WorldNetDaily: The law or good ideas?

Dr. Walter E. Williams writes:

"Whether 'evolving standards,' the 'weight of international opinion' and good ideas should determine court decisions underlies much of the ongoing conflict over President Bush's federal court appointees. A federal court appointee who'd say his decisions are guided by the letter and spirit of our Constitution would be tagged by Democrat senators and a few Republican senators, such as Arlen Specter, as an extremist. They'd prefer justices who share former Chief Justice Charles E. Hughes' vision that, 'We live under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the judges say it is.' Translated, that means we don't live under the Constitution; we live under tyrannical judges.

"Many law professors, and others who hold contempt for our Constitution, preach that the Constitution is a living document. Saying that the Constitution is a living document is the same as saying we don't have a Constitution. For rules to mean anything, they must be fixed. How many people would like to play me poker and have the rules be 'living'? Depending on 'evolving standards,' maybe my two pair could beat your flush.

"The founders were right about a lot of things, but they were dead wrong when they bought into Alexander Hamilton's Federalist Paper No. 78 prediction that the judiciary was the 'least dangerous' branch of government."

WorldNetDaily: The law or good ideas?

Terri Schiavo: Judicial Murder by Nat Hentoff

Nat Hentoff writes:

"For all the world to see, a 41-year-old woman, who has committed no crime, will die of dehydration and starvation in the longest public execution in American history.

"She is not brain-dead or comatose, and breathes naturally on her own. Although brain-damaged, she is not in a persistent vegetative state...

"I saw no sign that [the ACLU] has ever examined... the egregious conflicts of interest of her husband and guardian Michael Schiavo, who has been living with another woman for years, with whom he has two children, and has violated a long list of his legal responsibilities as her guardian, some of them directly preventing her chances for improvement. Judge Greer has ignored all of them.

"Michael Schiavo, who says he loves and continues to be devoted to Terri, has provided no therapy or rehabilitation for his wife (the legal one) since 1993... He insists she once told him she didn't want to survive by artificial means, but he didn't mention her alleged wishes for years after her brain damage, while saying he would care for her for the rest of his life.

"Terri Schiavo has never had an MRI or a PET scan, nor a thorough neurological examination. Republican Senate leader Bill Frist... said reasonably, 'I would think you would want a complete neurological exam' before determining she must die.

"In death penalty cases, defense counsel for retarded and otherwise mentally disabled clients submit extensive medical tests. Ignoring the absence of complete neurological exams, supporters of the deadly decisions by Judge Greer and the trail of appellate jurists keep reminding us how extensive the litigation in this case has been — 19 judges in six courts is the mantra...

In his book Forced Exit (Times Books), Wesley quotes neurologist William Burke: 'They feel the pangs of hunger and thirst. Imagine going one day without a glass of water! . . . It is an extremely agonizing death.' ...

"Contrary to what you've read and seen in most of the media, due process has been lethally absent in Terri Schiavo's long merciless journey through the American court system.

"'As to legal concerns,' writes William Anderson — a senior psychiatrist at Massachusetts General Hospital and a lecturer at Harvard University — 'a guardian may refuse any medical treatment, but drinking water is not such a procedure. It is not within the power of a guardian to withhold, and not in the power of a rational court to prohibit.'

"Ralph Nader agrees. In a statement on March 24, he and Wesley Smith... said: 'If this were a death penalty case, this evidence would demand reconsideration. Yet, an innocent, disabled woman is receiving less justice. . . . This case is rife with doubt. Justice demands that Terri be permitted to live.' ...

"What kind of a nation are we becoming? The CIA outsources torture — in violation of American and international law — in the name of the freedoms we are fighting to protect against terrorism. And we have watched as this woman, whose only crime is that she is disabled, is tortured to death by judges, all the way to the Supreme Court.

"And keep in mind from the Ralph Nader-Wesley Smith report: 'The courts . . . have [also] ordered that no attempts be made to provide her water or food by mouth. Terri swallows her own saliva. Spoon feeding is not medical treatment. This outrageous order proves that the courts are not merely permitting medical treatment to be withheld, they have ordered her to be made dead.'

"In this country, even condemned serial killers are not executed in this way."

village voice > news > Terri Schiavo: Judicial Murder by Nat Hentoff

WorldNetDaily: The culture of death advances

Pat Buchanan writes:

"Terri Schiavo will not have died a natural death. She will have been put to death by the state. The coroner's report should read: This was a state-sanctioned killing of a woman because she was brain-damaged, and the method of execution was by starvation and denial of water. These are methods most of us would protest if imposed on the Beltway snipers.

"Why did Florida put Terri Schiavo to death? Because that was the demand of a husband who refused to divorce her and denied her medical care, while he lived with another woman. Michael Schiavo is the ACLU poster boy for family values.

"In the Old Testament, King Solomon ruled that the mother who had been willing to give up her baby to the woman who had kidnapped the child rather than see the baby cut in half should have the child. Our Florida Solomon ruled that the husband who wanted Terri dead should have custody of her, not the parents who wanted her alive.

"Under the Constitution, no person may be deprived of life without due process of law. This has traditionally meant a trial of one's peers, proof beyond a reasonable doubt of a heinous crime and no cruel or unusual punishment. Though she committed no crime, Terri was put to death in a manner most decent men and women would not use to put a suffering animal out of its misery...

"Americans must face a hard truth. The state of Florida put Terri Schiavo to death. Before Holy Week, she was neither dead nor dying. For 15 years, she had been cared for by nurses and visited by loving parents. She was not dying until the judge ordered her dead, by ordering her feeding tube removed. Then it has taken her nearly two weeks to die, as he blocked the reinsertion of the feeding tube and ordered police to prevent anyone from giving her water.

"When the courts failed Terri, and Congress and the Florida Legislature failed Terri, the governor of Florida, who took an oath to defend the constitutional rights of Florida's citizens, should have taken custody of Terri, ordered the tube reinserted and let the federal courts proceed with the de novo hearing of the evidence, while Terri was still alive... He should have rescued Terri from the death sentence unjustly imposed upon her. If the court held him in contempt, so what? Who does not hold that Florida court in contempt?"

WorldNetDaily: The culture of death advances

Four Years Growth by Laurence M. Vance

Laurence M. Vance writes:

"George Bush was right when he said a few years ago: 'The American people have been overcharged for Government, and they deserve a refund.' The only problem with his statement is that it is now Bush and the Republicans who have overcharged the American people for government, and there is no refund in sight."

Four Years Growth by Laurence M. Vance

Remarks at the Founding Meeting of Primary Challenge by James Ostrowski

James Ostrowski writes:

"Duh, if they [politicians] were going to spend your money the way you wanted, why would they have to get you to pay up by threatening to throw you into a dungeon if you don’t?"

Remarks at the Founding Meeting of Primary Challenge by James Ostrowski

Against the Central Planners of Left and Right by Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

Professor Thomas E. Woods, Jr. writes:

"Forget going after government armed with public-policy studies showing that federal farm policy has been an expensive boondoggle or that federal poverty policy has only entrenched social pathologies that have rendered our cities unlivable. True and valuable as these statements are, they do not penetrate to the fundamental immorality of a system that is based on fleecing ordinary citizens in order to bestow special privileges on sectors of the population that did nothing to earn them...

"this supposedly 'failed' government program hasn’t failed at all. It has done just what its architects wanted it to do: it enriched well-connected big farmers as well as a huge class of bureaucrats in the Department of Agriculture. These people... are ripping us off...

"Rather than agitating for this or that reform, the entire system must be demystified and delegitimized. Superstitious reverence for Washington, D.C., must yield to the conviction that society, like the market itself, can order its affairs without the central direction of an imperial capital. Property owners, families, voluntary organizations, churches – in other words, all the institutions that the central state consistently seeks to marginalize or displace – can maintain a livable and decent social order far better than the would-be central planners of left and right."

Against the Central Planners of Left and Right by Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

Those Bush Vetoes by Laurence M. Vance

Laurence M. Vance writes:

"So for those who still think that Bush has a fiscally conservative bone in his body, read the following statement slowly and carefully: During his first term in office, George W. Bush did not veto a single bill sent to him by Congress. Not one. This means that Bush shares responsibility with the spendthrift Congresses that have for the past four years squandered not millions, not billions, but trillions of dollars of the taxpayers’ money. To argue that Bush did not veto any bills because he was a Republican with a Republican Congress is ludicrous. Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, and Jimmy Carter were Democratic presidents with Democratic Congresses and it didn’t stop them from vetoing bills."

Those Bush Vetoes by Laurence M. Vance

Tangle Tongue by William Norman Grigg

William Norman Grigg writes:

"During a recent interview with the Washington Post, Mr. Bush was asked if significant changes needed to be made in his policy toward Iraq. After all, the administration now admits that Saddam did not possess a fearsome arsenal of Weapons of Mass Destruction. With casualties mounting, and scandals accumulating with respect to torture and faulty intelligence, the Post inquired, could we expect to see changes in policy or personnel? To judge from Mr. Bush’s astoundingly self-serving reply, the answer is – apparently not.

'We had an accountability moment, and that's called the 2004 elections,' Mr. Bush told the Post. 'The American people listened to different assessments made about what was taking place in Iraq, and they looked at the two candidates, and chose me.'

This statement earns a full 9.0 on the Clinton Scale of artful dishonesty... the president did not say that his assessment was truthful or reliable, but only that a spare majority of the voting public bought into it. Rather than being subject to accountability, in other words, Mr. Bush and his handlers are now beyond accountability."

Tangle Tongue by William Norman Grigg