Legislation resulting from Schiavo fallout

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

It strikes me that in their willingness to trip over themselves on this issue, Republicans have offered up more than a few sound bytes that, if we are on our toes, we could use quite to our advantage.

Here is my list of proposed legislation that should be introduced just a few weeks after Terri Schiavo does finally find rest:

1) "Oh, but Terri is STARVING and no one should starve in America!!" -pretty much any Republican and/or religious funadmentalist

You know, it's funny, but I actually agree with the Rethugs on this one. No one SHOULD starve in America. As such, it would be my plan pass legislation that would open up 1 new homeless shelter for every 100,000 people in a given metropolitan area. These shelters would provide food and clothing for those who cannot afford to eat, so that not only would no American ever have to starve to death, but they also would not have to freeze to death either.

2) "This woman was denied what should have been her Americans with Disabilities Act protections and other protections. The possibility of rehab, speech pathology, and a whole host of other enhancements to her life. She was denied that since 1993." -Congressman Chris Smith, R-NJ, March 23, 2005

Again, I'm amazed at how much concern the GOP shows for those less fortunate than us. Couldn't agree more. As such, I would pass a sweeping reform of our health care system, providing every American with the treatment they need in order to recover or cope with their ailments. While we're at it, I will appropriate $1 billion towards unrestricted stem cell research so we can find a cure for Terri Schiavo, Michael J Fox, and every other American with a disability.

3) "If a prisoner comes forward with new DNA evidence 20 years after his conviction, suggesting his innocence, there is no doubt that the courts in our state or all across the country, for that matter, would immediately review his case. We should do no less for Terri Schiavo." -Jeb Bush, March 22, 2005

Absolutely right. As such, we're ending the death penalty. After all, if the person is dead, we can't go back and find out he didn't commit a crime and make it right, can we?

4) "It is always wise to err on the side of life." -George W. Bush, March 22, 2005

Should I just apply for GOP membership now, or what? Because I completely agree, yet again, that you should always err on the side of life. And with that said, we will pass new resolutions expressing the sentiment that pre-emptive wars should never be started without at least meeting the same burden of evidence that a government is expected to meet when dealing with Americans accused of a crime.

Now, surely, there shouldn't be any problems in getting this legislation passed. After all, they said themselves that these are huge moral problems, and I have proposed the best possible solutions to them. Or do they not mean what they say?

[Nite Owl]

1. The Dems have so many openings

to use their words for our legislation that you could drive a truck through them. Will they?

[Inland]

2. They don't mean what they say.

That's why there ISN'T any new legislation coming out of this.

The Fla legislature, and maybe Congress, could stop this in a moment by passing a law requiring feeding. Just that simple.

But that would be horrifically unpopular. People would freak. There was a reason the law reflects the ability for the individual's wishes to be enforced, and that is because that is exactly what people want.

Instead of new legislation, the righties are declaring that the Schiavo case is "unprecedented" and "extraordinary", as in, "since this is the only case of its kind I am not a hypocrite for failing to address any of the other situations of life, death, health care, feeding implicated in public policy." There AREN'T going to be any changes, and the fundies are never going to forgive Bush for it.

[HamstersFromHell]

3. Wonderful post!

Nominated.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

4. Why thank you!

[Kinkistyle]

5. Exactly. Repugs are selfish, greedy, fanatical hypocrites

Your post shows them up for EXACTLY what they are. They are blatant hypocrites who "believe" in one thing until they themselves are affected, in which case they will immediately switch positions. Just like the so-called "moral right" who try to impose their religious and moral positions on everyone - that is until they themselves get caught violating their own morals at which point they will beg forgiveness and leniency. Makes me sick.

[wryter2000]

6. Well done!

:yourock:

BTW, my officemate is one of my barometers for opinions of reasonable conservatives. She told me she liked what Boosh had said about erring on the side of life. I told her, "then maybe he shouldn't have started a war." A dozen lightbulbs went off in her head on that one.

[Helga Scow Stern]

7. This is all about attacking the courts.

Watch. This isssue will be hammered over and over on right wing radio stations as a justification to use the nuclear option so no argument can be given regarding *'s appointees.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

9. The judges in question are Republican though.

[adwon]

8. Nice idea!

Truman did something just like this in 1948. His challenge was, essentially, "Republicans claim to care about education, health, and welfare. Time to put up or shut up."

Excellent!

[Patiod]

10. Here, here!

Excellent post.