Jeb Bush Did All He Could Legally Do

http://newsmax.com ^ | Wednesday, March 30, 2005 | Phil Brennan

[Graymatter]

Don't think so. I have long suspected that Rove, being the object of such intense suspicion by the left wing, probably has trouble getting the President on the phone after 5 o'clock.
Seriously, I don't know where to look, but Rove is not at all plausible.

[GrandEagle]

Try reading the post, or maybe even the Constitution before you create conclusions to jump to.

Sorry, Got my feathers ruffled just a bit. This comment was un called for.

Regards,
GE

[Fido969]

[BobS]

"I don't recognize such an order as legal,...

Of course we don't. The majority of people are in the process of becoming desensitized to this. I don't know how much time we have left here for ourselves, but many people are going to die by order of the government. It happened before.

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

and follow up with a good dose of the Federalist papers to get at what power the founders really intended be vested in the judiciary vs the executive and legislative branches.

When you or I bring up the Federalist Papers, lawyers immediately shout that they are not dispositive of constitutional interpretation. But that is only because the courts no longer use the Constitution for its dispositions. It is interesting that Judge Birch used them in his opinion for supporting denial of relief to Terri Schiavo. So I suppose currently they operate in only one direction.

But for some specific FP references, start with these. The clear implication is that the executive was never intended as the rubber stamp for and force behind judicial fiat:

"Whoever attentively considers the different departments of power must perceive, that, in a government in which they are separated from each other, the judiciary, from the nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; because it will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them. The Executive not only dispenses the honors, but holds the sword of the community. The legislature not only commands the purse, but prescribes the rules by which the duties and rights of every citizen are to be regulated. The judiciary, on the contrary, has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments."Federalist #78

"It may in the last place be observed that the supposed danger of judiciary encroachments on the legislative authority, which has been upon many occasions reiterated, is in reality a phantom. Particular misconstructions and contraventions of the will of the legislature may now and then happen; but they can never be so extensive as to amount to an inconvenience, or in any sensible degree to affect the order of the political system. This may be inferred with certainty, from the general nature of the judicial power, from the objects to which it relates, from the manner in which it is exercised, from its comparative weakness, and from its total incapacity to support its usurpations by force." Federalist #81

[Jim Noble]

I'm sick and tired of all the fools who say they can't vote for Jeb because he didn't go beyond the law.

A law is a bill passed by both houses of the Florida Legislature, and signed by a Governor.

What Florida law prevented Governor Bush from taking Mrs. Schiavo into protective custody?

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

and follow up with a good dose of the Federalist papers to get at what power the founders really intended be vested in the judiciary vs the executive and legislative branches.

When you or I bring up the Federalist Papers, lawyers immediately shout that they are not dispositive of constitutional interpretation. But that is only because the courts no longer use the Constitution for its dispositions. It is interesting that Judge Birch used them in his opinion for supporting denial of relief to Terri Schiavo. So I suppose currently they operate in only one direction.

But for some specific FP references, start with these. The clear implication is that the executive was never intended as the rubber stamp for and force behind judicial fiat:

"Whoever attentively considers the different departments of power must perceive, that, in a government in which they are separated from each other, the judiciary, from the nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; because it will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them. The Executive not only dispenses the honors, but holds the sword of the community. The legislature not only commands the purse, but prescribes the rules by which the duties and rights of every citizen are to be regulated. The judiciary, on the contrary, has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments."Federalist #78

"It may in the last place be observed that the supposed danger of judiciary encroachments on the legislative authority, which has been upon many occasions reiterated, is in reality a phantom. Particular misconstructions and contraventions of the will of the legislature may now and then happen; but they can never be so extensive as to amount to an inconvenience, or in any sensible degree to affect the order of the political system. This may be inferred with certainty, from the general nature of the judicial power, from the objects to which it relates, from the manner in which it is exercised, from its comparative weakness, and from its total incapacity to support its usurpations by force." Federalist #81

[MACVSOG68]

I will never again vote for anyone who isn't 100% pro-life. I will never again vote for anyone named Bush. I will never vote for Condi Rice, and I was willing to overlook her pro-choice leanings, just a few weeks ago.

Glad you're not one of those one issue voters.

Somebody got the US Congress to back down about those subpoenas, and it wasn't a lousy lawyer, doctor or judge. Somebody convinced Gonzalez not to get involved, somebody convinced the FBI not to get involved. Somebody made Jeb Bush sit on his hands. It can't be the President, since he said the strong have a duty to protect the weak.

Ok, I've been in suspense long enough. Who was it?

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

See post #11.

There was no need to "storm" the hospice in order to effect a rescue.

[sgtbono2002]

He could have sent in the National Guard with fixed bayonets and ridden a White Horse at the front of the pack.

sarcasm

[bobscot]

OK do you want another Janet Reno or would you want someone that works within the law.everyone thats wants to lay blame for this miscarriage of justice needs to place blame where it belongs and that is not with the Bush brothers

[joesnuffy]

Keep chanting that mantra...:)

[GrandEagle]

BANG! (the sound of hitting the nail on the head)

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

OK do you want another Janet Reno or would you want someone that works within the law.

I want someone who saves innocent lives, not someone who incinerates them or sends them back to communist slavery.

[farmer18th]

What planet is Brennan on? We live in a nation governed by an out of control pack of scumbag activist judges.

Yes, but you see, according to many Rinos it is somehow "nation of laws" to allow judges to do whatever they want, but it is "Elian Gonzales" for the executive to restrain the judiciary. (I know, I know; it doesn't make any sense.)

[BobS]

Who should follow the law when judges act and in effect delare our constitution innapropriate? What is the recourse?
It is entirely in the powers of the executive to declare martial law, clean the mess, then rescind martial law.

[an italian]

Jeb Bush Did All He Could Legally Do

I'm absolutely convinced of that.

[Graymatter]

This is hardly one issue for me. It's pro-life, anti-euthanasia, and the restoration of the balance of powers. It's being against globalism, against Ginsburg's unwarranted consideration of foreign law and opinion, against the LOST and the tide of illegal immigrants. The Schiavo disaster was just the last straw. I was way right before, now I'm extreme far right.

No idea, not a clue, who passed around the memo making everybody back off the Schiavo case. I just know somebody did.

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

Then read posts #11 and #65.

[Diogenesis]

No.

Dr. Gambone (R) and Toast

Below is Terri's Hospice Certificate for Woodside Hospice House (***)

NOTA BENE: Please notice the following:
1) NO physician signed this Certificate for Woodside Hospice House.

ERGO: Michael Schiavo and Greer acted without a medical license.

ERGO: They had to murder her and cover it up.

2) Look at the "Terminal Diagnosis.
It appears to have been changed after the fact. It was clearly written while the
rest was typed, AND in a handwriting different from the rest.

In medical records, that is a sign of tampering. I bet whiteout is underneath.

3) The Certificate states she will live less than 6 months.
Yet they took $$$ from the insurance company(ies?)
and you know the rest.

ERGO: They apparently had to murder Terri to cover it up.