I knew Red would be 1 of those to post about Tom Delay. There are clear differences here between the two cases. Tom Delay's father was in a coma and hooked up to a kidney dialysis machine, his kidneys failed. Terri Shaivo wasn't hooked up to life support except for a feeding tube. The reason why she was on this tube is because Michael Shaivo ordered the nurses not to feed her by any other method. There are plenty of information in affidavits around saying that this is the case, the nurses also say they fed here without a tube before this. Definition of a Coma: A state of deep, often prolonged unconsciousness, usually the result of injury, disease, or poison, in which an individual is incapable of sensing or responding to external stimuli and internal needs. Sorry, that doesn't describe what Terri's state was. Let's talk about hypocrisy shall we? Look at the Clinton administration, Janet Reno, etc. with what they did at Waco, Elian Gonzalez situation. This is the same situation as the Elian Gonzalez situation except this is more critical situation with a dispute about a womans state and dying. The Clinton administration went against the 11th circuit court rulings and sent the INS and FBI into that house with a gun pointed at that poor little kid. There is the precedent that President Bush could use to get this woman. Who are the hypocrits now? Some should think before calling people hypocrites, it works both ways. Theres plenty of hypocrisy to go around. I know right where my friends on the left are now, this is just a reminder. I won't debate this with the 3 posters above because theres no use. http://www.cubanet.org/CNews/y00/jan00/06e12.htm http://www.cubanet.org/CNews/y00/ago00/14e9.htm http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/lawsuit.htm http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/4/22/103053
Well, you make an interesting argument, but i'm not sure it's logical to support your argument with instances of other wrongdoings by a previous administration. I'll even go so far as to say that you are correct, Clinton and crew did handle the E. Gonzalez thing horribly, but why does that allow the Bushies a free pass? That's like rehashing the whole 9/11 thing with the liberals saying Bush and Rice had the information and sat on it and the conservatives saying Clinton and crew didn't handle it expediately in the first place. All a matter of perspective and who's load of dung you prefer to have piled on you, imo.
http://reason.com/0007/fe.cf.reading.shtml "Imminent Danger" The administration repeatedly justified the armed seizure of the boy on the grounds that he was in grave danger. Indeed, if one believed the government’s claims, not a moment could be spared. Thus, the armed commando seen reaching for Elian was engaged in a courageous rescue of the boy from harm. Was there evidence for this dramatic claim of danger? That depends on what the meaning of "evidence" is. What the government had was a letter to the Immigration and Naturalization Service written on April 18 by a New York pediatrician named Irwin Redlener. Dr. Redlener had watched a homemade video of Elian released by the Miami family earlier that week, and had concluded that the boy was "in a state of imminent danger to his physical and emotional well-being in a home that I consider to be psychologically abusive." Redlener had never visited the home, had never spoken to the boy, and knew nothing firsthand of Elian’s physical or emotional well being. It is unlikely that any pediatrician who habitually relied on videotape alone for the purposes of diagnosis would be able to maintain his license to practice. In fact, doctors who had spent time with the boy in Miami had come to quite different conclusions; that the boy would suffer psychologically if he were returned to Cuba. But Redlener had one credential that the Miami doctors lacked: He had served on Hillary Clinton’s task force during her ill-fated efforts to reform the nation’s health care system. Noting the connection, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, an Arizona-based professional group, termed Redlener an "administration operative." (Another government doctor was later to suggest that the Miami relatives should receive counseling.) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Actually, My heart wants him to take a free pass but I think the Bush's are better people and have more class than the Clintons. Yes, a matter of perspective, just setting the record straight for the free loaders attacking the right when they should look into their own back yards before casting the first stone. The real reason Al Gore lost? http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20030801-093837-9954r.htm A matter of perspective, isn't it? These two cases are very similar except for a womans death being imminent. People cry about the government being involved in the matter. Isn't the government already in the middle with the Judicial branch?
Well, again, you're unable to adequately prove your point so you're pointing back to other wrongdoing in the past. That's all good, I understand. The Bushies to whom i'm alluding are his cabinet, not his family. And everyone is free to their own opinion, it's what makes this nation great. As long as they are running a tight ship, I don't care if the first family is drinking it up (Bush), smoking it up (Clinton), snorting it up (Bush), getting freaky-deaky in an upright position (Clinton), or running away from service duty (sadly enough, both Bush and Clinton).
I am not going to discuss EG. However Delay's dad did not have a living will. So under whose authority did this fellow act. Why didn't he come out with this first? That's why I call him a hypocrite. He would not have liked it one bit if his counterparts in the government would have tried to stop him. The poor woman is past ever having a normal life or any enjoyment. Sad but true. (And no I don't believe we just go around killling the weakest amoung us.) The rest as well as the way he cared for her is between Her husband MS and God. If what he is doing is against any law, charge him with a crime other than that keep the Federal government out it appears a personal or State issue.
At least you were civil and neutral above, fair enough Actually enjoyed talking to you! :shock: :grin:
Once Again The point is Delay's dad was in a coma and on a kidney machine. Terri was not, she could be fed by hand, at least liquids until Michael Schiavo put a stop to that. I've already stated all the differences on my thread on the page before this. Did you read it? Delay made a decision about his dad not his wife, I'm sure it was hard. Who is playing politics now? LA times, liberals, Red and the free loaders. I don't think these people are being fair to Tom Delay. Terri's father and mother want her to live, Tom losing his dad, has to know somewhat how the Schindlers must feel.
Yep I read them. My point is Just what Jeb Bush says. He has no leagal right to do anything. So why did he posture? Was it to get the right wing vote. Well he lost mine because one of the reasons I stayed on the right is because I believe in less Government intervention in my private affairs. This doesn't appear to matter to these people anymore. Secondly there appears to be a problem in the state of Fla. with the way the law is stating; no one could take over when this jerk was mistreating her That being so the citizens of Fla need to handle thier Judiciary problem. That is my biggest bone here.
