For instance, why do they give a shit if Roland Burris does or doesn’t get a seat?  If you’d asked me a month ago that you’d have Pat Buchanan on TV lying his ass off in order to get a Democrat seated in the Senate, and a black man at that, I would have told you to lay off the PCP.  It’s nakedly cynical for Republicans to root for Burris, because it’s clear that their thinking begins and ends with, “If the Senate Democrats want X, we must sell our daughters into slavery if that will prevent X from happening.” They’re ready to slide into the oppose-and-obstruct-at-all-costs mode.

I don’t think Pat really cares one way or another whether Burris is seated. What’s important here is to portray Reid as a racist, in the hope that that shit sticks. Just pack on every epithet in the book, and then when they want to portray some policy choice as a Bad Thing, they can just yell “Harry Reid! Nancy Pelosi!” You already saw it during the Georgia runoff when the argument against the Dem was nothing more than “Obama, Reid, Pelosi!”

They probably haven’t thought of it, but they’d be able to hurt Reid even more by saying “is it any wonder that a Mormon would hate black people?”

Well to truly pull a ratfuck trap, you’d need to create controversy. Make Reid look weak for supporting puppies and rainbows.

“[W]hy does [Senate Majority Leader Harry] Reid not want this guy? Why can’t he get elected? Because he’s an African-American.”

What the fucking shit?  Blacks can’t get elected in Illinois?

I’d like to remind PAT BUCHANAN that my state has sent TWO (2) uppity black people—one even an uppity WOMAN who talked back to Jesse Helms—to the Senate.  Carol won 55% of the vote in a state that’s only 12% black.

Danny Davis turned Blago down.  Danny Davis is black.  Jesse Jackson, Jr. wanted the seat and wore a wire for the Feds.  JJJ is black.  Both would have been better qualified than Burris, but neither wanted the “taint”, whatever the fuck that is.

Just…Pat Buchanan calling someone else a racist…seriously?  What the ever living fuck?

——-
As for Schiavo, bring it on.  The whole country turned on Congress when they took that case up.  Bill Frist never looked like a bigger idiot than when he pronounced her simply comatose, and then the autopsy showed that her skull was full of cerebro-spinal fluid instead of brain.  Thanks Dr. Frist!  I sure home my HMO covers you!

Schiavo’s case is too much like gay rights…pretty much everyone either knows someone or has had to go through end-of-life decision making, and those who haven’t will probably face it in the future.

It’s really hard to know what’s right.  When my grandfather was dying from Parkinson’s, we refused to have tubes surgically inserted b/c they would only prolong his life.  If a surgically ‘installed’ feeding tube (like Terri had) would have made him strong enough that some day we could remove it, we would have done it.  But he was not going to recover.  The tube would just stuff him full of nutrients that his body would have a harder and harder time removing.

Removing a surgically inserted feeding tube or turning off a breathing machine is never an easy choice.  All we wanted was to keep my grandfather alive…simply breathing was enough for us.  But what kind of life was that for him?  Not to mention he’d told us not to keep him alive on machines.

We all die.  It sucks, but there it is.  Keeping a body functioning isn’t saving anyone.  It’s not even helping the family.

Am I the only one who remembers Karen Ann Quinlan?  People don’t want to be vegetables kept alive by machines—or at least most don’t. 

Anyone who’s had to go through a slow death process wanted to smack Congress good and hard for getting involved in a private affair.  Remember that Michael Schiavo, as Terri’s husband and guardian, could have had the machines/tubes/etc. removed all on his own, but since her parents didn’t want that, he asked the court to determine what Terri wanted.  Over and over, the courts agreed that Terri didn’t want to go on as a vegetable. 

I’m so glad she’s not being held hostage to her driven-insane-with-grief parents anymore.  Most of the country is, too, so bring it on GOP.  It was a shining moment for you, wasn’t it?

Well, for your tiny whackadoodle base.  Which looks like the only people you are actually interested in keeping in the Big Tent.

Hm, puppies will be difficult to denounce. Maybe spotted owls? Or is that too 1990?

From the Think Progress link:

67 percent believed that these politicians were “trying to keep Schiavo alive are doing so more for political advantage than out of concern for her or for the principles involved.”

Personally, I think the parents were also like this. They didn’t care that she might have had to have several amputations. Their motives might have been for Terri’s well-being at first, but as far as I can tell, it quickly turned into a crusade to spite Michael.

“and then the autopsy showed that her skull was full of cerebro-spinal fluid instead of brain.”

Don’t forget being blind as well as deaf and had been that way for years.

Hm, puppies will be difficult to denounce.

Oh, please!  Those little welfare leeches who refuse to take any personal responsibility and work to earn their upkeep?  They shit on the floor, and it wastes far too many resources training them to go outside, which then lowers the property values because of the mounds of puppy crap people have to step in.  They add to noise pollution with their non-stop yapping.

And we haven’t even started with the health care costs….

“the hard right sees Terri Schiavo as the perfect woman, as if she was an overgrown fetus with her inability to speak or think, in reality she was, before her heart attack, exactly the sort of human being the hard right doesn’t think has a right to really live—-a thinking, breathing, feeling woman.”

I’ve known it for a while but this made my blood run cold.

“the hard right sees Terri Schiavo as the perfect woman, as if she was an overgrown fetus with her inability to speak or think, in reality she was, before her heart attack, exactly the sort of human being the hard right doesn’t think has a right to really live—-a thinking, breathing, feeling woman.”

I’ve known it for a while but this made my blood run cold.

This, this, a thousand times. Ever since I saw The Matrix the scene that keeps popping in my head when wingnuts start talking about “life” is the one where Neo wakes up in his little goo-chamber and sees the fields of people trapped in the same devices. That’s the logical extension of their views on women and reproduction - keep us unconscious, hooked up to machines, producing endless babies, just like God intended!

Well, the House Republicans voted against Mother’s Day because Democrats loved it. That’s a start:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/08/AR2008050802999_pf.html

I think that if we go nutty on them that would do the trick:

1.  Say that we’ve seen the light and want to be the party of personal ownership and personal responsibility.  Demonstrate that this is so by repealing all regulations regarding the banking industry, the FDIC, SEC,  etc.  The attitude should be “Caveat fucking emporter”.

2. Close down social security, returning to everyone present participant a lump sum of what they’ve paid into it so far, allow pensions, IRAs, 401ks, etc., but none of that socialistic ‘social insurance’ crap.

3.  Make abortion illegal, with a special provision to make the father of any aborted fetus liable to arrest, as an accessory before the fact, as the abortion wouldn’t have taken place without their voluntary act in the first place.

Puppies and rainbows? You mean the democrats are in favor of spending tax dollars to breed feral packs of pit bulls and turning the National Weather Service over to the Homosexual Agenda?

Maybe if Obama proposed to pardon Bush and Cheney the wingnuts would insist on a special prosecutor…

Alas, they’re not quite that bugf*ck yet.

That’s the logical extension of their views on women and reproduction - keep us unconscious, hooked up to machines, producing endless babies, just like God intended!

Don’t be silly.  How can you cook and clean if you’re unconscious?

3.  Make abortion illegal, with a special provision to make the father of any aborted fetus liable to arrest, as an accessory before the fact, as the abortion wouldn’t have taken place without their voluntary act in the first place.

Love this. 

Thing is, while I’m sure there would be outrage at some point, I bet your first response if you proposed this would be a blank look.  Sure, we need to punish the dirty slut and the murdering doctor, but what does the man have to do with it?

Also, expect the words “Don’t want to ruin some young man’s life” to be spoken at some point.

“your first response”=their response to you.  Sorry for the iffy grammar.

Democrats rescind support for rainbows, add tax break to the measure in attempt to get bipartisan consensus for puppy support.

Even when they already have all the votes they need for puppy support!

Here’s an idea: a Constitutional amendment guaranteeing a right to privacy.  The Right will fall all over themselves to oppose it and end up looking like assholes in the process. 

Yes, I know the right to privacy is already implicitly in there, but the Right would certainly never oppose the amendment on those grounds, since they’d never admit it was already in there in the first place.

It’s a win-win, all around.

“and then the autopsy showed that her skull was full of cerebro-spinal fluid instead of brain”

But what about her soul???

Seraph

<u>expect the words “Don’t want to ruin some young man’s life” to be spoken at some point.</u>

in which case I would explain that there should be an exception if the man in question is a victim of sexual assault/rape, or was an “involuntary sperm donor”.

in which case I would explain that there should be an exception if the man in question is a victim of sexual assault/rape, or was an “involuntary sperm donor”.

Oh, no.  You can’t do that.  Don’t you know men will just lie about being raped so they can escape the consequences of their actions?

“and then the autopsy showed that her skull was full of cerebro-spinal fluid instead of brain”

But what about her soul???

Did the doctors recover her pineal gland?

Paul, I wonder what the National Weather Service would look like in the hands of the Homosexual Agenda.

“and then the autopsy showed that her skull was full of cerebro-spinal fluid instead of brain.”

Don’t forget being blind as well as deaf and had been that way for years.

Well…yeah…since her brain wasn’t actually brain anymore.  Thought that was obvious. 

It decayed to nothing, despite nutrients being forced into her system.  Cause that’s what the body does when we prolong life…it decays anyway, wherever it can.  Hence the general “creeped” out factor most of us feel about being kept alive by machines when our brains stop working.

Well…yeah…since her brain wasn’t actually brain anymore.  Thought that was obvious.

It is, but considering how much of the Preserve-the-Corpse faction’s argument was based on her supposed response to voices and pretty ballons, it’s worth emphasizing.

If the Republicans are looking to the long haul, which they frequently do, seating Roland Burris is a very good thing for them.  The man cannot win the Senate seat under his own steam; he’s a nonentity.  If he’s seated now and runs again in 2010, the Republican candidate will likely beat him.

“on her supposed response to voices and pretty ballons, it’s worth emphasizing”

As well as the nurse that was trotted out that claimed Terry was sitting at the nurse’s station cracking jokes and talking to people while still supposedly comatose.

As ever, it comes down to the Base. The Base is life.

I must not pander to the Base… the Base is the mindkiller, the little death that brings total oblivion…

Paul, I wonder what the National Weather Service would look like in the hands of the Homosexual Agenda.

I’m imagining a titanic, purple, gay hurricane named “Mary” whirling in from the gulf and smacking Florida with $1,000,000 in homo-home-damage. Random men and women waking up in bed with other men or women, instead of their spouses. A general reshuffling of society… heretofore un-expressed desire blooming in the disheveled street. Mary then splits into two parts. One slowly heads east for parts unknown. The other remnant slowly drags across the continental United States, degenerating into a tropical storm, and finally into a lavender rain which branches everywhere and subtly queers the nation. The atmosphere feels a degree darker, and full of electric charge. Pleasant, but a little strange to the sunlit, heterosexual world that most are familiar with.

Let’s face it, the Rep’s attack on Reid is like a kitten “playing with a small bird.”

The kitten isn’t very powerful at all, but it’s found a pathetic little thing it can
easily toss around.

I mean, Reid asked for it.  Could he have handled this worse?

Caren, I thought that she did actually have a brain (and therefore could have responded, on a very simple level, to visual and auditory cues), but that her brain had shrunk to approximately half of its pre-accident volume.

It comes to pretty much the same thing, I guess. In either case, she would not have had an adult consciousness ever again.

I think they keep bringing this up because Schaivo’s husband wasn’t exactly a sympathetic character, and his lawyer, rather than spending the money to demonstrate her degree of incapacity, worked with him to lock her away from scientific evaluation of her condition by independent evaluators - even when medical societies offered to select those evaluators.

I thought a big part of the problem was that HE SAID she wanted one thing, while her parents said she wanted another, and IT WAS NEVER WRITTEN DOWN.  How and when did that make his statement of what he thought the correct one?  Other than he seemed to tell her what to say in life ...

Control freaks?  Yep.  In fact, some might point out that she would not have fallen into that cardiac arrest state had it not been for her control freak husband insisting that she stay unnaturally thin.

I get tired of the sanctification of this rank misogynist by the left just because it pisses off the right wing.  Sorry, but they are ALL DOUCHEBAGS IN THEIR OWN WAY - her parents, her husband, her husband’s lawyer - douchebags! Every last one of them.  I don’t give a crap who rallied around which side, either.  That doesn’t make Mr. Schiavo any less of a pig.

Ms Kate:

Terri Schiavo’s cerebral cortex was essentially gone; her eventual death was a done deal and the person that the Schindlers raised and Michael Schiavo married had been gone for years. This was a well-known fact. As to allegations of abuse, they were never substantiated and came entirely from a family in deep, deep denial about their daughter’s condition.

Brian, it isn’t that simple.

Her husband and his lawyer had a huge motive: money.  They could have ended all the bullshit if they had her taken for an MRI and submitted the results to the court.

There is also some debate as to whether the level of brain activity she still had that kept her breathing without a ventilator and responding to some stimuli is life or death.

Like I said, not that simple.

Her husband was a well-known control freak - before he met her, while she met all criteria for being alive.  It wasn’t just her parents saying that.  That may not meet the legal criteria for abuse, but it does meet the criteria for douchebag and misogynist.

I think they keep bringing this up because Schaivo’s husband wasn’t exactly a sympathetic character, and his lawyer, rather than spending the money to demonstrate her degree of incapacity, worked with him to lock her away from scientific evaluation of her condition by independent evaluators - even when medical societies offered to select those evaluators.

I don’t think you’re being entirely fair to Michael Schiavo.  By the time the whole situation went national, he’d already been fighting her parents for over a decade and had won multiple court cases with every judge agreeing that his wife would not have wanted to be kept in a persistent vegetative state and every court-appointed medical consultant agreeing that she would never recover.  From his POV, letting yet another “expert” (or even expert) examine her to get the exact same news one more time—news that he already knew would not be accepted by his in-laws—would be pointless and take him right back to the beginning of the process.  I can’t really blame him for not wanting to drag the circus out even longer even if it made him look like an asshole.

My brother is very conservative and the one thing that got him started thinking that maybe he was wrong about Michael Schiavo was finding out that she had no bedsores after 15 years in a PVS.  Here’s a PDF of the autopsy report.  My brother was in the hospital for a year after a serious car accident, so he knows how easy it is to get bedsores.  He was reluctantly impressed at the level of care she must have been receiving.

Her husband and his lawyer had a huge motive: money.  They could have ended all the bullshit if they had her taken for an MRI and submitted the results to the court.

She could NOT have an MRI—she had experimental metal implants in her brain that were designed to stimulate her brain.  (Again, see the autopsy or Google for it.)  Getting an MRI would have torn them out of place and done much more harm than good.  Doctors were unwilling to subject her to more brain surgery just so she could have an MRI.

They did have multiple CAT scans, all of which the courts accepted as showing exactly what Michael and his lawyers said—that she was in a persistent vegetative state with no hope of recovery because her brain was too damaged.

I think you may need to refresh your memory on the facts of the case, because you’re misremembering some of the details and using them to bash Michael Schiavo.

“I never heard the story about the nurse claiming to have talked to her and joked with her. “

She was spewing her crap on Fox News and any other network that allowed her on. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,201998,00.html

“rather than spending the money to demonstrate her degree of incapacity, worked with him to lock her away from scientific evaluation of her condition by independent evaluators - even when medical societies offered to select those evaluators. “

You may want to fact check that. She had been diagnosed for a number of years as being in a persistant vegetative state in fact the first diagnosis was a year after being admitted to the hospital. Numerous followups confirmed the initial diagnosis The parents were the ones who argued she was conscious despite all medical tests showing otherwise. Michael wanted the courts to rule against the parents since they were interfering with his legal efforts to have the feeding tube removed.

“.  In fact, some might point out that she would not have fallen into that cardiac arrest state had it not been for her control freak husband insisting that she stay unnaturally thin. “

Then why did he win a malpractice lawsuit against his wife’s physician for not recognizing that she had bulimia?

Ms. Kate -

Her husband was a well-known control freak - before he met her, while she met all criteria for being alive.  It wasn’t just her parents saying that.  That may not meet the legal criteria for abuse, but it does meet the criteria for douchebag and misogynist.

Source, please? One that doesn’t link back directly either Terri’s parents, lawyers hired by her parents, or anyone else who was on the side of the parents.

I’m serious, I would be open to this information if there *was* any proof for making those assumptions. So far, I’ve seen none. It looks like a PR spin to me.

Don’t you know men will just lie about being raped

In that case, men will have to be separated from women in the workplace and in public so as to protect them from the predatory, sperm-stealing succubi that MRA supporters apparently run into on a regular basis in our society. 

I have strong legal ground for my proposal:

An accessory is a person who assists in the commission of a crime, but who does not actually participate in the commission of the crime as a joint principal. The distinction between an accessory and a principal is a question of fact and degree:

  * The principal is the one whose acts or omissions, accompanied by the relevant mens rea, are the most immediate cause of the actus reus (Latin for “guilty act”).
  * If two or more people are directly responsible for the actus reus, they can be charged as joint principals (see common purpose). <u>The test to distinguish a joint principal from an accessory is whether the defendant independently contributed to causing the actus reus</u> rather than merely giving generalised and/or limited help and encouragement.

..................................................................................

Conspiracy

In some jurisdictions,  there are exceptions. In some situations, a charge of conspiracy can be made even if the primary offense is never committed, so long as the plan has been made, and at least one overt act towards the crime has been committed by at least one of the conspirators. Thus, an accessory before the fact will often, but not always, also be considered a conspirator. A conspirator must have been a party to the planning the crime, rather than merely becoming aware of the plan to commit it and then helping in some way.

A person who incites another to a crime will become a member of a conspiracy if agreement is reached, and may then be considered an accessory or a joint principal if the crime is eventually committed.

In the United States, a person who learns of the crime and gives some form of assistance before the crime is committed is known as an “accessory before the fact”. A person who learns of the crime after it is committed and helps the criminal to conceal it, or aids the criminal in escaping, or simply fails to report the crime, is known as an “accessory after the fact”. A person who does both is sometimes referred to as an “accessory before and after the fact”, but this usage is less common.

Criminal facilitation

In some jurisdictions, criminal “facilitation” laws do not require that the primary crime be actually committed as a prerequisite for criminal liability. These include state statutes making it a crime to “provide” a person with “means or opportunity” to commit a crime, “believing it probable that he is rendering aid to a person who intends to commit a crime.”[1]

OTOH, it will encourage traditional marriage:

Exceptions

In many jurisdictions a person may not be charged as an accessory to a crime committed by his or her spouse. This is related to the traditional privilege not to testify against an accused spouse, and the older idea that a wife was completely subject to the orders of a husband, whether lawful or illegal.

As a side effect, there will no doubt be more funding for a reliable male contraceptive,  but some Bible-thumpers would say that’s a bug, not a feature.

To add a little to Brian X and Mnemosyne: Michael Schiavo also spent the first year or two (don’t remember exactly how long, I was way better read on this at the time) that Terri was hospitalized getting a nursing degree so that he could help with her care and help with her rehabilitation when she got well and came home. During the course of his studies he apparently came to the realization that it was hopelessly optimistic to think that she was going to recover (based on her medical records, which he was then able to more clearly understand) and made the decision that she should be taken off of support. Which is when the parents went from loving him to hating him and the lawsuits began.

The allegations of abuse came up when her parents were trying to gain control of the situation and didn’t have a legal leg to stand on unless they could convince a court that by letting Mr. Schiavo determine Terri’s fate it would be letting him cover up a crime. So voila, a crime was decided upon, and once that route had been started down there was no going back for them.

Now if I had to choose between a man saying that his wife had an eating disorder and her parents saying that he was abusive I would likely lean towards the parents, unless I was told of the years of care the husband put into getting the best possible treatment for his wife and seeing the parents glom onto any fragile moment that could prop up their belief that one day they would get their perfect shining princess back. The truth may lie somewhere between the two parties, but I think it’s closer to Mr. Schiavo than to the parents. Just my opinion though.

Her brain had shrunk to half it’s normal volume, but also, what brain was left was faaaar from healthy.  It was just rotting/disolving in her skull; the body had no use for it, so it was recycling the nutrients.

I get tired of the sanctification of this rank misogynist by the left just because it pisses off the right wing.

Ms Kate

I’m not “sanctifying” anyone… who was sanctifying Mr. Schiavo?

We were pointing out the absurdity of claims that Ms. Schiavo could ever again become conscious.

Whether Mr. Schiavo was an evil sleazebucket, a decent person, or a great guy, is totally irrelevant.

“she had experimental metal implants in her brain that were designed to stimulate her brain. “

She had numerous therapies administered and it was her husband who led the efforts. It was her husband who was the one that the nursing home facilities said was at her side constantly and led the efforts to get the staff to give her and other patients excellent care. It was her husband who became a nurse to give her more care.

I’m not making these statements just because they piss off some right wingers, either. I don’t know how you get that from what any of us actually said.

Ms. Kate:

I think you are being unfair to Mr. Schiavo.  If I recall correctly it wasn’t just a he said/ they said situation between the parents.  The trial court was scrupulous and detailed in its examination of the facts and came to the firm conclusion that Terry S. did not want to be kept artificially “alive”.  Indeed, it was the religious right’s determination to a- ignore all the evidence, b- make up evidence, and c- lie like mad about the lower courts which caused a great deal of the backlash.

Despite an agonizingly careful examination of all the available facts it isn’t known why Ms. Schiavo had her seizure.  To assert that it was a freak of a husband in the absence of evidence to that effect puts you in the same camp as the righties who assert that he beat her.

“isn’t known why Ms. Schiavo had her seizure. “

The undiagnosed bulimia is suspected to have contributed. Diuretics such as iced tea and bulimia do not mix.

“The trial court “

It was more then one court as well.

“evidence, b- make up evidence, and c- lie”

don’t forget d- make death threats against the husband and his family as well as the federal judge who had the last court round. Quite a few fundies wound up in prison for these threats and the fbi got involved.

Just like the Dover case showed these fundnuts are real eager to get thrown into the slammer for making death threats against judges.

Ms. Kate said “Her husband and his lawyer had a huge motive: money.”

From Wiki:
“On March 11, 2005, media tycoon Robert Herring (who believes that stem cell research could have cured Schiavo’s condition) offered $1 million to Michael Schiavo if he agreed to cede his guardianship to his wife’s parents.[fn68: “Allred, Gloria, Esq. “Statement from Gloria Allred, Attorney-at-Law, Representing Robert Herring, Sr.:,” Christian Wire Service, March 10, 2005”] The offer was rejected; George Felos, attorney for Michael Schiavo, described it as offensive, adding that Michael had rejected other monetary offers, including one of $10 million [uncited]”.

Note also the thirty-ish false complaints about abuse all designed to create lies to prevent Ms. Schiavo’s court-recognized wish not to be left in this state.

tootiredoftheright noted…“don’t forget d- make death threats against the husband and his family as well as the federal judge who had the last court round. Quite a few fundies wound up in prison for these threats and the fbi got involved.”

True.  I had not realized how much I had come to take the lunacy of the American right for granted until I was in a conversation with an English friend.  I reduced her to laughter when I used, without realizing it and without irony, this sentence while explaining the Schiavo case to her:  “The judge who heard the case now has to have armed bodyguards because of the number of death-threats from right-to-lifers”.

Now if I had to choose between a man saying that his wife had an eating disorder and her parents saying that he was abusive I would likely lean towards the parents, unless I was told of the years of care the husband put into getting the best possible treatment for his wife and seeing the parents glom onto any fragile moment that could prop up their belief that one day they would get their perfect shining princess back.

Last minute allegations of abuse always make me suspicious.  The Miami relatives of Elian Gonzalez tried to claim abuse in the 11th hour, and it was so preposterous even their supporters didn’t glom onto it.

“I have very little doubt that making sure that they crippled Michael Schiavo’s ability to move on with his life was part of the motivation of keeping Terri’s body alive.”

Polish your crystal ball ‘cuz it ain’t workin’ you brain dead skank.

Somewhat related: One of my favorite little dirty indulgences involves lurking freeper threads where life support for a POOR person comes up.

Life support + taxpayer responsibility = conservative mindfuck.

Joy

Got any links?

Still Congested: a gift for you.

http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2jdhlro&s=5