Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Republicans show political hypocrisy with Schiavo intervention
LP News ^ | 04/06/2005 | LP

Posted on 04/08/2005 5:00:59 PM PDT by libertarianben

Playing to the demands of their Christian-right base, Republicans chose to abandon even the slightest notion that they support states' rights in the case of Terri Schiavo.

(Excerpt) Read more at lp.org ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government
KEYWORDS: 109th; defendingmurder; eatingyourown; flamebaiters; judicialmurder; libertarianasses; libertarianparty; lp; lpdeathparty; lpfools; lpimmoral; onepercenters; pointohonepercenters; pointonepercenters; potheads; shiavo; statesrights
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-148 next last
Couldn't say it better.
1 posted on 04/08/2005 5:01:00 PM PDT by libertarianben
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: libertarianben
Yeah, and the Libertarian Party is no friend to Christians.

The LP has a lot in common with the Democrats in that way. That says a lot.


2 posted on 04/08/2005 5:04:04 PM PDT by rdb3 (To the world, you're one person. To one person, you may be the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben

The US Constitution guarantees certain rights. Among them are the right to life, liberty and the pursuit....

When indididual states are perceived to be violating those rights...the federal government has the right to investigate, legislate, and intervene to certain extents.


3 posted on 04/08/2005 5:04:52 PM PDT by rbmillerjr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rdb3

Bravo!


4 posted on 04/08/2005 5:05:07 PM PDT by CAluvdubya ("Deep in everybody's soul is the great desire to live in freedom"...George W. Bush 3-11-05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rdb3
"Republicans didn't support states rights!" It's the argument of a precosious 8th grader.
5 posted on 04/08/2005 5:06:51 PM PDT by zook
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben
Except of course that this wasn't a States Rights issue, it was an issue of Federal Civil Rights being violated.

If, for example, Montana ever decided to unilaterally declare martial law and suspend the Constitution (or just the parts that it didn't like), that would be a federal case, too. The Republicans wouldn't sit back and say, "Yo, that's cool."

TS

6 posted on 04/08/2005 5:07:21 PM PDT by Tanniker Smith (I teach Environmental Science in high school. Scary, isn't it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rdb3

LP News is much like LP Gas... Inflammatory, foul-smelling, and of no use to most of America unless tanked.


7 posted on 04/08/2005 5:09:13 PM PDT by Luddite Patent Counsel ("Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others." - Groucho Marx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben
If the libertarians will condone judicial tyranny and the horrific murder of an innocent woman, with no due process or authentic opprtunity for appeals, then they are not fit to be taken seriously by anyone, on any issue.

Buh Bye.

8 posted on 04/08/2005 5:09:28 PM PDT by FormerACLUmember (Honoring Saint Jude's assistance every day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben

Saw your screen name. Read your homepage. Both tell me all I need to know.

BTW, what's a parnet?


9 posted on 04/08/2005 5:10:13 PM PDT by Theresawithanh (Fee, Fie, Foe, FReep!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben

This cuts it for me. Even though I think of myself as having a libertarial bent, I can't support this juvenile "analysis".


10 posted on 04/08/2005 5:11:01 PM PDT by John Valentine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben

"Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"

The State of Florida failed to protect Terri's life and the GOP stepped in because it was the RIGHT thing to do. The Federal Court then failed to follow the instructions of Congress to review the facts of the case. What they did was rule on process and even that was flawed as the dissenting opinions clearly state.

The Congress screwed up because they did nothing to force the Court to review the facts as the Court was properly empowered and instructed to do.

If Congress' order was un-Constitutional the Federal Court could've vacated the order as such and made no ruling at all. Instead they accepted the jurisdictional grant and then failed to execute the order they were given jurisdiction to execute.

Finally, when individual rights are violated then state's rights are irrelevant. Every time.


11 posted on 04/08/2005 5:11:31 PM PDT by PeterFinn (The Holocaust was perfectly legal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben
Republicans such as Tom Delay, entrenched with his own ethics issues,...

If you guys want to develop any credibility you need to differentiate yourselves from the Democrats.

12 posted on 04/08/2005 5:12:14 PM PDT by facedown (Armed in the Heartland)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben
Regardless of your or anyone else's opinion - - - - I have just one question:

Was it RIGHT to starve a living Human Being to death?

The answer is NO! and no rational being can say anything different. All retoric aside - - - It was not proper to starve a human being to death. Cease and desist, any other opinion is wrong.

13 posted on 04/08/2005 5:13:49 PM PDT by Freeper (I was culture in the 60's and now with Clinton "running things" I am suddenly Counter-Culture.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben
IT is called the US Constitution, an American citizens rights and the rule of law.

That is what the Republicans were protecting.

14 posted on 04/08/2005 5:13:57 PM PDT by Diva Betsy Ross (Code pink stinks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben

Republicans support every state's right that is consonant with human rights in general, and the Bill of Rights in particular. It's not only disingenuous; it's positively monstrous to suggest that there is any such thing as a "state's right" to murder, or for that matter, to enslave, its citizens. Given the choice between mindless sophistry and the Rights of Man, commend me to the latter every time.


15 posted on 04/08/2005 5:14:31 PM PDT by Mr Ramsbotham (Laws against sodomy are honored in the breech.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theresawithanh

"BTW, what's a parnet?"

I believe it is early Aramaic (or was it Swahili?) for:

A confused liberal who mistakes oneself for a conservative.


16 posted on 04/08/2005 5:14:42 PM PDT by PeterFinn (The Holocaust was perfectly legal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: FormerACLUmember
If the libertarians will condone judicial tyranny and the horrific murder of an innocent woman, with no due process or authentic opprtunity for appeals, then they are not fit to be taken seriously by anyone, on any issue.

Not only that, but I highly suspect that the libertarians are the authors of the current cult of Death, to the extent they've argued that individuals have a property right vested in themselves.

17 posted on 04/08/2005 5:17:31 PM PDT by Mr Ramsbotham (Laws against sodomy are honored in the breech.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben

States have the right to kill innocent citizens? Cool! Let the killings begin! And if we can kill them, can't we also enslave them? States rights are awesome!


18 posted on 04/08/2005 5:18:54 PM PDT by TheDon (Euthanasia is an atrocity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rdb3; rbmillerjr



Opposing Federal intervention on the Shiavo case in is like opposing Federal intervention during Segregation.


19 posted on 04/08/2005 5:20:21 PM PDT by LauraleeBraswell ( CONSERVATIVE FIRST-Republican second)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: zook
""Republicans didn't support states rights!" It's the argument of a precosious 8th grader."

pretty much what they're learning in public schools...

20 posted on 04/08/2005 5:21:00 PM PDT by sageb1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: rdb3
And is appears that the LP has no issue with "Borking" Mr. Delay. That says a great deal about with whom we are speaking as well.
21 posted on 04/08/2005 5:21:32 PM PDT by Diva Betsy Ross (Code pink stinks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben

And we shouldn't have sent the FBI to Mississippi in the Sixties? Killing of civil rights workers was just a states rights issue?


22 posted on 04/08/2005 5:22:58 PM PDT by d2e
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LauraleeBraswell
Opposing Federal intervention on the Shiavo case in is like opposing Federal intervention during Segregation.

That's not an extreme comparison. Not at all.


23 posted on 04/08/2005 5:38:49 PM PDT by rdb3 (To the world, you're one person. To one person, you may be the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Luddite Patent Counsel

ROTFLMAO !!


24 posted on 04/08/2005 5:51:21 PM PDT by PatriotGirl827 (Would you rather be O.J.'s girlfriend or Michael Schiavo's fiancee? - Ann Coulter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Comment #25 Removed by Moderator

To: TheDon

lol


26 posted on 04/08/2005 6:06:56 PM PDT by FormerACLUmember (Honoring Saint Jude's assistance every day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben

There are a lot of arguments on both sides of this issue, but there is nothing wrong in the Congress & President wanting to have an independent review of the facts in the case, especially when a life was at stake.

It seems to me that a "life issue" trumps states' rights.

An accusations of hypocricy, especially in this case, is lame.


27 posted on 04/08/2005 6:07:33 PM PDT by Loyal Buckeye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lefty_insurgent

Go haunt some other house, troll.


28 posted on 04/08/2005 6:07:48 PM PDT by FormerACLUmember (Honoring Saint Jude's assistance every day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Loyal Buckeye

The essential problem, it seems to me, is the meaning of "clear and convincing evidence." Judge Greer was convinced, it seems, but many others were not.


29 posted on 04/08/2005 6:11:43 PM PDT by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben

The Schiavo case was about life and death which knows no boundaries. Standing for life is more important than any of the 50 States right to determine who lives or dies.


30 posted on 04/08/2005 6:13:20 PM PDT by sugarbabe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lefty_insurgent

I wonder why you haven't been zotted yet.


31 posted on 04/08/2005 6:16:53 PM PDT by TigersEye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

Comment #32 Removed by Moderator

To: lefty_insurgent

I still wonder why trolls troll...


33 posted on 04/08/2005 6:19:50 PM PDT by DBeers ()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben

LP News...about as exciting and factually sound as Dan Rather.


34 posted on 04/08/2005 6:24:30 PM PDT by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben

Some Libertarians will show themselves as frauds over this issue.

Without Life, there is no liberty.


35 posted on 04/08/2005 6:43:53 PM PDT by k2blader (If suicide is immoral, then helping it happen, regardless of motivation, is also immoral.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben

There's a reason Libertarians get zero votes.


36 posted on 04/08/2005 6:56:18 PM PDT by MikeHu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Diva Betsy Ross

If Terri's parents had only had the foresight to wedge a lit reefer between her lips, somewhere along the way: she'd be the Libertarian Party's designated pin-up girl for the remainder of the century. :)


37 posted on 04/08/2005 6:59:48 PM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle ("As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-G-d, PRO-LIFE..." -- FR founder Jim Robinson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Freeper
Was it RIGHT to starve a living Human Being to death?

The answer is NO! and no rational being can say anything different.

Yes, but the left will attempt to brand us rational folks as "hysterical."

38 posted on 04/08/2005 7:05:43 PM PDT by k2blader (If suicide is immoral, then helping it happen, regardless of motivation, is also immoral.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben; All

Ben,

LIFE IS NOT A STATE govt's OR A FEDERAL govt's ISSUE - IT'S A LIFE ISSUE.

What is it about LIFE that you do not get ..??

And .. if you want hypocrisy - check out the woman (Juliet Yackel - A&E 11pm PT) who worked round the clock to save the LIFE of a CONVICTED KILLER - while she never said a word or lifted a finger to save the life of an innocent disabled woman. You people make me sick.


39 posted on 04/08/2005 7:12:21 PM PDT by CyberAnt (President Bush: "America is the greatest nation on the face of the earth")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben
"Couldn't say it better."

You think THAT article speaks truth?

LOL!

Yo "LIBERALtarianben" why not just change your party to that of a Demoncrat. You have more in common with them then you care to admit. They too love murdering babies and now the disabled that are NOT terminal.
40 posted on 04/08/2005 7:15:50 PM PDT by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zook
"Republicans didn't support states rights!" It's the argument of a precosious 8th grader.

May I assume that you weren't too precocious?

;^)

41 posted on 04/08/2005 7:18:56 PM PDT by Constitution Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben

The Bill of Rights is part of Federal law. Any time a state breaks the law they invite the Feds in. This is not a states rights issue.


42 posted on 04/08/2005 7:22:10 PM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #43 Removed by Moderator

To: libertarianben

We heard all this from the pro-deathers already. Move on. Knock up some women and force them to get abortions to sate your blood lust if you must, it's completely legal, but quit preaching.

You'd make a great official in China, those that enforce the one child policy. You'd have a ball drowning the excess children.


44 posted on 04/08/2005 8:04:45 PM PDT by Duke Nukum (King had to write, to sing the song of Gan. And I had to read. How else could Roland find the Tower?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben

Yeah, that 'State's right to starve gimps to death' is one we all need to get behind. /sarcasm


45 posted on 04/08/2005 8:06:55 PM PDT by TigersEye (Are your parents Pro-Choice? I guess you got lucky! ... Is your spouse?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben
Democrats Show Political Hypocrisy With The Wal-mart Intervention. Take that, you Libertarian frauds!

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
46 posted on 04/08/2005 8:11:50 PM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben

A government that results in the killing of a handicapped woman is a government that has a deep flaw in its construction.


47 posted on 04/08/2005 8:13:06 PM PDT by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheDon
States have the right to kill innocent citizens? Cool! Let the killings begin! And if we can kill them, can't we also enslave them? States rights are awesome!

Please. Nonbody is advocating such a position.

This is the kind of hysterical nonsense that discredits your side.

48 posted on 04/08/2005 8:14:45 PM PDT by Jorge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Freeper
Was it RIGHT to starve a living Human Being to death? The answer is NO! and no rational being can say anything different. All retoric aside - - - It was not proper to starve a human being to death. Cease and desist, any other opinion is wrong.

So I guess you don't believe a person has the right to refuse a feeding tube or other means of medical life support under any circumstances?

Sorry, but according the law you're wrong.

Thank God people are allowed to make their own end of life decisions without interference from the Gov't.

49 posted on 04/08/2005 8:20:21 PM PDT by Jorge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Jorge
Nonbody is advocating such a position.

Yes, slavery is so 1800's. Who wants slaves,when we have so much fun can dehydrateding helpless women.

50 posted on 04/08/2005 8:22:32 PM PDT by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-148 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson