Posted on 02/12/2006 6:25:57 AM PST by doc30
Sen. Mel Martinez, nearly a year after leading the charge for federal intervention in the Terri Schiavo case, now says he may have been off-base.
"Perhaps this was not in the realm of federal concern. It may have been better left to state courts to deal with it," Martinez said in a taped interview for Political Connections that airs today on Bay News 9.
In a wide-ranging interview in which the Orlando Republican for the first time also publicly embraced the Senate candidacy of Katherine Harris, he alluded to the Schiavo controversy as providing a lesson "with a whack across the head."
Martinez was the Senate's point person pushing a bill to give federal courts jurisdiction in the case as part of an effort to force the brain-damaged Pinellas County woman's feeding tubes to be reinserted.
The effort to keep her alive proved unsuccessful and enormously unpopular with the public. It was particularly damaging to Martinez after it turned out his legal counsel had drafted a memo describing the Schiavo legislation as "a great political issue." That aide left Martinez's staff.
"I've enjoyed the year. There are moments of learning, sometimes with a whack across the head," he said when asked about lessons he'd learned in his year in the Senate. "You know exactly what I'm talking about. Staff members that don't quite do what you want them to do, and then big problems develop. You learn from those things and you move on."
Martinez has previously stood by his role in the Schiavo controversy, but his latest comments come two weeks after Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist recounted the lessons he learned from the Schiavo controversy: "The American people don't want you involved in these decisions."
Martinez said supporters of the bill wanted "one last measure of review. That's what the debate was about in the Senate. If I had to take one lesson away it's perhaps decisions of this nature really belong in state courts, not federal courts."
Political Connections is a joint venture between the St. Petersburg Times and Bay News 9, and it airs at 11 a.m. Starting Monday, the interview can be seen on channel 340 (Tampa Bay on Demand).
Martinez also touted the bill he and Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson are sponsoring to enact permanent restrictions on offshore drilling within 150 miles of Florida, even as he said he ultimately will campaign against Nelson, who faces a challenge from Republican Rep. Harris of Sarasota.
"The beauty of it is that (Nelson) and I are working together as Floridians, working side by side on something that's good for Florida. But there's no question that I'm a Republican and I want to support my party's nominee for senator," said Martinez, adding that "politics will come later."
While prominent Republicans for months had been unenthusiastic about Harris' candidacy, fearing she will lose, Martinez for the first time publicly promised he'll campaign for Harris.
"I don't see anyone else out there even thinking or talking about it. So I think she is the candidate. I think she'll be the nominee of our party and I think she'll acquit herself well. She's a fighter, she's a dogged person that I think will demonstrate to Floridians that she'll be a good candidate," he said.
Martinez narrowly beat Democrat Betty Castor in 2004 in a race in which former University of South Florida professor Sami Al-Arian was a central issue. Al-Arian was suspected of financing terrorism while Castor was president of USF, and Martinez criticized her for not taking more decisive action against Al-Arian.
In December, a federal jury found Al-Arian not guilty on eight counts and a judge declared a mistrial on nine others. Despite that, Martinez said he had no regrets about making an issue out of Al-Arian, calling it a "managerial" question and noting that the Castor campaign itself first brought up Al-Arian in the general election.
"I don't have any second thoughts about it. I think it was a valid issue, but I think at this point the legal process isn't through with it, and I would anticipate that there may even be further prosecutions," Martinez said.
You are quite right. Most people I know who were strongly Republican were left with a bitter taste in their mouths when the Republicans tried to step in and intervene with Schaivo. They took it very personally and interpreted the actions of the government to be a threat to their own personal and family decisions. Some elementds of the Republican party championed it as a right to life case and were throwing everything they had at it. All it did was alientate Republicans and conservatives who either did not see it as a good political decision or who thought it was government making itself bigger and more intrusive. They didn't look at it as helping one woman, but setting the precident for interfering in everyones' lives.
On March 18th, when Terri was screaming after she found out the g-tube was coming out, the cop in the hall said it never happened.
How many people on this thread would be screaming for their lives if they knew they were going to be killed? Every last one of them.
If the new republican party is not going to help and protect the most vulnerable among us, what good are they?
Any other pure Republicans/conservatives we can name on this thread that are the opposite of Martinez & Frist? (weenies).
How's it feel to be on the same side as the ACLU who helped Schiavo finish killing his wife? The government interfered by making the first order to kill Terri. The interference was the murder, not the cancellation of same which led to Terri's torture and murder. I thought the U.S. didn't condone torture. Oops, that's only applicable for terrorists, not for innocent Americans.
I recommend that you read what Martin Katz wrote in The American Thinker, March 29, 2005. That is how many saw this case.
Most Conservatives, especially Freepers who tend to be better informed, were appalled at the government-ordered murder of a disabled woman. Nazis believed they were doing good.
This RIGHT HERE is why I quit the Republican Party!!!
Absolutely amazing. A US Senator rediscovers the ideal of federalism. Unfortunately for the citizens of the respective states, it won't spread.
Great Find, Dante! - ~Short & sweet~ and to the point:
Everything else, every legal, moral, theological, constitutional, or philosophical argument, is a sideshow, diverting attention from the essential issue of this case.
We have wounded our national character. By our actions, or inactions, we have placed ourselves one notch less, above the Nazis.
We, as a people, have so shamed ourselves, that we cannot look Mary Schindler, Terri Schiavo's mother, in the eye, and give her one good reason why WE did not allow her to give water to her dying child.
How we came to this shameful point in our national existence is a question that demands examination, and rectification. For our sake.
For Mary Schindler, and her severely impaired child, Terri Schiavo, it is too late. We did not find it in our collective hearts and souls, in our actions, to have mercy on them.
May We, and G_d, forgive us.
Martin Katz
Martin Katz on Terri Schiavo - The American Thinker, March 29, 2005
FR Thread (3/29/05): Terri Schiavo: Judicial Murder Nat Hentoff | Village Voice ^ | 7/11/05
(Terri's 'crime' was being disabled & voiceless)
And she wasn't dying in the first place, until the legal system got through with her. That is what I would add...
Just wondering - did Martinez really change his mind (and people do change) or was it all a sham?
#4 - Let us murder you, so then we can apologize to your corpse
#31 - Terri wasn't dying in the first place, until the legal system got through with her.
#9 - ~...the principle of utility dominates~ Unless the person is useful, they are worthless.
#10 - Civil rights are a federal issue.
#11 - This is probably the only matter in history which the liberals think should have been decided by the states...
#12 - Condemned prisoners get federal judicial review on top of their state review. The governor of the state also has the power to grant clemency.
This is all that was asked when a person's blood relatives disagree with the spouse's decision to end a life. We're going to err on the side of keeping people alive when the correct course is uncertain.
Not exactly an earth shattering concept.
#13 - The effort to keep her alive proved unsuccessful and enormously unpopular with the public.-
That should be "unpopular with the uninformed public", and they were uninformed because the media misinformed them with the use of the term "vegetable".
One BIG #14 ~ one big happy oligarchy ~ BUMP!!
#15 - The propaganda by the mainstream media contributed to her death. Hard to believe how many people were brainwashed... ~ So many more people are being killed the same way without the headlines. She had no directives. She was murdered.
#16 - Exactly. And an incredible amount of misinformation has been spread about this case.
The fact is that Terri never indicated she wanted to die, much less be dehydrated. She never had a lawyer, and Greer denied her due process while catering to Michael Schiavo. The sadistic stunts Michael pulled on her and her family is too long to list.
Wondering as well. Can't get inside his head. But I do know that as she neared the tube being removed and neared death, there was huge pressure on Martinez to do something on behalf of her family and her supporters. Now that it's "all over" (not really, but he thinks so), he's got the political reality to face that most people even Republicans don't understand the Schiavo case, thanks to the lying media, and he is adapting to that side, methinks.
FYI - #33 thread summary..
Pointed comments ALL...thanks for highlighting them.
He won't get re-elected. He's a flip flopper like Kerry. "I voted for Terri before I voted against her."
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.