[b4its2late]

Good job.

[goldstategop]

Its not just about Terri Schiavo. She's not just a Poster Child for the Right To Life; she's become a Poster Child for reining in our Out Of Control Judiciary.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[tomahawk]

The judiciary has run amok, and is now tyrannical.

Depriving us of our rights to rule ourselves, enact laws, even protect the weak among us.

It is pure tyranny.

We must take our country back from the judges, or our entire system of government will be euthanized.

[denydenydeny]

Wow.

I love this guy.

[StonyBurk]

What I wonder is WHY these mere politicians act as if the Courts alone can dictate what must be done. AN intervention by the Gov. that is nothing more than a query
is not much intervention. Wallace intervened by sending in the National Gaurd. Did not work well as I recall but certainly went further than what Jeb Bush has done so far.
But I guess the play ain't over until Terri dies and America
forgets and /or decides we like being sodomized by the unjust Judges.

[RoseofTexas]

Brace yourselves it's coming to a town near you! The courts will tell us who lives and who dies...Jeez, sounds much like the trains that deported Jewish families to concentration camps in those box cars and when they reached their destination the Nazi's separated the weak from the strong. The weak got the gas chamber and the strong got hard starving type labor work...SCARY CRAP!!

[smoothsailing]

Clarity and Wisdom from The Great One.

I just finished his book,MEN IN BLACK, and have made it a permanent part of my library.

[gopwinsin04]

Great minds think alike!

[stan_25]

As usual, Mark Levin has put his fingers right in the eyes of the liberal elite. He has become the voice that has started us to thinking that we must rein in the activist judges that are usurping their power.

People, we are at crossroads in this country and we must decide if we want the Judicary making our laws and having the Legislature rubberstamp them or put the Judicary back to where the framers meant for them to be. At the bottom of the ladder.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

I love this guy.

[metacognative]

Nominate Levin for the Supreme Court

[oreolady]

Talking point:
HEARSAY,HEARSAY, HEARSAY, HEARSAY, HEARSAY!!!!!!
Why do we never hear this on the media?

[Yaelle]

Mark is right on.

Our court system is based on the Jewish Sanhedrin, and our country is built on Judeo-Christian morals. The first tenet of these morals, Judaically, is to Choose Life.

This case does not have a living will which states "Should I become brain-damaged, at some point pull out my feeding tube and let me starve to death."

Spouses should not have the final say. They are always the first suspects in someone's murder. If there is no Living Will that clearly states, not only DNR decisions but also at what point the individual would like to be starved and dehydrated, then we have to as a country Choose Life for that person.

If our courts come down on the side of allowing others to aid or abet medical decisions to promote death, we lower ourselves morally as a country. The fear of elderly Dutch who try to avoid hospitalization when they need medical care is real. Their society has told them that they are a useless burden, and so many of them have been put to death like dogs.

If we as a nation choose to respect the life of all innocents, even those who cannot speak for themselves, it only raises us as a country. Without explicit instructions, I daresay we need a federal ruling to allow life to continue. But of course, this butts up against abortion laws.

Is that it?

Do people want Terri to die so that "Choose Life, IF It's Convenient To Others" is our motto?

[CarryaBigStick]

Excellent, Mark. Keep up the good work you are doing.

[Misty Memory]

He quickly dismissed the relevance of the House subpoenas with this statement: "I have had no cogent reason why the committee should intervene." The state judge, therefore, contended that the House had to convince him of the legitimacy of its subpoena to compel witnesses to appear so it can conduct hearings.

I should think even the liberals in congress would be up in arms about this. Some day they are going to want to subpoena a conservative witness to come before their committee. All that conservative has to do is find a friendly judge to say he doesn't see why that person has to appear. If this is allowed to stand, Congress has lost it's power to compel witnesses to testify.

[Conservativegreatgrandma]

Outstanding. The line in the sand has been drawn. Bring it on.

[spodefly]

BTTT

[epow]

The more the House resists judicial usurpation, the more unhinged its critics in academia and the mainstream media will become -- accusing it of politicizing the independent judiciary, intimidating judges, and so forth

How true. Trust Levin to tell it the way it is, I love the guy.

Of course if this was a Democrat controlled Congress issuing a subpoena to a conservative judge in order to stop him or her from blocking a "mercy killing", i.e., murder, or an abortion, i.e., murder, the same unhinged critics in academia and media would be railing and foaming at the mouth in outrage, and calling for the judge's impeachment and subsequent imprisonment.

Hypocrisy, thy name is LIBERAL.

[RS]

"This is a typical slippery slope argument, applied only to Congress but not to the judiciary."

Well Mark, at least you didn't dispute that it DOES apply to Congress in this case.

"There's nothing in writing here, no living will, no witnesses -- just heresay."

I believe their WAS a witness - her friend Joan, but besides that minor point - would he require that a husband and wife sign separate agreements for EVERY intersection of their lives ? I suppose we could just do away with the concept of marriage in a legal sense and supply each couple with a stack of legal forms.