A response from the right

A response from the right

: Just got back to a connection and saw that this morning, Hugh Hewitt responded to my Jumping the shark for Jesus post. Crazed doing important things like eating dinner so I don’t have time to respond but wanted you to see the link.

  • alcibiades

    Here’s George Felos,
    in his own words, representing the sanity of the left, giving voice to the experience that sent him on his mission as an advocate for the right to die.

    “As I continued to stay beside Mrs. Browning at her nursing home bed, I felt my mind relax and my weight sink into the ground. I began to feel light-headed as I became more reposed. Although feeling like I could drift into sleep, I also experienced a sense of heightened awareness.
    As Mrs. Browning lay motionless before my gaze, I suddenly heard a loud, deep moan and scream and wondered if the nursing home personnel heard it and would respond to the unfortunate resident. In the next moment, as this cry of pain and torment continued, I realized it was Mrs. Browning.
    I felt the mid-section of my body open and noticed a strange quality to the light in the room. I sensed her soul in agony. As she screamed I heard her say, in confusion, ëWhy am I still here Ö Why am I here?í My soul touched hers and in some way I communicated that she was still locked in her body. I promised I would do everything in my power to gain the release her soul cried for. With that the screaming immediately stopped. I felt like I was back in my head again, the room resumed its normal appearance, and Mrs. Browning, as she had throughout this experience, lay silent “.(73).

    So nice to know he can actually communicate mind to mind with stroke victims otherwise unable to talk. Why, now I’m reassured he really does know what Terri Schiavo wants! And why he thinks it is beautiful that she is being dehydrated to death! And why he wants to lead others there. And, in general, to know the profile of the man who is litigating the landmark cases on this issue.
    Yep, Jeff, you are so right. All the religious kooks are on the right. Your side are all middle of the road rationalists and moderates.

  • John

    I visit BuzzMachine regularly and don’t always post, but I usually read, a bit.
    Jeff’s blog is a great web resource.
    I’m with Hugh on this.
    I’m thankful that it was not for me to decide if Terri
    should continue to live.
    I only asked, “what harm will it do if she does live?”
    I was told by people that she is suffering, but the same people assured me that she doesn’t actually have enough brain function to suffer from the withholding of water and nutrients.
    The law was followed religiously, why is the result so unsettling to me?
    If we are going to cast this onto the canvas of
    national political debate, this is the way I see it:
    The left is in decline.
    Their agenda was rejected unquestionably in the last election cycle.
    That hurts.
    What they really wanted was Rumsfeld’s head on a
    platter or something of equivalent value, to help
    ease the pain.
    Sorry, it didn’t happen, and gay marriage was pretty much rejected as well.
    Finally, chalk one up for the leftist ideologues on the “right to die” issue.
    Unfortunately for the cause, most folks, and voters, tend to identify with the living.
    As well, most folks don’t presume to be qualified to order the deaths of innocents for no apparent reason.

  • John

    Actually, if you really wanted to hear the true religious right, as portrayed in the media, you should have been listening to Hewitt’s show tonight, when he spent most of it arguing with callers who demanded that Jeb Bush ignore the judicial rulings and go into the hospice and remove Terri Schiavo by force, even if that meant armed confrotations between the State Police and National Guard (though all the callers wanted to believe the State Police would just melt away if that happened).
    Hugh argued at one point that for Bush to do that would be no better than what George Wallace did when he stood in the doorway of the University of Alabama to defy a court order to allow blacks to be admitted to the university, and would be the first step toward tyranny. Those of the other side ranged from the mildly argumentative to the downright hostile, who now see Hewitt as a wimp at best and a tratior to the cause at worse.
    The point is there are gradiations of support for keeping Schaivo alive, from those willing to do everything within the law to those who believe that if the law goes against their beliefs, breaking it can be rationalized. Lumping them all in together is either lazy, or an overt desire to treat the issue solely in black and white terms.

  • Regretfully, alcibiades’ example of George Felosí fanciful ghoulishness and another lost election seem to be what is animating this whole discussion.
    When the details fade years from now, will we remember Mr. Felos’ measured remarks, assuring us of Terri, that he had “never seen such a look of beauty and peace upon her” or will the image of an exhausted mother and father fighting desperately to feed, hydrate and comfort their daughter in her dying moments be our memory?

  • Carlos

    Bill Clinton sent in the jackboots to kidnap Elian Gonzales against the court’s ruling. Who can forget the SWAT cop pointing the machine gun at Elian’s uncle hiding in the closet? Liberals cheered.
    Here, the Bush brothers showed far more restraint in comparison, and they still get lambasted as trampling on the Constitution. Stunning hypocrisy, don’t you think?

  • Hugh Hewitt’s response to Jeff’s “Jumping the Shark” post was cowardly and dishonest.
    First, he disputes that the RR has been front-and-center on Schiavo by listing some non-RR people who’ve been on their side. Obviously, the biggest names in the RR have taken strong positions alongside the minority in the to tube or not to tube controversy, and you’d have to be blind not to see them. Jeff singles out the RR for their positions on Schiavo, and it’s fair.
    Second, Hewitt even denies there is such as thing as the RR by jumping through hoops and landing nowhere. We know who the RR is, and we know what they stand for – Biblical law in America.
    There’s no getting around the fact that the RR has hurt itself by taking unprincipled positions on the Schiavo matter. For years they told us they were upset about activist judges, but lately they’ve been showing upset for restrained judges and urging – even demanding – unlawful activity from government.
    Whatever moral principles bind these people together, they should stay out of politics because they lack a coherent set of principles about government. That’s what the shark-jumping argument is about, and Hewitt’s disingenuous attempt at spin doesn’t do anything to counter it. It’s just clueless.

  • Who can forget the SWAT cop pointing the machine gun at Elian’s uncle hiding in the closet? Liberals cheered.
    So did fathers, even conservative ones.

  • To quote Mark Steyn (from memory):
    “I hate to say I told you so, but actually I love to say I told you so, I just hate having to make the obligatory self-deprecating comments about saying I told you so…”
    Hewitt smoked the Shark Jumping post hard on radio today, and it was something of a vindication for me and others in that thread objecting to the “we can turn this into an anti-christian stick” lefties commenting on this tragedy. If Hewitt has ever been wrong, I don’t remember when. More importantly, he can go out on a limb where other conservatives don’t dare to follow… and he *still* turns out to be right. Well… he has my deep respect, anyhow. (Although, ironically, I do sometimes object to his tainting his political views with his deep religiosity)
    To me the most important idea Hugh came up with in this matter today was that the lasting “backlash”, (about which some of us “pro-tube” types and Mr Jarvis differ), will become apparent as the facts *come out*. Exampli Gratia: this Felos guy– 1, he’s a creep of a pro-euthanasia zealot, and 2, he was a key witness in the original fact-finding.
    A clearly relevant set of facts, n’est-ce pas? Yet why did we the public at large not know these things at the time when knowing these things was crucial, indeed a matter of “life” and death?
    Well… we shall see. Certainly the legacy media is on Mr Jarvis’ side, but… we’ll just have to wait and see.

  • franky

    It was only a matter of time before someone linked Elian and Terri at this forum. Who can forget the disgusting site of a family attempting to coach a little boy to publicly disown his own father? What type of slime would attempt to divide a boy and father with gifts? Well, I guess the CANF has had a pretty successful run of buying the politicians with gifts so just assumed they could do it with a child as well. Castro is wrong about pretty much everything since about one month after taking power, but man he’s on the money when he refers to the “miami mafia”.

  • The left is DESPERATE that there be a religious right backlash, and thus they keep suggesting one.
    They were terrified that if the Schindlers and those who saw no harm in letting Terri live had succeeded in those efforts, the few platforms that are identified as a Democratic strength, such as abortion and gay marriage, may have weakened next.
    I think John, that’s one answer to your question:
    “”what harm will it do if she does live?”

  • Franky asks: “Who can forget the disgusting site of a family attempting to coach a little boy to publicly disown his own father?”
    Look, there’s a Mom and a Dad. They stand helplessly by. The thing they want most in the world at this moment is to give their daughter food and water. Her immenent death is being caused ONLY from the lack of that food and water.
    They can’t because a Judge says they can’t. They can’t even go be with her as she lay dying.
    THAT is not disgusting?
    Carlos posted “Bill Clinton sent in the jackboots to kidnap Elian Gonzales against the court’s ruling. Who can forget the SWAT cop pointing the machine gun at Elian’s uncle hiding in the closet? Liberals cheered.
    Here, the Bush brothers showed far more restraint in comparison, and they still get lambasted as trampling on the Constitution. Stunning hypocrisy, don’t you think?


  • Carlos

    You’re changing the subject. What about the court’s decision on Elian? It was ignored. What about Bill Clinton sending in jackboots in defiance of the court’s decision? Not so bad when Clinton did it I guess.
    In fact, Libs loved it because “fatherhood” had suddenly become so important to them in that one instance.
    Whereas in the Schiavo case, the Bush brothers were infinitely more tempered in their decisions. No jackbooted thugs were dispatched.
    So much for a “constitutional crisis” and “fundamentalist christians” and all the rest of your Lib sqawking about nothing.

  • Carlos, in the post above where I quoted you,…the italics did not show up for the second half of the quote …sorry. :-( They were your words, and good ones too!…Lynn

  • plunge

    I think the most important issue on the Schiavo case is seeing who will fall in for using lies and bogus arguments to bolster their positions. The facts will come out? You mean the facts that people like Hewitt dragged out every last lie and false claim, treated it like gospel, and still won’t acknowledge they’re wrong about the facts or the law? Or that Ben Stein compares the episode to the Holocaust saying that liberal abortion-loving judges are to blame (when most of the judges in this cas were anti-abortion Republican-appointees, and the only dissenting judges were Dems)?
    It’s been an eye-opener for me, no doubt.

  • JimH

    For me, at least, this has been a jump the shark incident. I am a Christian and a conservative, but like millions of others, I have been in the position of having to decide whether to terminate medical treatment for a loved one. Although most of us think we will never have to make a decision about abortion, who among us has not thought about end of life issues? The thought of an ethics challenged Texas congressman and shrill religious zealots inserting themselves into the grief sticken ICU as my family and I make the hardest decision of our lives is more appalling than words can express. The theocratic mullah wing of the Republican party scares me.

  • So even though the Usual Suspects have lined up to issue their Harshest Judgements, tried to move the narrative the situation with their usual codewords (“culture of life”, “err on the side of life”, etc), and systematically promoted every bullcrap claim about Schaivo’s state of consciousness, it’s not theocratic… because Steyn and Krauthammer agree.
    Wow, he found guys who are Traditional Conservatives and not Cultural Conservatives on his side! Gosh! I’m convinced, aren’t you?
    He then crowbars Barney Frank’s position to support his point although Frank voted against and spoke out against the legislative action.

  • monkeyboy

    A MRI done while Terri is still alive would clear a lot of this up.
    I find it interesting that it was a wonderful blow for civilization whan a multiple murderer, who wants to be executed was granted a repreive for no other reason than he was sixteen at the time of the crimes, while a woman whose “desire to die” is a second hand report from someone who would gain from her dying, and hasn’t had all the tests needed to “convict” her done, advances the republic with her death.
    If only she had shot a cop or something.

  • richard mcenroe

    Richard Bennett ó All fathers, or just the ones who had nothing to do with their kid after they poked the seed in and left?

  • Carlos

    if you’re a christian conservative, I’m an astronaut. You sound like a seminar blogger.
    “shrill religious zealots” and “ethics challenged Texas Congressman” is straight from a Democrat talking points memo.
    you see lies and bogus arguments everywhere? So do I. Take a look at JimH’s latest post.

  • richard mcenroe

    Monkeyboy ó It’s OK. Mike won’t approve an MRI while she’s still living but his lawyer said today they’ll demand an autopsy as soon as she dies.

  • plunge: “I think the most important issue on the Schiavo case is seeing who will fall in for using lies and bogus arguments to bolster their positions.”
    Well… ok, that seems reasonable.
    “You mean the facts that people like Hewitt dragged out every last lie and false claim, treated it like gospel, and still won’t acknowledge they’re wrong about the facts or the law?”
    Well… no, that doesn’t seem reasonable. In fact, it seems like a “lie”.
    Hewitt has been consistantly unwilling to entertain any wild theories or hearsay, including but not limited to theories about Michael’s ulterior motives. Callers to his show who want to discuss such things are soundly rebuffed, as are those who want Jeb Bush to do something extra-legal, et cetera.
    And if Hugh Hewitt doesn’t know much about Constitutional Law, then it’s curious that he teaches Constitutional Law at Chapman University.
    If you can demonstrate where Hugh’s been wrong about the law, then I will eat an Enormous Omelet Sandwich, personally autographed by Jeff Jarvis.

  • plunge

    “you see lies and bogus arguments everywhere? So do I. Take a look at JimH’s latest post.”
    Take a look at monkeyboy’s post.

  • monkeyboy

    All i’m asking for is a MRI.
    I just made the comparison to the appeals allowed for convicted murderers. I don’t think any DA would get away with saying “we don’t need a DNA test, because it would just confirm the fingerprint dusting.”
    A while back we had a conversation about the death penalty, and how we needed to be absolutely sure before executing someone. Why not in this case?

  • They did an MRI in 1990. And they did two CAT scans, and they have a nearly flat-lined EEG. Next thing you know, you people will be asking for an LSAT score. Testing, like recounting votes in Florida, can go on forever but it doesn’t yield significant data after a certain point.
    Elian was about the Miami Mafia – the cowards who fled Cuba rather than depose Castro – making a symbol and martyr out of a 6-year-old boy who should have been with this father rather than his drunken criminal relatives. Every divorced father in America cheered when he was rescued from his kidnappers, but the same wacky bastards who want to animate the corpse of Terri Schiavo 15 years after she died put more weight on the supposed wishes of his dead mother than on the child’s best interests.
    The dead speak more clearly to the fundies than do the living.

  • Carlos

    You’re avoiding the point about Elian.
    The Florida courts disagreed with your assessment of Elian (and personally I didn’t care either way). Yet Clinton ignored the court and trampled on the Constitution by sending in his machinegun-toting goons to enforce his imperial decree. Liberals cheered.
    The Bush brothers were far more measured in their response re Terri.

  • owl

    Never seen a subject like this one. We usually have our lefties, righties and all of us that “claim” we are in the middle. Not here.
    Today, Jesse Jackson joined what some are calling religious zealots. Hey, I thought he was suppose to be a Leftie Liberal Zealot. What was he doing mixing his message? Must be confused like the rest of us.
    Read a lot of people that come at this from their own grief (and I suspect guilt when there should be none). The lawyer blogs have got it going strong. Seldom an agreement between them. For some…they are just fighting the abortion fight or straight politics.
    I admit that there is something that will haunt me over Terri. Do I know if she is there? No. But I can SEE her mother, father, brother and sister. For myself, I don’t care how the law is written in the book, I recognize wrong when I see it.
    If the Courts had not thumbed their noses at the other two branches and the new law that was created to make double dang sure they were not wrong, I would feel better. More extensive tests (before you kill her, not after) with new FACTS established. If the Courts then come to the same conclusion and sentence, I vote for a lethal injection (equal to a death row inmate). I could actually live with that.
    I suspect her mother, father, sister and brother could, also. I have seen terminally ill people starve themselves because they are not hungry, their sick bodies shut themselves down. If anyone is trying to equate this to pulling a plug on a brain dead child that was in an accident or a terminal parent, forget it. This is not the same.
    What is wrong? One side out-lawyered the other. This is not justice for anyone. Not this way. This has proven to be one of the most ugly things ever witnessed. A true example, in our faces, when the law is just not justice. I thought that look on Elian’s face could have been avoided if they had just knocked on the door. Same here. Establish new tests and new case facts, and we could have lived with the outcome.
    Please, no one tell me a 26 year old would choose to have a Court order her staved to death, while her mom, dad, bro and sis watched. She might say “shoot me” but NO WAY this. This should haunt us all.

  • The Florida courts never had jurisdiction over Elian Gonzalez, Carlos. Immigration is a federal matter, always has been, always will be.
    In the Schiavo case there’s no jurisdictional dispute, and the courts have spoken with unanimity.