Should he have sent in the National Guard to have a shootout with the Local police?
Correction: Make that Federalist No. 78.
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.
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.
How is this thread either "News" or "Activism"?
The Florida legislature could have stopped this, and blew it. The state of Florida is a deranged and evil dominion of Satan and should be nuked.
But the american people hardly ever vote a judge out of office.. no matter how badly they perform, or how they trample on people's rights..
Check on the voting record concerning judges in your area..
I will bet you dollars to doughnuts, it is close to 100% of judges are voted to remain in their position of authority every voting cycle, without exception..
While I routinely vote to remove them from office, I am invariably out-voted, 100 to 1..
So, who's fault is it they're in office?
Greer will be voted back into office come november, or 2006, whenever it comes up for vote..
This won't make a difference..
Parenthetical title and everything. Too bad you couldn't find a current article, but trolls have their limitations.
The Pres and the Gov did everything they could within the law. They must respect the rule of law or they will basically be telling us there is no reason to.
Is there something wrong with the way this situation played out? You bet ya! But pointing fingers and blaming other people for not breaking the law seems pretty stupid if we did nothing to help them.
We need to make changes in our own lives to prevent this kind of event from occurring in the future. Through living wills, passing new laws that protect those that do not have a living will, allowing living parents to have more choices when husbands choose to terminate their spouses life-support. And to also ask, who the hell has the authority and is it in the right place? We seem to be quick to give that responsibility to the government. If anything, this is just one more big example of the government not helping us when we need it. Stop putting all your trust in them! Time to make some changes.
Perhaps her death will be the catalyst that perpetuates the change that is needed and could not be rectified in 13 days. These questions we face could have easily been discussed when she was put on life support to begin with, but we waited until after her husband made a legal decision to suddenly be concerned about Terri and the laws.
Blame Michael, or don't blame him, it's possible that none of this awareness would have come to light if he had not taken the action he did. I personally have been on the fence seeing validity while standing in the shoes of all persons directly involved. Is Terri's life one worth living? Is Michael evil or saintly? Are Terri's parents blinded from reality with their undying love and hope for Terri? Should we have broken the law and created an additional crisis or possible killings of others just doing their job in the attempt? Is putting a person in Terri's condition on life support for the rest of her life unreasonable when we put convicted murderers up for life every single day? Are we letting the Government have too much say in what our lives should be like? The courts? The insurance companies? And a myriad of other questions!
Jeb Bush was the last man to turn his back on a dying innocent disabled woman . . . and he walked away. There will be hell to pay - not just Jeb Bush but every one who participated in this murder.
Well it certainly has influence over the sword, commencing with this precedent....
churchillbuff, I've been reading that something like 70% of Americans polled thought it was wrong for the President and the Congress to involve themselves in what was simply a state legal matter.
That Appeals Court judge (Birch???) down in Atlanta stated in no uncertain terms that the Executive and the Legislative were mucking up the "separation of Powers," thereby putting our constitutional rule of law at risk. This is total nonsense! The other half of the "separation of powers" doctrine is the "balance of powers." When a court is totally exceeding (or ignoring as the case may be) its constitutional mandate, the Executive -- as chief law enforcement officer -- and the Legislative -- as the people who write the laws (and therefore have an interest in seeing them faithfully followed) and constitute the courts, have a duty to weigh in and restore the balance.
Judge Birch suggested that the Congress shouldn't meddle with the Judiciary. I wonder if he has a copy of the U.S. Constitution handy. I'd tell him to go look at Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 8, the Powers of Congress:
"To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court...."
All federal courts with the one exception of the Supreme Court are the creatures of the Congress.
Article III vests the judicial power in a supreme Court, stating [Section 1]: "and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish." Which just confirms what was said at Article I, Section 8. If Congress tomorrow were to abolish all the federal courts inferor to SCOTUS it would very likely be acting within its constitutional powers.
Americans today do not understand the rule of law which made and makes this country possible -- the U.S. Constitution. It is the only thing that can defend our natural and civil rights against the depredations of tyrants. And most people don't even bother to learn what it says, but then will go all "righteous" on somebody who's supposedly "violating it," on the hearsay of the MSM or interested judges.