Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

"""Reagan would have seen this situation, he would have understood it, and he would have gone in person to make sure that it was done according to the Constitution, according to his gubernatorial authority, according to constitutional right and justice. And I think that is, I guess, the measure of the man, because these kinds of situations are the test. They show an individual in terms of that ultimate character that is needed to really stand with courage and conviction and strength in a way that will preserve our constitutional integrity."""
1 posted on 03/30/2005 11:20:37 AM PST by churchillbuff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last
To: churchillbuff

Reagan didn't have the stones to come out and personally address the March for Life.


2 posted on 03/30/2005 11:22:46 AM PST by wideawake (God bless our brave soldiers and their Commander in Chief)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: churchillbuff

""""even more damaging than anything, because if he leaves the impression that the governor has kowtowed to some county sheriff, he does immeasurable harm to the Florida constitution, to the authority of the governor, to peace and order, because, at the end of the day, the guarantee against civil disorder in Florida--where some sheriff or other authority would abuse his power--is that the governor will stop him. """


3 posted on 03/30/2005 11:23:02 AM PST by churchillbuff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: churchillbuff
I was wondering the other day of Reagan's reaction to this mess, and people's reaction to Reagan's action. Frankly, I think the whole thing would have been settled in an hour with the stroke of a pen, the harmonious wailers be damned.

Reagan faced the gale and charged full ahead.

4 posted on 03/30/2005 11:24:24 AM PST by atomicpossum (Replies should be as pedantic as possible. I love that so much.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: churchillbuff

It's not very hard for me to say what I think the Gipper would have done, most likely he'd have taken her out of there first chance he got. Can't be positive on that but it's my gut feeling anyway.


7 posted on 03/30/2005 11:26:18 AM PST by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: churchillbuff

Very important find. Thank you.

It's funny. Keyes talked at length on a Constitutional level. It didn't reach many people. But put a human face on leadership, such as Ronaldus Maximus, and that will have much more impact. FReegards....


12 posted on 03/30/2005 11:31:26 AM PST by Arthur Wildfire! March (<<<< Profile page streamlined, solely devoted Schiavo research)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: churchillbuff

This is the video that should be shown on the news everynight - it is even more powerful than the balloon video.

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/ccb/videos/Terri_Big_Eyes.rm

You need Real Player to watch this, available free on the internet.

This is not reflex action - she heard the doctor, she opened her eyes as wide as she could to impress him.

Even Fox news has ignored this clip.


13 posted on 03/30/2005 11:31:34 AM PST by grassboots.org (I'll Say It Again - The first freedom is life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: churchillbuff

Look, I'm not going to impugn Bush's character-- I think he IS conflicted and wants to do the right thing. But I do impugn his judgment and wisdom in not listening to anyone's advice but his own attorney, and I do impugn his strength.

If he's not the man to make and act on such a clear exmaple of right and wrong, he's not the man for the job.


19 posted on 03/30/2005 11:36:38 AM PST by mikeus_maximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: churchillbuff

Is this the same Keyes that supported slave reparations during his Senate campaign?


21 posted on 03/30/2005 11:37:49 AM PST by Redgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: churchillbuff

Mr. Keyes proves yet again that it's easiest to throw rocks from the sideline...and there isn't a more perfect bench-warmer than he.


23 posted on 03/30/2005 11:39:46 AM PST by Cyber Liberty (© 2005, Ravin' Lunatic since 4/98)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: churchillbuff

Ah, there is no problem so difficult that its lack of solution cannot be blamed on Republicans.


29 posted on 03/30/2005 11:46:42 AM PST by AmishDude (I'm not self-righteous enough to be in the WPPFF.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: churchillbuff
Now, inalienable is very important in that phrase, because it has an undisputed meaning throughout our history. It means it can't be given away, and it can't be transferred to another by law. Now, Judge Greer has, in fact, transferred Terri Schiavo's right to life to her husband, Michael Schiavo, and in doing so has violated the clear and explicit language of the Florida constitution.

Jeb Bush, therefore, by his oath to protect, support, and defend the Florida constitution, is obliged to act to stop this damage to the constitution, this violation of rights. He's also now giving the impression that, some how or another, the governor of the state must submit to a county sheriff, if that county sheriff is ordered by a judge to do x, y, and z. That is a lie.

The constitution of Florida vests supreme executive power--that is, the highest executive authority--in the governor. No judge, no law, can create a higher executive authority than the governor, so nobody can say, "No," to him. The county sheriff cannot, if he goes to help Terri Schiavo, say, "No," because he is a lower authority--not by order of a judge or by order of any statute or law, but by order of the supreme law of Florida, which is the constitution.

Stated correctly, forcefully, flawlessly, and persuasively, as usual.

38 posted on 03/30/2005 11:53:03 AM PST by Aquinasfan (Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: churchillbuff

I really get sick and tired of the self proclaimed bluest of the blue blood conservatives(keyes, buchanan, randall terry, etc.etc.) trying to pit conservative brother against conservative brother.


39 posted on 03/30/2005 11:53:16 AM PST by Dane ( anyone who believes hillary would do something to stop illegal immigration is believing gibberish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: churchillbuff

I'm sorry, but Alan Keyes does not speak for Ronald Reagen. The man is dead, so its easy to ascribe opinions to him as he is not here to refute them.

Keyes and a number of folks on this forum are all wrong on this. Niether Bush could do anything to stop what has happened without committing an impeachable offense. Alan Keyes (and a bunch of FReepers) would suggest that the proper thing to do would be break the law, violate the constitution, get impeached and get booted out of office. Would Dr. Keyes do that? He talks a good game, but he wouldn't have the stones. Hell, he'd never have the chance because he would never have been in office in the first place. Alan Keyes is an unelecatble idealogue.

The fact is that sometimes bad things happen. And some times good men can do nothing (short of becoming the bad guy) to stop it. Its unfornuate, but it is what it is.

Should Jeb or W gone in at gunpoint and siezed Terri (ala Elian Gonzolez)? Gee. let's think about that one...how did FReepers react to that? Let's assume that they did it and set the precendent and 6 years hence, there is another battle, this time the judge sides with the parents and the spouse wants to pull the plug, and there are countless stories of how ths person is truly in a vegitative state and its well documented that she did not want to be kept alive... and President Clinton decides to send in the troops to take the person away and let her die /pull the plug. Well, if its OK for W or Jeb to do it now, you'd have no problem with Hillary doing that, right?

We complain about how the Clintons had no respect for the constitution or the rule of law when they did things... yet now, there are FReepers bitching about W and Jeb not haveing the "stones" to break the law; that they are wrongfully respecting the Constitution and the rule of law.

I think its terrible that she is going to die. I think that the husband may have caused her current condition. I think the husband is creepy...that he should not be involved given the fact that he's got kids with another woman and some of the crap he pulled... but the fact is that he has effectively used the courts and has the authority to do what he is doing. If you don't like it, work to change the system and change the laws.


42 posted on 03/30/2005 11:55:32 AM PST by RayBob (Republicans...we eat our own.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: churchillbuff

I agree with Keyes.

I truly believe that President Reagan would have stepped in to stop this murder.

The Governor and the President have the authority and Pres. Reagan would have exercised his authority. He did, when he bombed the Libyan President Qaddafi. Congress passed an unjust law, not to target the heads of State that were our enemies. We could only wage war, not target the sadistic dictators. Reagan said he was targeting something else, but everyone knew Omar Qaddafi was his real target.

The law was passed after the rumors that Kennedy had the CIA assassinate Diem in South Vietnam, our ally, not our enemy. Reagan could see through the unjust law Congress past that tied our hands against people like Qaddafi and acted. He acted quickly and decisively in Grenada too.

Pres. Reagan was a practical man, He would have helped Terri.

Eisenhower sent the federal troops into the South to protect the civil rights of people. I believe he also would have done something to protect Terri's civil right to life.


43 posted on 03/30/2005 11:56:03 AM PST by FR_addict
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: churchillbuff
You may remember that when abortion on demand began, many, and indeed, I'm sure many of you, warned that the practice would lead to a decline in respect for human life, that the philosophical premises used to justify abortion on demand would ultimately be used to justify other attacks on the sacredness of human life -- infanticide or mercy killing. Tragically enough, those warnings proved all too true. Only last year a court permitted the death by starvation of a handicapped infant.

This is from a speech Reagan delivered in 1983. Did he do anything but call this tragic?

Link

60 posted on 03/30/2005 12:07:14 PM PST by Dolphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: churchillbuff
Ronald Reagan had a similar thing happen on his watch. As my memory serves me correct:

A hospital had ordered a Down's Syndrome baby to starve to death. And, also in this case as in our recent case, Reagan did everything he could do to prevent it. But, the baby died. The only thing he could do was make sure that hospitals that intended to starve babies could not get their federal funding. Now, I am working from my memeory here. It all happened before the internet and all my copies of National Review are in my attic.

65 posted on 03/30/2005 12:20:16 PM PST by Slyfox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: churchillbuff

Gov. Bush has the legal authority to remove Terri Schiavo.

He is not exercising it because he does not want to be seen "resisting" a court order.

The court order (ordering Gov. Bush not to enforce the law) is null and void.

But Gov. Bush ins't willing to have a "constitutional crisis".

So, the illegal order by the murdering judge stands and she dies, absent 11th Circuit intervention.


66 posted on 03/30/2005 12:20:23 PM PST by tomahawk (http://tomahawkblog.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: churchillbuff

Talk about your irrelevant conversations.


72 posted on 03/30/2005 12:24:06 PM PST by Huck (:-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: churchillbuff

If Reagan were alive today, he would probablt distance himself as far as possible from people who try to make a name for themselves by invoking his name.


73 posted on 03/30/2005 12:28:53 PM PST by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Howlin; Amelia

75 posted on 03/30/2005 12:35:10 PM PST by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson