[NoSump]

I wouldn't mind taking the two Senators from Maine, Chaffee and Spector if you would take Byrd and Lieberman. I don't know what's up with Joe lately? Weird.

Actually, Spector is from PA. He was the member of the Warren Commission that came up with the "single bullet" theory. The other Maine Senator is Olympia Snow (both Chaffee and Snow are borderline Republicans - there must be somthing in the water up there). The issue with Lieberman is that is he has been willing to put the national interest above partisan politics (a cardinal sin in the Democratic Party). Byrd would not be a good "jumper", he clearly has Democratic crosses to bear (no pun intended).

I better get some work done. I am flying out to Indianapolis this afternoon. I plan to try and visit that supplier that you had recommended (Inland Aquatics, in Terre Haute) again, if I have time. Take care.

Chuck

[Ninong]

Originally Posted by NoSump

Actually, Spector is from PA. He was the member of the Warren Commission that came up with the "single bullet" theory. The other Maine Senator is Olympia Snow (she is a "borderline" Republican). The issue with Lieberman is that is he has been willing to put the national interest above partisan politics (a cardinal sin in the Democratic Party). Byrd would not be a good "jumper", he clearly has Democratic crosses to bear (no pun intended).

I better get some work done. I am flying out to Indianapolis this afternoon. I plan to try and visit that supplier that you had recommended (Inland Aquatics, in Terre Haute) again, if I have time. Take care.

Chuck

I know Spector's from Pennsylvania. I lived there for 3 years!

What I'm saying is that I like both of the women Senators from Maine, plus Spector plus Chaffee. Chaffee should really be a Democrat anyway. I'm not wild about Spector but if he wanted to switch, that would be fine with me.

[almostdiva]

Originally Posted by Ninong

Huey Long was before my time, believe it or not, but I have met both Earl Long and Russell Long and I didn't think much of either of them, although they were both typical of Louisiana Democrats of their day.

I know you're post-Earl (as it were..). I didn't know however that there even WAS a Russell. What did he do?

My mom lives in Maine. I am constantly envious that she gets to have 2 such smart, reasonable, balanced senators, both of whom happen to be women.

Let's remember, before we go auctioning off Arlen, that he was the one who came up with the "magic bullet" theory re the Kennedy assn...

[Ninong]

Originally Posted by almostdiva

I know you're post-Earl (as it were..). I didn't know however that there even WAS a Russell. What did he do?

I'm not post-Earl, I'm post-Huey. Huey was assassinated in 1935. Russell was Huey's son. He served in the U. S. Senate for 39 years from 1948 until 1987. Huey was more a Socialist than a Democrat. Earl was more a madman than anything else. Russell was a typical Southern Democrat.

My mom lives in Maine. I am constantly envious that she gets to have 2 such smart, reasonable, balanced senators, both of whom happen to be women.

California has two women Senators -- one a liberal Democrat and the other a moderate-to-conservative Democrat.

[NoSump]

Originally Posted by Ninong

I'm not wild about Spector but if he wanted to switch, that would be fine with me.

That's big of you to accept him, especially given the narrow edge that exists in the Senate

It's an interesting pattern that's developing in New England. It appears that in order to be elected, you have to be a pro defense/fiscal conservative, but liberal on social issues. I think that's why they are electing 'liberal" Republicans. On the other side of that same coin is Lieberman. The differences between Lieberman, Chaffee and Snow are marginal. If the Dems could lose their fixation with higher taxes, they could sweep New England, much as the Republicans now control the southern states.

I guess we've gotten a bit off topic on the Schiavo court battles.

[almostdiva]

Originally Posted by Ninong

I'm not post-Earl, I'm post-Huey.

Typed wrong.... I think faster than I type and this is sometimes the result. I apparently also was typing at the same time as No Sump!

My mom sez the reason the republicans in ME are so moderate/basically social liberals is that, with the exception of places like Blue Hill and Kennebunkport, many of the people in Maine are very middle-class or below economically/income speaking, so the Senators are actually SPEAKING for their constituents on things like welfare, etc. (crazy idea, huh?).

And, YES, we do digress... I guess because nothing more is likely to happen today.

[almostdiva]

The full 12-judge panel of the 11th Curcuit has just rejected the parents' appeal.

And in Fl. The senator sponsoring the bill (as Ninong mentioned previously) can't get enough senators to go along and pass the bill requiring that a feeding tube remain in place in cases where there is dispute amongst the relatives.

Looks like this is FINALLY winding down.

[Biomanjcs72]

They can go to the supreme court now - but since the Supreme court has already denied to hear the case twice - and they are historically unlikely to overturn an appeals denial - I don't see it happening - but - then again - I could be wrong..

[Ninong]

Originally Posted by Biomanjcs72

They can go to the supreme court now - but since the Supreme court has already denied to hear the case twice -

I think it was actually three times but those were all appeals from state courts. This will be an appeal from a federal court. However, I agree that the Supreme Court probably won't take it. I wish they would. In fact, I think they should.

In all three of the appeals from state courts, Justice Kennedy brought in the other members of the court.

I would like to see some way for the Supreme Court to address the constitutionality of the statute that transferred the case from state court to federal court.

[Ninong]

Originally Posted by almostdiva

And in Fl. The senator sponsoring the bill (as Ninong mentioned previously) can't get enough senators to go along...

That's because there are nine Republicans in the Florida Senate who are firmly opposed to any new legislation. Jeb Bush's first "Terri's Law" was ruled unconstitutional months later by the Florida Supreme Court.

[almostdiva]

Originally Posted by Ninong

That's because there are nine Republicans in the Florida Senate who are firmly opposed to any new legislation. Jeb Bush's first "Terri's Law" was ruled unconstitutional months later by the Florida Supreme Court.

Huzzah for them!

I knew "Terry's Law" had been struck down.

We're winding down, folks.

[Biomanjcs72]

I doubt they'll tackle that issue - interesting thing is that the court will almost never render an opinion on something unless it is directly warranted. i.e. they'll just issue a ruling on the merits of the case -

If someone were to challenge the constitutionality of the bill - then they'd "have" to rule on it - but otherwise - I bet if they even take it (the Schaivo matter that is) - they'll just weigh in on the specific issue and leave it at that.

[Ninong]

Jeb Bush is trying to "take custody" of Terri Schiavo: http://abcnews.go.com/US/print?id=607930 I guess it's going to take a judge to order the state police to ignore any orders from the governor to kidnap her.

He claims that a new neurologist hired by the state has visited her in her room and proclaimed that she is capable of improving. He didn't actually examine her or anything like that but he did tell the governor what he wanted to hear.

Gov. Bush has a habit of ignoring any medical opinions that do not suit his personal agenda. Here is the full report of the Guardian Ad Litem: http://jb-williams.com/ts-report-12-03.htm If you don't read the entire report, at least skip down to the "Historical Facts in Theresa Marie Schiavo's Case" and read that.

[SPasse]

Ninong,

Oh boy… Here I go.

Background & Personal Story Here.

My mother was, probably from the teenage years, afflicted with severe manic depression.

In the early 1980’s she had a complete nervous breakdown and spent the rest of here life in mental institutions and finally, as her health failed nursing homes. She was physically dangerous to herself and others. She made numerous suicide attempts and on one occasion, I woke up with a steak knife being held to my throat.

I watched her slowly, over the cource of 20+ years, deteriorate from the person that I knew as my mother, into a tortured invalid. My father, who had scrimped and saved all of his life, had his fortune drained away, including all of the equity in his house.

My father passed in 1993 and it was left to me to look after my mother. I visited her in the nursing home every week and when she was “manageable” I took her out to dinner.

Slowly her physical health failed and eventually, in 2002 she stopped eating. Her doctor asked me if I wanted to her to be fitted with a feeding tube. I had to do some major soul searching. Did she really want to pass on from the hell she was living in, and this her way of saying so?

I decided to “error on the side of life” and have her get the feeding tube. As it happened, she really was ready to pass on and, in spite of the feeding tube, did pass so several weeks later.

I don’t regret my decision to have her get the feeding tube for one min. My conscious is clear in the knowledge that I did not starve her to death, simply because she was a “burden”

Now some vary disturbing “evidence” is coming to light in the Terri Schiavo case. Sworn depositions from two different RN’s speak of a woman that earlier in her institutionalization was conversationally lucid let alone not “in a persistent vegetative state”. There is mounting evidence that not only did Terrr Schiavo’s husband not allow physical therapy for Terry, but that he was actively cheerleading here demise because he wanted to collect her settlement/estate. One of the RN’s went on to swear that she actually overheard him ask out loud “when is that B**** going to die.

What really should be happening here is that Terrr Schiavo’s husband should be prosecuted, not have an innocent human life “starved to death”

We have crossed a Rubicon here. We are once again exploring a “culture of death” where humans that are a burden are expendable. National Socialism started out this way by euthanizing the feeble minded in the name of easing the burden of the helpless on society.

If you want to know why it is important that we don’t appoint any more judges that don’t support life, contemplate this; most of the federal circuit judges (that mattered) that ruled against Terry were Clinton appointees.

May God help this country…

Scott

[Ninong]

Scott,

The very disturbing "evidence" that you speak of was dismissed by the judge as "incredible."

Since you seem to truly believe that the husband should be prosecuted, I think you should read the official report of the Guardian Ad Litem. You will find that he dismisses all of the derogatory reports against the husband and practically canonizes him: http://jb-williams.com/ts-report-12-03.htm You can skip down to the history part if you like.

So something doesn't add up here. The 19 judges (many of them Republican conservatives) in six different courts and all of the court-appointed doctors have examined all of the evidence, including what you refer to as "disturbing evidence," and have reached conclusions entirely different than what Randall Terry and the other advisors to the parents are presenting to the public.

They can't all be correct. I prefer to think that the court system is competent to evaluate all of the evidence in this case and reach the best possible decision.

[Ninong]

Scott,

The 11th. Circuit ruled 10-2. Seven of the judges on the 11th. Circuit are Republicans. Did Clinton appoint Republican judges?

The question of Terri Schiavo's wishes in this matter has been adjuticated. The courts heard from others who testified that she expressed her wishes that she would never want to be hooked up to feeding tubes. This was not just the testimony of her husband. Joan Schiavo and Scott Schiavo both testified that it was Terri's expressed wish that she would never want to be hooked up to a feeding tube. I believe it came up during the discussion of a movie or T.V. program where that issue was part of the story line. The judge found their testimony credible and convincing. The Guardian Ad Litem discusses this exact point in his report to the court.

BTW, if you are watching Fox News, you are misinformed because they have consistently misrepresented the facts in this case and they have given air time to "self-promoting" quacks whose claims to Nobel Prize nominations are totally phony. Bill O'Reilly repeatedly claimed that it was the testimony of the husband alone that convinced the court that Terri would not want extraordinary life-support measures. That's not true.

[SPasse]

Ninong,

I was referring to the three judge panel that ruled today, I don’t recall the circuit number, but two of the three judges were identified as Clinton appointees.

I will track down the particulars.

Also I am trying to track down what could be an urban legend, perhaps not. Some thing to the effect that Terrie’s original brain trauma was consistent with the kind of blunt force trauma associated with say a “baseball bat”

I read the Guardian Ad Litem report, and listened to his interview on NPR.

Your right, something dosen’t add up… I guess we are discussing which side of the equation we are trying to normalize…

Regards,

Scott

[Ninong]

Originally Posted by SPASSE

Ninong,

I was referring to the three judge panel that ruled today, I don’t recall the circuit number, but two of the three judges were identified as Clinton appointees.

It has already been turned down by the full court. The three-judge paned ruled 2-1 and then the full court ruled 10-2. Seven of the judges on that court are Republicans. I assume that Clinton did not appoint any of the Republicans.

The Guardian Ad Litem's report covers the cause of her medical problem in detail. There is no mention of blunt force trauma.

[Ninong]

Originally Posted by SPASSE

Ninong,

I was referring to the three judge panel that ruled today, I don’t recall the circuit number, but two of the three judges were identified as Clinton appointees.

I will track down the particulars.

Scott,

Here are the 12 judges of the 11th. Circuit: http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/about/judges.php

The first 7 judges were appointed prior to January 1993. The next four judges are Clinton appointees and the last judge was appointed by George W. Bush. There are five Democrats, four appointed by Clinton and one appointed by Carter. The six Republicans who were not appointed by the current President were appointed by Presidents Ford, Reagan and George H. W. Bush.

This court is considered one of the more conservative circuits. I'm sure that if this case had gone to the 9th. Circuit we would never hear the end of it on Fox News.

[Ninong]

Scott,

This is interesting. Of the two dissenting judges, one was appointed by Clinton and the other was appointed by Ford.

http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200511556.pdf

Wilson was appointed by Clinton and Tjoflat was appointed by Ford.