The Real Schiavo Agenda for the Right

I was listening to Randi Rhodes on Air America Radio and she made such a great point that I just never put together regarding the Schiavo mess. I think it is in part due to the fact that I really try to not read or listen or watch anything having to do with this case, but also just the genious of another person in seeing the obvious.

The Right is going to use this whole fiasco — which they know they are in the wrong and going to lose — to label the judges siding with THE LAW OF THE LAND as out-of-control liberal judges who will ruin the pure system our founding fathers yadda yadda yadda, you know the spiel. And they are going to appoint über conservative judges in the circuit courts and to the Supreme Court to overturn such laws. Doesn't seem like much of a stretch, does it?

Why else would W fly back from vacation to sign this thing in person in D.C.? This is the only vacation he's ever interrupted and he's been on vacation for what, almost 40% of his presidency? When Condi read aloud the now infamous August 6^th 2001 PDB [download it here] to him entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US" he didn't rush back to D.C. He could very well have signed the thing in his vacation home, but nooooo, he had to make a big stink because it was a great issue for them.

The Repugs even have an alleged Nobel Prize nominated doctor on the FOX talkshow circuit. I listened to some clips on the Al Franken Show of Hannity constantly referring to this doc as a Nobel Prize nominee and once as a Nobel Peace Prize nominee. This guy was "nominated" by a random Repug from Florida who has ABSOLUTELY NO SAY in the nomination process. In addition, the Nobel Prize committee doesn't reveal the names of the nominees like they're receiving Oscars.

What's your conspiracy theory?

Comments

[howard]

About labeling the judges who oppose reinserting the feeding tube:
Some legal experts have predicted that if this case does find its way in front of the U.S. Supreme Court, one of the people who would be least likely to want to overturn the decision would be C.J. William Rehnquist -- mainly because of his strict conservative leanings (which in this case would be much truer to conservativism than what Congress and Bush have done).
I personally believe that this tactic of labeling judges who oppose Congressional intent as out-of-control liberals is part of the thinking for many in Congress; but I think that because of conservatives like Rehnquist, who are likely more indignant about this congressional intrusion than most liberals tend to be, this end-run will ultimately fail. And if it's the conservative judges who harpoon this whale of a legislative effort, congressional Republicans will lose on two fronts.
See? there could be a happy ending in this somewhere...

[dragonballyee]

once can only hope

[Chloe]

Apparently one theory is that they want to go after living wills too...

As the National Right to Life notes on its Web site (www.nrlc.org), living wills are used “to condition public acceptance of assisted suicide, mercy killing, and euthanasia.”
By and large, religious extremists lost their fight against living wills legislation. But Schiavo’s case appears to have re-energized the movement’s opposition to living wills, in the guise of opposition to euthanasia and assisted suicide.

I was just saying somewhere else that I think their agenda is that they don't want anyone to die. At all. Ever. But now after reading this blog post, I think some people's agenda IS a ploy for control.. That THEY can make the decisions of whether someone lives or dies... and a plethora of other decisions for people.

[Matt]

i see the judicial angle, but at root I think it's all about paying back the base for the november election.

I'm just so happy to see how grossly they miscalculated this one, and how horrible they look pontificating from their supposedly high moral perch when it's obvious to everyone who looks that they are using terri shiavo's body as a political football.