Posted on 03/25/2005 3:45:48 PM PST by goldstategop
RUSH: Let's go to the phones. Matthew in Yonkers, New York. Open Line Friday. You're up first today, first. Great to have you with us.
CALLER: Rush, how are you doing?
RUSH: Good.
CALLER: Rush, I think you're missing the basis on this entire thing.
RUSH: Of course, of course.
CALLER: I have yet to meet one person who has said, "I'm going to take great joy in seeing the death of this woman." As we speak right now there are probably 50 to a hundred families that are going through the same decision-making process. The two things that people want out of this whole thing is they want privacy and they want to make sure there's due process. This woman has received more protection than probably anyone else in this country ever will. She's gone through the courts repeatedly. You know, it's a confusing case unfortunately. I don't want to get into that. I don't know what the motivations are on either side. But she has been protected by the court system repeatedly. And what the country wants as a whole, I think, is they want to see the government doesn't interfere.
RUSH: I am stunned. I am sitting here stunned. I don't believe what I just heard.
CALLER: Okay.
RUSH: The courts of this country are starving a woman to death and you just got through saying she's being protected by the court system.
CALLER: Yeah. She's received repeated review over and over again. The question before--
RUSH: If you want to argue about -- she's received repeated review, but we haven't had a full review in a long, long time. Some of these motions are being decided in an hour and a half, which is clearly not enough time to decide them. We also have a husband being allowed with hearsay to establish his wife's, spouse's desires via hearsay in a court of law.
CALLER: Rush, do you remember a few years ago they had the huge AT&T breakup settlement and the tobacco settlement? You remember all that? What if Congress went back and said, "You have to review the entire case," okay? De novo review only occurs when there is very clear and compelling evidence that comes out. There's nothing new, clear, and compelling. They're going to walk in with 25 experts who are going to say, "This woman is fine." The other side's going to come in with 25 experts who are going to say, "This woman is a vegetable." There's nothing clear and compelling. The courts are doing their job. The courts don't investigate these things. The courts wait for information to be brought to them and then they make their decision. Congress can't tell the court, "You need to review the entire case." It's not within their authority.
RUSH: Matthew, time's up. You're a blooming idiot. You don't know what you're talking about. Congress can do exactly that. And I'm tired, folks, I'm tired of explaining this to a bunch of blockheads who aren't going to listen. Congress decides the jurisdiction of the courts. The judicial branch is not the final authority. It does not have check and balance power over the other two branches. It doesn't. We, the people, do via the elected representatives in Congress. If the courts are not doing their job, there is plenty of remedy that is afforded by the Constitution via the elected representatives of the people. And your view that the courts are infallible, and are never wrong and nothing can be done about it is one of the reasons we're in the circumstances we're in today is because so many people like the results the courts happen to be handing down more often than not that they're happy to rely on the courts as the final authority on everything in this country, and they are not. They were never intended to be. And what's happening in this country, in large measure, and increasingly so more and more, is judicial tyranny.
Now, I'm losing my patience here, and I don't mean to be insulting people, but I've been talking about this for a week. The Constitution is what it is. It isn't arguable. Article 3 is very clear, and to sit here and tell me that the Congress can't do anything. Congress could have ordered the feeding tube reinserted if they wanted to. The Congress passes laws in this country. The judiciary does not. Congress could have ordered that feeding tube in. Some people are now saying Congress didn't have any guts. Congress didn't go far enough. Some people are now suggesting that Congress could have put that feeding tube back in and make somebody violate Congress, have contempt of Congress citations here. They didn't do that, but they could have. They could have done anything they wanted if the president would have signed it. They are the elected representatives of the people. Then that would have started a whole new legal battle, whether this was constitutional or not, blah, blah, blah, but they could have done it. And the idea that there is such a lack of understanding in this country about the power of the people via their elected representatives versus the judicial branch, that we just have to sit there, bend over, grab the ankles and take whatever the judicial branch hands down is frightening to me. It's not the case. It isn't true.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Let's see. Louisville, Kentucky, and Greg, welcome, sir. Nice to have you on the program.
CALLER: Hello, Rush. How are you?
RUSH: Fine, thank you.
CALLER: I enjoy your show. I don't agree with you on this issue. I think Terri Schiavo's cerebral cortex has been destroyed, and all the medical testimony that I've heard says that, and if that's the case, then Terri Schiavo, the person, has been dead for 15 years. We're talking about the body of Terri Schiavo, the brain, the stem and the forebrain, which is not a conscious, not the personality of Terri Schiavo. Therefore, we're not talking about the life of Terri Schiavo, the person.
RUSH: It's that easy for you, is it?
CALLER: Well, I think it's actually fairly easy yes. I mean, I'm a Libertarian now. I used to be a Republican before they were basically captured by the big spenders and the witch doctors. Unfortunately, you know, the big government can intrude everywhere apparently now.
RUSH: Yeah.
CALLER: And I must disagree. I understand what you're saying.
RUSH: How did big government intrude here?
CALLER: Well, of course, you're right. You're constitutionally correct. Congress has the Article 3 power to set the jurisdiction of the federal courts. You are totally correct about that. However, that's not consistent with the conservative agenda. Conservative agenda has traditionally been to keep the federal government out of our personal business, keep the government out of local and state affairs, so while you are correct legally--
RUSH: No, that's not the --
CALLER: You're correct legally, but you're incorrect philosophically. That has not been the traditional view of conservatives.
RUSH: You know, conservatism doesn't matter to me here. Maybe it would help if I were to tell people that my view on this has nothing to do with ideology. I don't care what the conservative split is over this, and I think it is absolutely intellectually vacant to try to argue for this woman's death on the basis that there is hypocrisy in the conservative movement. What does hypocrisy in the conservative movement have to do with this woman's death? To me, nothing. I couldn't care less that there are some conservatives who worry about the overreaching federal government and therefore, they're not being consistent if they support this. How about the founding documents? If you want to go this way, I'll be glad to. Founding documents charge the government with protecting life, l-i-f-e, liberty, property, pursuit of happiness. There are certain roles that government has. National defense. Whether you're conservative or liberal, you acknowledge that. The problem is that too many liberals don't want the government involved in life decisions, as we are seeing. If somebody doesn't stand up for it on the whole, who will? Are all of our lives going to come down to what some judge thinks someday?
So to me, this is not an ideological argument. I don't care whether I sound hypocritical to people as a conservative or not. And I don't care whether there's hypocrisy. In fact, this whole business of trying to win an argument based on the hypocrisy of the opponent is nothing more than a flashy little attempt to sidestep the substance of the argument. Don't tell me about the hypocrisy of conservatives. Tell me why you want this woman to die, or tell me why you don't. But don't say, "The conservatives are being hypocritical, federalism, overreaching federal government and so forth." We've got a federal judge, we've got a federal appeals court, we've had the US Supreme Court, the federal government is involved. It's not just when Congress gets involved. You want to talk about the overreaching federal government? We got a whole branch of the federal government that is siding with death here. Anybody worried about that? I happen to be. And it's not because I'm a conservative or liberal. It happens to be because I do have a sacred view of life. Sorry.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: I'd like to read you an e-mail I just received, ladies and gentlemen, from one of the subscribers at Rushlimbaugh.com. It's perhaps the most virulent of the e-mails, but there are a few, and have been many over the course of the week that are of equal sentiment.
Rush, get off this bleep. It's none of your bleeping business. You're advocating more government intrusion. I'm tired of this diatribe by you. I've been a big supporter, advocate, and listener since you started but now I've gotten blanked. You don't know what the blank you're talking about in this case. You just stated that Congress has the authority over the courts. Well, dumbass, the people have authority over the blanking Congress. Get your blanking facts straight. I have more damn authority than the blanking Congress or the blanking courts. I'm an American voter and I've spoken. Let her blanking die and move on. You and Hannity are destroying our power in this country by acting like holier-than-thou morons trying to control our lives. I didn't vote for Bush because of a religious zealot attitude. Although I'm a Catholic and a conservative Republican, I did not vote for Bush or you to get more involved in my life, so get out of my life, as you would like others to get out of your life. You've become a hypocrite. Get out! Signed "Al."
This is from a subscriber to my website, ladies and gentlemen. Now, he's spoken. I don't know how he voted on this. He's a voter. And he has spoken. "Let her blanking die and move on." So you tell me there's no passion? You tell me there's no enthusiasm for this woman's death? Don't try telling me that that's not the case, ladies and gentlemen. And, of course, now I find it interesting these people are getting so mad. The fact that she hasn't died yet is my fault, and Sean Hannity's fault.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
If the Pope recovers, maybe he'll give an 'Executive Order'....?
And nothing said about the fact that she was on her way to recovery 12 years ago. Until Michael won his monetary settlement and stopped her therapy!
I wish some liberal would actually stand in front of me and make this comment!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If it were a case of worrying about government intrusion, maybe Judge Greer should have just said years ago that it was a family matter and tefused to hear the case.
This is one dying country.
"But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, WITHOUT LOVE, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, NOT LOVERS of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God-- having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with them." 2nd Timothy 3:1
Subject: URGENT - Do you have any VATICAN CONTACTS ??
Anybody know the Papal Nuncio in Washinton?
The Vatican could save Terri Schiavo by giving her diplomatic status, appoint her as a special ambassador of Vatican City, thus removing her from the jurisdiction of corrupt US courts. This is a desperate move, but offers at least a possibility. The Vatican provided fake birth certificates to save Jews threatened by the Third Reich. Providing Terri with diplomatic credentials would take her out of the jurisdiction of the evil courts.
From Eric Bower this morning:
I talked to a senior White House official, whose name I am not a liberty to disclose, and they concur that this new status would in fact remove Terri from the jurisdiction of all U.S. courts - but they thought it unlikely that any nation would step to the plate with the offer - I remind the official of the Bobby Fisher situation where he avoided prosecution in US courts by being granted citizenship in Iceland - just this week, after he was being held in detention in Japan for 9 months at the US request...
[T]he White House official concurred that if this diplomatic status were given to Terri by the Vatican or any other state that we have recognized diplomatic exchange that he, as well as the courts, would be under international law and treaty to protect that diplomat from all harm and to make sure that they were not detained by anyone.
[We need to] use every contact we have in Rome to get who every is in charge of the diplomatic corp to issue a diplomatic passport to Terri and have Rome issue a press release that Terri has been appointed as Ambassador-at-large for the Vatican City State to all persons with disabilities.
Please get this info out to whoever you can think of that can get either the Vatican of another so disposed nation to grant Terri a pardon from her death sentence at the hands of the US courts.
Mrs. Don-o
You know what? These ignorant screaming whining liberals think they have won concerning Terri, but, just like Rush says, they are the real losers, and it will show up in the next election. Have you ever noticed you can't talk to a liberal? They always have the same sing-song response, and the same ignorant opinions.
I was starting to give them the benefit of the doubt that they were entitled to their opinion, until I saw a sign outside Terri's hospice that said "Hey W! It's payback time".
This isn't a question about W. It is a question about life and death, ....of moral values.
The POS husband of Terri has now refused to allow her the right of religious freedom . He has refused to allow anyone to give her last rites. What a frickin jacka$$!
I certainly hope the Schindlers don't remain their calm selves after this is over. I hope to God they file a wrongful death lawsuit!
You know what? I don't think these pro choice screaming liberals have all their brain. They are not "all there." Let's starve them to death. After all, according to the POS husband, you only drift into a sweet sleep, and don't feel a thing!....What an A$$
Rush made the same exact point I made her a day or so ago. This is NOT about big government intrusion, but rather government not even upholding the most basic of citizen rights. What coservative or constitutionalist would argue that the federal government has no obligation to protect and preserve LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness of its citizens? If the federal government won't do that, there's no need for it to exist at all.
I've had what I thought were God-fearing Christians tell me that, and much worse. Someone based it on her looks, alone.
I'm learning, I'm learning....
Liberals don't even come near me.
Maybe that's your problem.
Liberals know not to come near you.
That's pretty cool, too!
More Prayers in Jesus' Name, Amen!!!
""But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, WITHOUT LOVE, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, NOT LOVERS of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God-- having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with them." 2nd Timothy 3:1"
Hell, that already happened to ancient Rome.
If the Pope recovers
****
LOL PLEEEEZZEE let me know when you find a cure for being almost a century old!! :) I'll buy some.
Very short attention spans. Sad.
Mr. Limbaugh is indeed performing excellence in broadcasting.
I have a new respect for Hannity. He's been at the scene, right on top of this story. He seems to be making a genuine, passionate effort to help Terri.
Wow. Way to go Rush.
Moses didn't EVEN get started until he was 80 years old!
I had an email from an acquaintance who was teasing me and gloating about Terri's demise. It was gruesome. They hate Christians and they know that we have fought for Terri to live so they naturally want her dead. That will make them happy.
You know, while I have my own arguments with libertarians at least the Ayn Rand branch, I am sick to death of folks who misrepresent the libertarian position in this manner. A libertarian, I think would say, there is a right to life, liberty, and property (a wife is life, not property btw). If Terry wants her dead, and the family wants to suppor her in life, well, the family gets her. They can argue over the property later, but no one has the right to cause her to be dead.
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.