Posted on 03/31/2005 7:45:43 AM PST by churchillbuff
Should he have sent in the National Guard to have a shootout with the Local police?
Correction: Make that Federalist No. 78.
If Jebn can't do the job, then he should resign! As the chief law enforcement officer in the state, it was his obligation.
You set up a straw man, as if such a dangerous response was the only option. The fact is, the judge went beyond his constitutional authority. Some kind of response - calibrated and intelligent - was demanded, but there was none - not even a statement by Jeb that the judge had exceeded his powers. Just craven cowardly silence. The Founding Fathers weep.
FoxNews Napolitano just said Jeb Bush was heroic.
I think Jeb began at one point to lead and that he then got cold feet about some county judge and then became a milquetoast.
Hardly heroic.
Not fit to lead, imho.
I'll side with the authors of the Federalist Papers - and of the US Constitution - over a Fox News talking head, thank you.
Does that mean you're going to STFU? I doubt it.
Yep, the real problem here is that congress waited till now to exercise its Article III powers. The Republicans have held congress for ten years and have abdicated their Article III responsibilities during that time. At least they fired the first shot in this battle, but it is too late for Terri and this issue was the wrong one to fire the FIRST shot.
Why? Because the MSM has been able to mislead a majority of Americans, most of whom were not paying attention to this matter prior to congress stepping in, and demagogue this issue. The MSM pushed the following facts to achieve the public opinion results it wants: 1) Terri was on life support (read respirator) or in a coma; 2)Terri left a living will; 3) Terri's family was in agreement that she would not want to live (this is a private matter); and 4) Terri received a full judiciary hearing no less than 14 times.
Given those facts, their are few amongst us who would not say that government should but out. (No wonder the poll results are what they are, they are, as usual, loaded.) BUT, the only reason the congress became involved in the first place is that NONE of the above assumptions were even remotely true.
So, here we are. The MSM has used this issue not so much to push a pro-death agenda as to promote a Judicial Supremacy agenda. For example, "you see, this is why the Judiciary should reign supreme, because it protects you dumb voters (we told ya so) from those Jesus freak evangelical Republicans!!!"
Of course, this has been a coordinated effort by the MSM and dems since they lost the election. Namely, they took the exit polling data (the same exit polls that had Kerry winning) and honed in on the "values" responses. But does anyone know what the question was that lead to the response being given that "values" were the most important thing to voters? Does anyone know what those "values" were? The MSM took it and ran with it. Values=Evangelicals=Jesus Freaks=White Male, Pickup Driving Hayseeds=Dangerous. Terri's tragedy has served as a convenient tool for the MSM (a large bunch of tools).
I just hope that the next issue, and there will be a next issue, where the Judicial Branch oversteps its bounds, congress is not afraid to act. What is going on now can't be allowed to stand. The Judicial Branch is simply grabbing all the power and proclaiming itself above the law. . ."holy committee of public safety Batman!!!" In the instant case, a Judge just basically said to Congress, F.U. and the Constitution you rode in on. How long before some Judge starts to decide on our foreign policy? How long before some Judge declares the Constitution Unconstitutional?
Do you like spam? I like spam!
. JEB LET THIS REBEL JUDGE GET AWAY WITH IT. NUFF SAID.
I say BULL!!I am getting sick and tired of people sayig the President or his brother had anything to do with Terri's death..that is a stupid remark.You want to blame someone blame the husband or the judge or anyone else that refused to do anything.
This has nothing to do with Hamilton's warnings which referred to the federal judiciary not the state. Nor did the judge do anything except follow the law. He didn't just make it up as he went along to satisfy the plaintiffs and their cheerleaders. That is what we have claimed we wanted in a judge. Change the law if you don't like it don't blame the judge for following it. BTW this will NOT happen.
I'm with you.
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that either Bush could have acted, and it would have been within their authority per the constitution.
I can only conclude that they were complicit.
Somebody needs to speak inconvenient truths. I believe in holding officeholders accountable for the way they use - or don't use - their authority. Accountability is a conservative principle, and I'm a conservative. I don't exempt politicians just because they have R after their name. Until you and others who don't believe in accountability (at least not for Republican officeholders) can get me censored or banned, I'll continue to speak up for accountability.
Somewhere else, hopefully.
How is this thread either "News" or "Activism"?
I don't think the reputation of judges needs much more of your conspiracy theory "dragging down" - they've done that just fine by themselves, thank you.
As for Bush's responsibility, it goes way beyond him. The courts have been dictating all domestic policy (and are creeping into international policy) in the US for many a long year now, and the other two branches have let them get away with it, one decision at a time.
I don't think it's too late to fight back, but it's not going to be easy, and we've got to light a fire under our elected reps. That will give them a bit of backbone.
To have stopped Judge Greer from usurping Executive-branch power would not have been "an assault on the judcial branch" -- it would have been an assault on an unconstitutional power grab. Since Jeb and the GOP weren't interested in stopping Greer's power grab in order to save Terri's life, I really doubt that we're going to see, in the near or distant future, a genuine effort to rein in unconstitutional arrogance by the courts. There will be the usual rhetorical bones thrown to conservatives, but, as one freeper suggested yesterday, the politicians actually LIKE having courts assume legislative and executive power, because it takes hot potatoes off the politicians' hands. They can say, "It's a court order, i''m not responsible and there's nothing I can do about it."
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.