At another point, Suzanne and I told Terri she needed to suck in all the food she could because she might not be getting anything for a few days. During that time, Mary Schindler, Terri’s mother, joined us for a bit, and we noticed there were bubbles in Terri’s feeding tube. We joked that we didn’t want her to begin burping, and called the nurses to fix the feeding tube, which they did. Terri’s mother did not come back into the room. This was a very difficult day for Bob and Mary Schindler. I suspect they were less hopeful all along than I was, having lived through Terri’s last two feeding tube removals.
Suzanne and I continued to talk and joke with Terri for probably an hour or more. At one point Suzanne called Terri the bionic woman and I heard Terri laugh out loud heartily for the first time since I have been visiting with her. She laughed so hard that for the first time I noticed the dimples in her cheeks.
The most dramatic event of this visit happened at one point when I was sitting on Terri’s bed next to Suzanne. Terri was sitting in her lounge chair and her aunt was standing at the foot of the chair. I stood up and learned over Terri. I took her arms in both of my hands. I said to her, “Terri if you could only say ‘I want to live’ this whole thing could be over today.†I begged her to try very hard to say, “I want to live.†To my enormous shock and surprise, Terri’s eyes opened wide, she looked me square in the face, and with a look of great concentration, she said, “Ahhhhhhh.†Then, seeming to summon up all the strength she had, she virtually screamed, “Waaaaaaaa.†She yelled so loudly that Michael Vitadamo, Suzanne’s husband, and the female police officer who were then standing together outside Terri’s door, clearly heard her. At that point, Terri had a look of anguish on her face that I had never seen before and she seemed to be struggling hard, but was unable to complete the sentence. She became very frustrated and began to cry. I was horrified that I was obviously causing Terri so much anguish. Suzanne and I began to stroke Terri’s face and hair to comfort her. I told Terri I was very sorry. It had not been my intention to upset her so much. Suzanne and I assured Terri that her efforts were much appreciated and that she did not need to try to say anything more. I promised Terri I would tell the world that she had tried to say, â€I want to live.â€
Suzanne and I continued to visit and talk with Terri, along with other family members who came and went in the room, until about 2:00 p.m. when we were all told to leave after Judge Greer denied yet another motion for stay and ordered the removal of the feeding tube to proceed. As we left the room, the female police officer outside the door was valiantly attempting to keep from crying.
Just as Terri’s husband Michael has told the world he must keep an alleged promise to kill Terri, a promise remembered a million dollars and nearly a decade after the fact; I must keep my promise to Terri immediately. Time is running out for her. I went out to the banks of cameras outside the hospice facility and told the story immediately. Now I must also tell the story in writing for the world to hear. It may be the last effective thing I can do to try to keep Terri alive so she can get the testing, therapy, and rehabilitative help she so desperately needs before it is too late.
About four in the afternoon, several hours after the feeding tube was removed, I returned to Terri’s room. By that time she was alone except for a male police officer now standing inside the door. When I entered the room and began to speak to her, Terri started to cry and tried to speak to me immediately. It was one of the most helpless feelings I have ever had. Terri was looking very melancholy at that point and I had the sense she was very upset that we had told her things were going to get better, but instead, they were obviously getting worse. I had previously had the same feeling when my own daughter was a baby who was hospitalized and was crying and looking to me to rescue her from her hospital crib, something I could not do. While I was in the room with Terri for the next half hour or so, several other friends came to visit and I did a few press interviews sitting right next to Terri. I again raised her window shade, which had again been pulled down, so Terri could at least see the garden and the sunshine from her lounge chair. I also turned the radio on in her room before I left so that when she was alone, she would at least have some music for comfort.
Just before I left the room, I leaned over Terri and spoke right into her ear. I told her I was very sorry I had not been able to stop the feeding tube from being taken out and I was very sorry I had to leave her alone. But I reminded her that Jesus would stay right by her side even when no one else was there with her. When I mentioned Jesus’ Name, Terri again laughed out loud. She became very agitated and began loudly trying to speak to me again. As Terri continued to laugh and try to speak, I quietly prayed in her ear, kissed her, placed her in Jesus’ care, and left the room.
Terri is alone now. As I write this last visit narrative, it is five in the morning of March 19. Terri has been without food and water for nearly 17 hours. I’m sure she is beginning at least become thirsty, if not hungry. And I am left to wonder how many other people care.
Michael Schiavo is doing his best to have his wife killed, wee must do our best to ake sure she lives. Please join me in prayer today for Terri and our leaders in Washington as they struggle with how best to help Terri.
3/18/2005
What an amazing evening! The folks at Borders Bookstores and 710 KNUS did a wonderful job and treated us like VIPs. I was privileged to spend the evening with some of Colorado’s finest conservatives and Hugh Hewitt. The topic of Hugh’s show today was the murder by starvation of Terri Schiavo. I had a feeding tube for four months, for those of us who are or were dependent on feeding by other than traditional means, it’s an absolute necessity. Go to Focus on the Family’s citizen link page and send the legislators in Florida and Washington DC a message that we in America will not stand for murder by judicial order.
I helped two new bloggers set up blogs tonight, both have just made their first posts. You can find them here and here. For any of you interested in starting your own blogs go to www.blogspot.com. It’s a free blogging service and has a great user interface for those who are novices. Check out the other members of the Rocky Mountain Alliance for live blog action of tonight’s festivities. Oh, and a huge thank you to Michael at Tucano’s for a wonderful dinner. Now, off to bed. It’s been a long day.
I am here tonight at Borders bookstore in Lakewood (Hugh, why are you having such a hard time remembering that?) It has been a great experience and I hope to have more to publish soon.
3/17/2005
Here We Go Again With The Spin
I mentioned over the weekend that the NY Times had put out a fairly well spun piece on “fake news”. Now the NY Times editorial board has carried the spin even further. I have submitted several questions to the author of this column. Here are the questions.
1) You express outrage over the Bush administrations release of “fake news”. Where was your outrage when the Clinton administration did the same thing?
2) According to the Barstow/Stein piece over the weekend, the Clinton administration (both terms) did the same thing that you accuse the Bush administration of doing. Did it take you this long to figure out that this was going on, or did you just ignore it when the Democrats were doing it?
3) Do you also condemn networks such as CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, and MSNBC for their often unfair coverage of the President (for example the Dan Rather fake document scandal)? If so, why haven’t you publicly called for this type of bias to stop as well?
4) It seems to me that it would be fairly common for political parties to hire PR firms to help get out their message. Have you checked into how much the Democrats have spent on PR, and if so, how does that compare to what the Whitehouse has spent (I just saw an ad this morning paid for by a PAC for a Democrat cause)?
5) How much PR help, in a dollar amount, do you think that the Democrats get from the hollywood left when they go out and tout the evil of the Republican plan, and why don’t you condemn that?
Right minded people can have a debate over whether or not this is propaganda, and whether or not it should be done. That is a topic for a different post. This post (for you commenters who think I am dodging the question) is purely about the hypocritical NY Times editorial board.
I anxiously await their response, and will post whatever response I get in it’s entirety.
UPDATE: This is the response so far. It’s not very encouraging.
Dear Jim C,
The positions taken by the editorial board of The Times are not within my purview, nor should they be; the editorial board is entitled to its views, and readers are free to agree or disagree with them. However, as I know that the editors are concerned with reader response, I have forwarded your comments to editorial page editor Gail Collins.
Yours Sincerely,
Daniel Okrent
Public Editor
3/15/2005
I won’t pretend to know about the problems facing the black community or the answers to those problems. But, I suspect that victim mentalities like this one are chief among them.
Brian G. Nichols considered himself a “soldier on a mission” the day he terrorized a courthouse and a city with a gun, according to a law enforcement official who witnessed Nichols’ first statement to authorities.
The official said Nichols, who was being tried in a rape case when Friday’s deadly shooting spree occurred, considered himself a wrongly accused man in a legal system unfair to African-Americans.
After his capture Saturday afternoon, Nichols gave a three-hour statement to local, federal and state law enforcement agents at FBI headquarters in DeKalb County.
In an interview with The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, the official said Nichols described how he had been stewing in jail while awaiting retrial on charges that he held his ex-girlfriend hostage and sexually assaulted her. The first jury couldn’t agree and the judge declared a mistrial.
Nichols said he was angry that many of the inmates around him were also black and he wondered how many were innocent.
“He called it systematic slavery,” the law enforcement official said.
By all accounts this guy had a lot going for him for most of his life. He had parents who cared, he had good grades, he had talent in football.
He told officials he felt like a “soldier” when he slammed sheriff’s Deputy Cynthia Hall to the concrete floor of a courthouse holding cell.
After knocking Hall unconscious, Nichols told authorities, he strolled across a skybridge to the older part of the courthouse complex to find Barnes, who was in his courtroom hearing a civil case.
Nichols said he first headed to Barnes’ chambers, where he herded four hostages before entering the courtroom. He opened a private door behind Barnes’ bench, approached the judge and fired, he told investigators.
Nichols said the attack wasn’t personal. In fact, he told authorities he thought Barnes had been fair to him during court proceedings.
Julie Ann Brandau, the judge’s court reporter, stood up to check on Barnes, and Nichols said he shot her in the head before making his escape, the law enforcement official said.
As Nichols ran from the courthouse, he turned and fired at Deputy Hoyt Teasley, who was pursuing him across Martin Luther King Drive, the official recounted. Teasley died of his wounds.
Real tough guy eh? He feels victimized by the system so he knocks down a five foot something or other female deputy and kills two other people; an unarmed judge and court reporter before fleeing the scene like a coward.
Afterword he admits:
Nichols didn’t feel he was mistreated by deputies at the jail or courthouse, the official said. But he also didn’t care that the deputies he would soon hurt were black. His anger was focused more on the legal system than race. And the main target was Superior Court Judge Rowland Barnes, who was preparing to resume hearing Nichols’ rape trial.
Later in the same article:
Nichols said the attack wasn’t personal. In fact, he told authorities he thought Barnes had been fair to him during court proceedings.
This kind of animal behavior and he’s the victim? This doesn’t make sense.
3/14/2005
Atrios And The Hypocrites On The Left
I occasionally check out the blogs on the left just to keep track of the latest craziness. Today, I found this short little blurb from Atrios about the NY Times article I mentioned yesterday.
While all right thinking people should condemn the Bush administration for their production of fake news, it’s important to not lose sight of the fact that it’s our ethically pure media who are running the segments. And, if the NYT is correct that these outlets are actually being paid to do so…
But Markos once worked for Howard Dean and disclosed it!!!
We should condemn the Bush administration for producing fake news? I guess so, if that’s actually what they were doing. But, that’s not what the administration did. Some of the departments have put out news releases, they are about legitimate news. Furthermore, the stations airing the spots in their local newscast had the option of saying that they were produced by a government agency. They didn’t.
One other thing that Atrios failed to mention in his post is that this thing of “producing news spots” occurred during both Clinton terms. I wonder if Atrios condemns the Clinton administration for producing “fake news”?
The practice, which also occurred in the Clinton administration, is continuing despite President Bush’s recent call for a clearer demarcation between journalism and government publicity efforts.
Hypocrite
3/13/2005
Media Still Trying To Destroy Aministration Accomplishments
Hugh points to two articles today. One by the New York Times, and one by the LAT. The elite media just can’t accept that the Bush administration is making headway in the middle east and here at home. The NY Times article attacks a program that has been used since the first Clinton administration to get the word out about successes in Washington and here at home. They are disingenuous in portraying it as exclusively a Bush program. They do this by not mentioning until the second page (in the online version) that Clinton used the same program, while portraying Bush’s use of the program as a propaganda machine. What’s wrong with the Government producing a news segment for air at your local station because the “traditional” media won’t?
The LAT article does everything it can to undermine the accomplishments of the Bush doctrine in regards to Libya. Here’s Hugh’s take on the article.
The Los Angeles Times has a lengthy article on the decision by Libya to give up its WMD. This disarmament is one the great victories of the Bush Doctrine, so I expected the article to somehow attempt to undermine the achievement, and sure enough, the piece sets up early its intended result:
“Officials still disagree about exactly why Kadafi gave up the programs. Some information supports President Bush’s contention that the overthrow of Saddam Hussein and the broader U.S. doctrine of pre-emptive strikes forced the Libyan leader to act.
But several British and U.S. officials said Kadafi had been trying for years to surrender the weapons to end the international sanctions crippling the Libyan economy and smooth the way for his eldest son’s eventual assumption of power.”
Incredibly, the reporter never discovered or chose not to include the exchange between Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi and Kadafi in which Khadafi admitted he acted to disarm in response to the projection of American power into Iraq. Charles Krauthammer wrote on this more than a year ago, but the Times just can’t be troubled to draw the obvious conclusions. Instead it helps produce an alternative narrative of the sort that will be used by Bush critics to deny the reality of the success of the Administration across the entire region.
It still amazes me what passes for fair and balanced these days. I don’t think I have ever seen the elite media so complicit in the bashing of a successful Presidency.
3/12/2005
This week, George W. Bush got the credit he so richly deserves. Assad sent word via Time Magazine that he is not Saddam Hussein. This took place as Syrian troops evacuated Lebanon and left Lebaneze troops in charge for the first time in decades.
President Bashar Assad reiterated his commitment to withdrawing all Syrian troops and intelligence agents from Lebanon, a U.N. envoy said Saturday, indicating that he had received a timetable for the pullout. Meanwhile, a convoy of Syrian troops returning home received a rousing welcome. …
“I will present U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annanwith further details of the timetable for a complete Syrian pullout from Lebanon upon arrival in New York early next week,” Roed-Larsen said in a statement read to The Associated Press by Roed-Larsen’s spokesman Najib Friji
Hat Tip: Captains Quarters
3/11/2005
Yesterday, in a remarkable display of partisan bullying, the Colorado House Democrats shoved a reckless piece of legislation down the throats of the tax payers who will have to pay for it. Unidentified sources in the Capital report that:
HB 1194 started out as a minor tax cut with a suspension of TABOR refunds for 5 years. On Second Reading, the bill was amended to suspend for 10 years.
Rep. Stengel yesterday moved to send the bill back to the Finance Committee so the effects of suspending TABOR for years 6-10 could be analyzed. This is permitted under the rules whenever there is a “significant” change to the bill. The Democrats recessed for 10 minutes to ask Leg Council to generate a new fiscal note and the fiscal note from Feb 1 has exactly the same numbers as the fiscal note dated Feb 10.First of all, how can a fiscal note dealing with 10 years into the future have the same dollar impact when the bill originally dealt with 5 years only? When Rep. Stengel pointed this out at the microphone, the Democrats with a straight face kept moving the bill forward, ramming it through the Third Reading.
It’s difficult to believe that the Democrats would believe that they have such control over the situation that they could produce a phony Fiscal Note report and it would go un-noticed and un-challenged. But, they did. You can find the first report online here. The Republicans sent it back to committee after the Democrats amended it to extend to ten years. The second Fiscal Note from the Committee is here. Notice the only thing that changed was the addition of the words 3rd reading in the heading area. They didn’t even bother to change the years that the report covers much less the financial impact.
There are many other options for the Democrats, ones that would be more widely accepted by the other party. But, I guess they’re not interested in true bipartisan support. The option they’re working with right now only has the support of five lone Republicans who, in my opinion, have gone way off the reservation.
The option they have on the table right now calls for keeping all of our TABOR refunds for ten years, and does nothing to solve the true budget problem; Amendment 23. Amendment 23 puts K-12 spending on autopilot regardless of the states economy. If we have to live within our means at home, our representatives at the Statehouse and in Washington should have to as well.
In conclusion, we have to work out a budget plan this year. Obviously, TABOR will have to be tweaked. But, any budget plan that calls for changes to TABOR should also call for major changes to Amendment 23 as well. The good news is that in November we have a choice. If the Democrats continue on their current course of action and pass this disaster of a budget plan we the voters have a chance to shoot it down, and in my opinion we should.
3/10/2005
I watched Ladder 49 tonight. I have avoided watching it since it came out because my younger brother is a fire fighter. Those of you who have seen the movie will understand why. For those of you who haven’t seen the movie, I won’t ruin it for you.
Please take some time out some time this next week to stop by your local fire house and thank the brave men and women who put there life on the line every time the alarm bell rings. As for me? Well, Dave, what can I say other than thank you, and I’m proud of ya bro’.
Joshua 1:9 9 Have I not commanded you? Be strong and courageous. Do not be terrified; do not be discouraged, for the LORD your God will be with you wherever you go.”
3/9/2005
The Rocky Mountain Alliance of Blogs has been solicited for its endorsement of a candidate to replace Elizabeth Hoffman as president of the University of Colorado. On Monday during his radio show, the eminent Hugh Hewitt