Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

DeLay Apologizes for Schiavo Case Rhetoric
AP via Yahoo ^ | April 13, 2005 | Terence Hunt

Posted on 04/13/2005 8:21:32 PM PDT by cyncooper

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay apologized Wednesday for using overheated rhetoric on the day Terri Schiavo died, but refused to say whether he supports impeachment of the judges who ruled in her case.

~snip~

At a crowded news conference in his Capitol office, DeLay addressed remarks he made in the hours after the brain-damaged Florida woman died on March 31. "I said something in an inartful way and I shouldn't have said it that way and I apologize for saying it that way," DeLay told reporters.

~snip~

DeLay seemed at pains to soften, if slightly, his rhetoric of March 31, when Schiavo died despite an extraordinary political and legal effort to save her life.

"I believe in an independent judiciary. I repeat, of course I believe in an independent judiciary," DeLay said.

At the same time, he added, the Constitution gives Congress power to oversee the courts.

"We set up the courts. We can unset the courts. We have the power of the purse," DeLay said.

Asked whether he favors impeachment for any of the judges in the Schiavo case, he did not answer directly.

Instead, he referred reporters to an earlier request he made to the House Judiciary Committee to look into "judicial activism" and Schiavo's case in particular.

~snip~

(Excerpt) Read more at story.news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Heated Discussion
KEYWORDS: apology; cowardaceunderfire; delay; grovelingissafer; schiavo; thewormturns
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 1,021-1,034 next last
To: justshutupandtakeit
Society cannot pay millions to preserve all those in such conditions when there is NO hope they will return. It simply does not have the resources to spend.

How unblievable it is what I'm reading.

This is the United States of America, we do not kill our handicapped people to save money. I take it next you'll be going into all the institutions for the mentally retarded and putting them out of their misery as well?

121 posted on 04/13/2005 9:53:21 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
The country I always knew and grew up in did. The best we can do is to make sure it never happens again.

I know I'm one of the ones who think the same as the poster who said, "my country died with Terri." Well, maybe not quite but we are on life support and I'm glad another lady who was facing the same thing was saved. I know Terri shook me so much is that I am currently anti-capital punishment on the grounds that because of Terri, the State should not have the right to take anyone's life (although taking life for self defense, the protection of society and in war is still OK with me) although criminals still should be punished. Even the war on terror and Iraq are ringing hollow with me because of Terri, I think we have lost or are losing the moral and ethical high ground. I still support those two, but I think we need to get back on track morally and ethically. Well, again, I'm glad we saved the next lady in that situation but we have opened a can of worms with Terri and we must work to re-can them even if it means "getting a larger can."
122 posted on 04/13/2005 9:55:04 PM PDT by Nowhere Man (Lutheran, Conservative, Neo-Victorian/Edwardian - Any Questions?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit
Talk about hysterical melodramatic nonsense. NOthing can top "my country died" it is hilarious.

You won't think it's hilarious when it happens to someone in your family. I've seen so much. I'm not alone. I'm digusted with the way the whole world seem to be so SELFISH.

You can laugh all you want. Like it or not, we ARE going downhill.

123 posted on 04/13/2005 9:55:13 PM PDT by lula (Starving the disabled is OK, go to jail if you do the same to an animal...go figure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: balch3

Which would do nothing except cause more trouble for the GOP. The best thing for the Delay and other Republicans to do is work to reign in the federal courts by limiting their jurisdiction over certain issues such as abortion, homosexual marriage, and other things that should be left to the states and to the people.


124 posted on 04/13/2005 9:55:48 PM PDT by COEXERJ145 (Just Blame President Bush For Everything, It Is Easier Than Using Your Brain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Canadian Outrage

I *totally* agree.


125 posted on 04/13/2005 9:56:18 PM PDT by Miss Behave (Beloved daughter of Miss Creant, super sister of danged Miss Ology, and proud mother of Miss Hap.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: k2blader

Don't forget the evil Christians argument, mocking faith is a favorite insult of the politically pure.


126 posted on 04/13/2005 9:56:41 PM PDT by roses of sharon (WITH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper

To argue semantics we consider the meaning of 'independent' in contrast to that of 'separate'.

There may be a stretch of the notion of three 'separate' branches of government linked via the Constitution to an alterior meaning of 'independent' branches.

The distinction is important whereas 'separate' refers in kind to physical space and 'independent' to activities.

That the three branches are physically separate, there is no argument. However, their activities are never completely independent, ergo always dependent in some sense.

This is the crux of the issue. The judiciary is acting 'independent' when in fact they are merely separate, yet dependent on Congress for their role and jurisdiction.

Still we wonder what Tom Delay meant by his remarks and why he feels compelled in any sense to appease his accusers.


127 posted on 04/13/2005 9:57:35 PM PDT by Hostage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: lula
It's happening again in Georgia.

It's very sad and this sort of thing has to be stopped.

128 posted on 04/13/2005 9:57:36 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: lula

I hear you. It is frustrating as heck, isn't it?? I think the best thing we can do is to continue to pray and keep on the case of our representatives.


129 posted on 04/13/2005 9:58:10 PM PDT by k2blader (Immorality bites.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale

Translation: I apologize for momentarily seeming as though I had a backbone. I give this apology so that I can be sure EVERYONE is mad at me.


130 posted on 04/13/2005 9:58:27 PM PDT by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Legislatures are so outdated. If you want real political victory, take your issue to court.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard; B Knotts; lula
To all: Thanks for offering up some sanity around here. Sometimes all I can do is shake my head when people claim that Schiavo's barbaric murder was justified by "the rule of law".

bttt

131 posted on 04/13/2005 9:59:11 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit

Well, once again, I tried to make some arguments, and the more righteous accused me of reveling in the "murder" of someone, and another said I should be wearing a swastika. So this is the level of conversation here.

Amazing, you could change one or two words, and you would think we were at DU.

Have a good night, keep fighting.


132 posted on 04/13/2005 9:59:31 PM PDT by Central Scrutiniser (Remember when conservatives embraced the rule of law?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: balch3

No he blundered egregiously by speaking of impeaching judges for reasons not recognized by the constitution as valid. He was not speaking of impeaching for the reasons the Founders intended but because he didn't LIKE their rulings.

This is not just a "sign of weakness" but a recognition that he screwed up big time. THAT at least is positive.

Differences of opinions in the judiciary were part of the design of the Founders since they specified that the grounds of impeachment were ONLY misbehavior NOT their opinions. It is probably one of the strengths of our system that such differences exist.

The only constitutional means of changing the courts are appointments even FDR eventually had to accept that fact. It would be just as wrong for the GOP to pack the Court as it would have been for him.


133 posted on 04/13/2005 9:59:33 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (Public Enemy #1, the RATmedia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: COEXERJ145
OH PLEASE! Stop being so melodramatic.

OH PLEASE! wake up!!!!!!!

134 posted on 04/13/2005 9:59:40 PM PDT by lula (Starving the disabled is OK, go to jail if you do the same to an animal...go figure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: roses of sharon
Most definitely.

I still think most of the pro-death crowd is operating from a decidedly anti-Christian viewpoint.
135 posted on 04/13/2005 10:00:30 PM PDT by k2blader (Immorality bites.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit
Talk about hysterical melodramatic nonsense.

Stop talking about yourself and your mindless posts.

136 posted on 04/13/2005 10:01:09 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: lula
That's the problem. MONEY is more important than life?

You have $100,000.

You can keep one PVS patient alive for five years. Or you can feed 100 hungry children for five years.

What are you going to do?

The problem isn't between money vs. life. It is between life vs. life. The reality is that there are not nearly sufficient resources to provide the highest level of medical care to everyone who can benefit from it, or who can be sustained in life by it. Who pays? How do you allocate limited resources? These are real-world questions.

137 posted on 04/13/2005 10:01:26 PM PDT by malakhi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit
No he blundered egregiously by speaking of impeaching judges for reasons not recognized by the constitution as valid. He was not speaking of impeaching for the reasons the Founders intended but because he didn't LIKE their rulings.

This is not just a "sign of weakness" but a recognition that he screwed up big time. THAT at least is positive.

DeLay has been taken to the woodshed. He is now acknowledging that he let his shotgun mouth get ahead of his BB gun butt.

138 posted on 04/13/2005 10:01:50 PM PDT by sinkspur (If you want unconditional love with skin, and hair and a warm nose, get a shelter dog.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: Hostage
That the three branches are physically separate, there is no argument. However, their activities are never completely independent, ergo always dependent in some sense. This is the crux of the issue. The judiciary is acting 'independent' when in fact they are merely separate, yet dependent on Congress for their role and jurisdiction.

I think you missed the co-equal part of the argument.

139 posted on 04/13/2005 10:02:01 PM PDT by Cold Heat (For rent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper

The Hammer is really a rubber mallet?


140 posted on 04/13/2005 10:03:09 PM PDT by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 1,021-1,034 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson