firedoglake Archive Site

Joementum: Desperate and Draggin'

Today:

JACKI SCHECHNER, CNN INTERNET REPORTER: We want to give you a peek into how this local legislation is resonating nationally. There's not a lot of talk on the big, conservative political blogs, other than just linking to the news, but what little chatter we are seeing is about how this may be a sign of things to come.

It may be a sense that now that the Supreme Court is seeming to turn a little more conservative, this may be the start of lots of states challenging on this level.

We went to over to prolifeblogs -- this is one of the big blogs that was first and foremost in the fight for Terri Schiavo. And they say actually that the stipulation within this legislation that allows for an abortion in the case that the mother's life is at risk is actually a giant loophole. They'd like to see that go away.

That's right. You fuck you die. Your life thereafter as a woman is worth less than the embryo you carry. Your sole function is as human host, and should you fail in that task your death is appropriate punishment.

At least they're willing to come right out and say it.

There's also some reaction on the left that the stipulation that would punish doctors for with five years of imprisonment may be too much for moderate Republicans. And now there's also a call on the left to go after Joe Lieberman, saying that he helped to confirm Alito, this is all his fault. They want to support his [N]ed Lamont in the Senate race against Lieberman. So it's resonating. It's bubbling up, and then resonating out, Wolf.

That's right, it is all Lieberman's fault (that was FDL she was referring to, BTW). And it is resonating. It is bubbling up.

As long as we're on the subject, Ned Lamont reminded me of this Lieberman golden oldie:

"You would have kept the tube in?" asked NBC's "Meet the Press" host Tim Russert.

Lieberman, a Demcoratic U.S. senator from Connecticut who ran as his party�s vice presidential nominee in 2000, replied, "I would have kept the tube in."

The exchange began when Russert mentioned Lieberman's Republican House colleague, Rep. Christopher Shays.

Shays said he believed the GOP would suffer "repercussions" from voting last week to try to get the brain-damaged Florida woman's feeding tube replaced.

"This Republican Party of Lincoln has become a party of theocracy. ... There are going to be repercussions from this vote [on Schiavo's constitutional rights]," Shays said. "There are a number of people who feel that the government is getting involved in their personal lives in a way that scares them."

Russert asked Lieberman if he "agreed" with that statement.

"I don't," Lieberman said. And though he said Shays' statement was "a very credible and respectable opinion, the fact is that, though I know a lot of people's attitude toward the Schiavo case and other matters is affected by their faith and their sense of what religion tells them about morality, ultimately as members of Congress, as judges, as members of the Florida state Legislature, this is a matter of law. And the law exists to express our values.

"I have been saying this in speeches to students about why getting involved in government is so important. I always say the law is where we define the beginning of life and the end of life, and that's exactly what was going on here," Lieberman continued.

"And I think as a matter of law, if you go - particularly to the 14th Amendment, [you] can't be denied due process, have your life or liberty taken without due process of law, that though the Congress' involvement here was awkward, unconventional, it was justified to give this woman, more than her parents or husband, the opportunity for one more chance before her life was terminated by an act which was sanctioned by a court, by the state."

Lieberman added, "These are very difficult decisions, but - of course, if you ask me what I would do if I was the Florida Legislature or any state legislature, I'd say that if somebody doesn't have a living will and the next of kin disagree on whether the person should be kept alive or that is whether food and water should be taken away and her life ended - that really the benefit of the doubt ought to be given to life."

In conclusion, Lieberman said, "The family member who wants to sustain her life ought to have that right because the judge really doesn't know, though he heard the facts, one judge, what Terri Schiavo wanted. He made a best guess based on the evidence before him. That's not enough when you're talking about aggressively removing food and water to end someone's life."

"You would have kept the tube in?" asked NBC's "Meet the Press" host Tim Russert.

Lieberman replied, "I would have kept the tube in."

That was on May 27, 2005, two days after a three judge panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against the parents of Terri Schiavo. Not to mention all the other 20 judges involved in adjudicating the case over the previous decade.

Maybe it's Joe's noodly grasp of the facts that is causing people like Bill Buckley -- the man responsible for putting him office in the first place -- to jump ship from his tough talking chickenhawk Iraq stance.

As Kos says, Lieberman's actions are those of a man completely freaked out by Ned Lamont.

And well he should be. Weasely little creep.

Update: I'm on was on the Young Turks talking about NARAL, South Dakota and Ned.

posted by Jane Hamsher @ 2/24/2006 03:57:00 PM