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 ...
Not one person can produce the "offending" posts you continue to LIE about. The links on your homepage actually don't do much for your case. Any idiot can understand the remarks were always directed at you, Bykr. You should have been flattered, since you sit and dress like a man on a motorcycle.
You've done quite abit of damage to this forum. Most people have too much class to stick around and keep company or banter with you. That's your claim to fame here.
You just keep on believing your own lies, BB. The rest of us know the truth...
sw
Preamble
We, the people of the State of Florida, being grateful to Almighty God for our constitutional liberty, in order to secure its benefits, perfect our government, insure domestic tranquility, maintain public order, and guarantee equal civil and political rights to all, do ordain and establish this constitution.
Article One
Section Two
Basic rights.--All natural persons, female and male alike, are equal before the law and have inalienable rights, among which are the right to enjoy and defend life and liberty, to pursue happiness, to be rewarded for industry, and to acquire, possess and protect property; except that the ownership, inheritance, disposition and possession of real property by aliens ineligible for citizenship may be regulated or prohibited by law. No person shall be deprived of any right because of race, religion, national origin, or physical disability.
See my post #722
Greer broke the law that all the other laws rest upon, clearly.
In fact, he is lawless...he makes it up as he goes along.
And the rest of the legal and political establishment refused to do a thing about it, because they could care less about the existence of the Constitution, either.
That is what you're defending.
Try reading the Constitution, if you're looking to understand the law.
Most inappropriate use of the word "newbie", newbie.
Is my post #722 'valid' and 'well-thought out'? Is is a 'random ranting totally off the subject'?
Or do you all want to continue to pretend that the Constitution doesn't matter?
The only way Congress can constitutionally "reign in" the Judiciary is by limiting its jurisdiction or abolishing some of the districts. Most, if not all, other methods would require a constitutional amendment.
Nothing else it tells them has any validity.
Those who are sacrificing principle to expediency will have no leg to stand on and will have undermined GOP credibility for nothing.
That was a most poignant and accurate post. Just remember that the DU has discovered how easy it is to infiltrate and to pretend to be the whackjob caricature they envision. We cannot judge internet people's real life truths, but each post bespeaks them.
Those laws and regulations are not capable of being reformed in such a degree that the judiciary could be "reined in" as far as I can see. My point is that the content of a ruling cannot be dictated by Congress other than what is already prescribed under the laws.
I suppose you could argue that changing a law could rein in the Judiciary. But I don't think that is what is intended.
Yes, clearly. Clear to you, state hopping Alan Keyes, a fake Nobel Prize nominee, and an anti-abortion activist that disowns family he disagrees with and has has been tied to murderers. Crystal clear. Good company there junior.
And the rest of the legal and political establishment refused to do a thing about it, because they could care less about the existence of the Constitution, either.
We have gone over that before. But keep posting it will you? The plain and simple fact is that the next possible Chief Justice of SCOTUS disagrees with you, the man who wrote the document itself disagrees with you, and most of the men who argued over the powers of the document originally would disagree with you. The problem with you 'conservatives' is that you don't see the limitations of the Constitution once your party (sports team) is in charge. But they are there for both parties, not just the Democrats.
I've got an idea for you. Since you claim to know him, call up Alan Keyes, ask him to go down to Florida and somehow get charges brought up against Greer that no one else in the state of Florida or the national government sees. Hell, we all know he's not doing anything since his last failed campaign is he? Come back and tell us how that works out would you?
That is a perfect description of you and those you are doing damage control for.
But, I know, to you, white is black, and black is white.
Go ahead and substitute personal attack for a clear reading of the words of the Constitution. It's par for the course for you and your friends.
There is no killing here merely the cessation of an artificial prolonging of life. A life which, if left to God, would have ended long ago. Men kept Terri hanging on in limbo not God. There was no God in that debacle.
If terminally ill people stop eating are they committing suicide? Are they sinning? I'll let God decide those questions not a mob of the misguided.
Since you cannot distinguish between actively terminating lives and allowing nature to take its course with hopeless causes it is clear that you cannot understand what has happened here. P.T. Barnum's dictum remains on point.
Society will have to make hard choices when social resources are involved and that is what is paying to prolong these patients' suffering. Like it or not there is NO alternative.
I just have to sit here and shake my head at your unbelievable attempt to suggest that those who tried their best to save Terri Schiavo were somehow sacrificing principle to expediency, while you purists would have none of it.
You're so principled that you empowered the judicial killing of an innocent American citizen by her government.
Nowhere in my statement did I make one personal attack on you. I stated clearly that the Justice Scalia and James Madison disagreed with you and if you know Keyes as you claim, get him to argue your 'factual' case down in Florida. If you want to take the words of Hammesfahr, Terry, and Keyes over the words of those two men about what the Constitution says that's your business, not mine. But I'll bet you they have a much better understanding of the document than the Florida 3 have.
This woman had the right to defend herself and no person deprived her because of her physical disability. She could have reached for a fork any time she wanted.
and to acquire, possess and protect property; except that the ownership, inheritance, disposition and possession of real property by aliens ineligible for citizenship may be regulated or prohibited by law ...
Seems that the law found the parents tried to usurp the hubbie's rights.
Thanks, Orwell.
Maybe you should get started on those constitutional 'quality of life' Amendments to the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and to Article One, Section Two of the Florida Constitution.
And make sure you get a clause in there that permits 'justshutupandtakeit' to be the arbiter of just whose 'quality of life' is sufficient to still have the right to live, eh...
I take this to mean that you choose not to avail yourself of medical care, vaccination, angioplasty or any other technological advancement protecting from or curing illness.
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.