Posted on 03/30/2005 11:20:36 AM PST by churchillbuff
So you're another freeper who thinks it's fine that a backwater probate judge can order local cops to resist the state child-protection agency, and the law enforcement agency of the governor, --- and nobody does or says anything about it? Ronald Reagan - who fired the PATCO union slackers without a second thought -- wouldn't have put up with this insurrection by "Judge" Greer.
I'm sorry, but Alan Keyes does not speak for Ronald Reagen. The man is dead, so its easy to ascribe opinions to him as he is not here to refute them.
Keyes and a number of folks on this forum are all wrong on this. Niether Bush could do anything to stop what has happened without committing an impeachable offense. Alan Keyes (and a bunch of FReepers) would suggest that the proper thing to do would be break the law, violate the constitution, get impeached and get booted out of office. Would Dr. Keyes do that? He talks a good game, but he wouldn't have the stones. Hell, he'd never have the chance because he would never have been in office in the first place. Alan Keyes is an unelecatble idealogue.
The fact is that sometimes bad things happen. And some times good men can do nothing (short of becoming the bad guy) to stop it. Its unfornuate, but it is what it is.
Should Jeb or W gone in at gunpoint and siezed Terri (ala Elian Gonzolez)? Gee. let's think about that one...how did FReepers react to that? Let's assume that they did it and set the precendent and 6 years hence, there is another battle, this time the judge sides with the parents and the spouse wants to pull the plug, and there are countless stories of how ths person is truly in a vegitative state and its well documented that she did not want to be kept alive... and President Clinton decides to send in the troops to take the person away and let her die /pull the plug. Well, if its OK for W or Jeb to do it now, you'd have no problem with Hillary doing that, right?
We complain about how the Clintons had no respect for the constitution or the rule of law when they did things... yet now, there are FReepers bitching about W and Jeb not haveing the "stones" to break the law; that they are wrongfully respecting the Constitution and the rule of law.
I think its terrible that she is going to die. I think that the husband may have caused her current condition. I think the husband is creepy...that he should not be involved given the fact that he's got kids with another woman and some of the crap he pulled... but the fact is that he has effectively used the courts and has the authority to do what he is doing. If you don't like it, work to change the system and change the laws.
I agree with Keyes.
I truly believe that President Reagan would have stepped in to stop this murder.
The Governor and the President have the authority and Pres. Reagan would have exercised his authority. He did, when he bombed the Libyan President Qaddafi. Congress passed an unjust law, not to target the heads of State that were our enemies. We could only wage war, not target the sadistic dictators. Reagan said he was targeting something else, but everyone knew Omar Qaddafi was his real target.
The law was passed after the rumors that Kennedy had the CIA assassinate Diem in South Vietnam, our ally, not our enemy. Reagan could see through the unjust law Congress past that tied our hands against people like Qaddafi and acted. He acted quickly and decisively in Grenada too.
Pres. Reagan was a practical man, He would have helped Terri.
Eisenhower sent the federal troops into the South to protect the civil rights of people. I believe he also would have done something to protect Terri's civil right to life.
That's true, but he hasn't done it yet. Instead, he's allowed a backwater probate judge to mount an insurrection against a state agency and state law enforcers. Outrageous.
My disappointment over this current Bush is his handling of the border crisis, I'm not really sure what he or Reagan as president could do or have done. As governor though Reagan in California probably would have handled it differently than Jeb. He was of a totally different political breed.
You're right. Reagan's actions speak for Ronald Reagan. And the man who fired the insubordinate PATCO union slackers, wouldn't have allowed a county judge to deploy local police against a state agency and state law-enforcers. That's a rebellion, and Reagan wouldn't have stood for it.
They are all self-proclaimed and practicing pro-lifers. Actually maybe it is Conservatives against Republicans. [I don't know what Terry is, anybody?]
No, you're just an anti-war Bush-basher.
But I'm not going to bite. You are a Republican basher to your very core.
If you want to know my opinion, I suggest you look at my posts (or my tagline). And I know you care what I think. Everyone does.
It looks that way. I doubt that he understands the situation the way Keyes does. He's uncertain about what to do, so he goes with the status quo. Sad. But this demonstrates the importance of understanding and adhering to principles.
Psst, Reagan actually signed legislation legalizing a orm of abortion in California as Governor.
So far, most of the conservative minds I respect agree that the Bush brothers exhausted their power in this matter.
Several of them are attorneys.
You are on solid ground.
Morris' comment was what HE thought Reagan thought, not something based on an actual conversation. Since that autobiography has been discredited by just about everyone as being full of Morris' weird perceptions, I am amazed Morris is suddenly the authority on what Reagan thought of Bush 41.
Few people remember that Bush 41 had a Republican House and Senate, that they threatened to freeze the military budget during Desert Shield if he didn't raise taxes, and did it with the full intention of hammering him with it in the next election, aided and abetted by people like you.
You are always trying to alienate people from the President. You are the same person who said he was a war criminal.
Furthermore, since Keyes almost ocmpletely discredited himself in the Illinois senate race, I see no reason I should care about anything he says. He is nothing but a bomb-thrower who preys on gullible conservatives for cash.
No, you're just an anti-war Bush-basher.
The only reason Chamberlainbuff cares about this issue is because it gives him another chance to bash the President. I guarantee that if the President had violated the rule of law in this matter Neville would be the one crying loudest for impeachment.
I looked at your posts, and we're on the same page re. Judge Greer and impeachment ---- though "accepting hearsay evidence" wasn't legally forbidden; the pro-euthanasia forces in the LEgislature changed the law in the late 1990s to allow that. What Greer did that was wrong was say that the evidence was "clear and convincing" that Terri would want her feeding tube pulled. In actual fact, the evidence - even when the hearsay stuff was included - was and is ambiguous. the law requires that it be "clear and convincing," so Greer was ignoring the law when he ordered her death.
PATCO does not apply here. That was a business issue that affected the national economy. Firing the Air Traffic controllers was a labor issue. There is nothing that you can show me that would indicate that it was an ultra vires action on the part of Reagan. The Shiavo case isn't that simple. Reagan had firm beliefs, but he also respected the office of the Presidency, the Constitution and the Rule of Law. He would not have thrown those principles out the window. Unless you can show me a case on point, don't say that Reagan would have done it.
I don't blame him for complaining, actually. The family grieving the slow, gruesome death. The new nazi movment of our country undercover. And Keyes is convinced she can be saved. What's he supposed to do? Shut mouth and sit down?
Do you realise how much criticism Keyes could have been ranting about prior to this mess? He's been holding back for the good of the country. But where's School Choice? Where's the National Endowment of the Arts defunding? Where's the National Sales Tax? Drilling in the Gulf? If he were on the soap box over those issues, Bush would deserve it.
It does apply, because it showed that Reagan had courage to stir things up, in defense of his prerogatives as chief executive. Jeb's prerogatives as chief executive have been challenged by a local judge who has usurped executive power. So far, he's gotten away with it.
If a judge ordered a lynching, and the governor said he couldn't interfere with a court order, would you be OK with that -- as long as the governor was a Republican?
This is from a speech Reagan delivered in 1983. Did he do anything but call this tragic?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.