This may be a reason the vote went through. Dems, please chime in.

[duffer]

@Left Hand of Dorkness

Can you point to the place in the Constitution wherein something that becomes a matter of national debate suddenly falls under the purview of the Congress?

What puzzles me about this case is that I cannot even imagine a justification however weak, for Congress claiming jurisdiction here. Has any such claim been put forth, or is this one gigantic “Suck it!” to the Constitution?

Kudos, though, duffer, on your politicization of this woman’s life; you’re truly a partisan’s partisan.

Daniel

Show me one fucking thread from last summer about this that had more than 10 responses. It’s been going on for 15 years now. Oh, nothing?

Hmmm. Now that it’s got Federal courts and Congress involved, it seems to be a (multiple) subject for debate.

Hence a national debate.

Politicizing her life? No. It’s a debate about future laws that will affect us all. Me, you, our friends and our children. Aren’t the children what we do everything for?

Oh, and fuck off. I’m tired of your snide remarks to people. If you have all the answers why don’t we have the option of voting your sorry ass into office. :rolleyes: Douchebag

[duffer]

@This Year's Model

Your request for a cite was already replied to in this thread.

Dumbass.

Ah, yes. I had forgotten about Mike saying she wanted to die. I was looking for someone other than him, but I guess that’s good enough. 1 out of 5 billion is good enough for me.
Dumbass.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@duffer

Show me one fucking thread from last summer about this that had more than 10 responses. It’s been going on for 15 years now. Oh, nothing?

Hmmm. Now that it’s got Federal courts and Congress involved, it seems to be a (multiple) subject for debate.

Hence a national debate.

I admit it’s a national debate–I never doubted that. My question, you will recall, was:

@me

Can you point to the place in the Constitution wherein something that becomes a matter of national debate suddenly falls under the purview of the Congress?

Still waiting.

Politicizing her life? No.

Gosh, and the thread title is " This may be a reason the vote went through. Dems, please chime in." How on earth did I think you were dragging partisan politics into it?

Daniel

[Frank]

@duffer

Show me one fucking thread from last summer about this that had more than 10 responses. It’s been going on for 15 years now. Oh, nothing?

Here is one thread.

Here is a bonus thread.

There’s another one I remember, but her name was misspelled, and I can’t track it down.

[Frank]

@duffer

Ah, yes. I had forgotten about Mike saying she wanted to die. I was looking for someone other than him, but I guess that’s good enough. 1 out of 5 billion is good enough for me.

If you bother to actually read, two other people are named in that opinion as having provided evidence.

You’re beyond dumbass.

[duffer]

@This Year's Model

Here is one thread.

Here is a bonus thread.

There’s another one I remember, but her name was misspelled, and I can’t track it down.

OK, I’ll retract my challenge if you retract the cites.

Technically I asked for threads from last summer. But even though I win by 3 days, it seems an empty victory.

[duffer]

@This Year's Model

If you bother to actually read, two other people are named in that opinion as having provided evidence.

You’re beyond dumbass.

Retraction retracted. If you can’t figure out when the season’s change, what’s the point?
How far is this going to go?

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

So I take it you’re not going to try to justify the legality of Congress’s interference in this matter?

Gosh.

Daniel

[Squink]

@duffer

This has nothing to do with state’s rights at this point. This is so friggin big now that it’s a national debate.

State’s rights aren’t a national debate?

This weekend’s emergency session of congress, and the president’s hasty return to Washington to sign a bill in the dead of night make it painfully obvious which faction is in charge of the republican party these days. I wonder how many conservatives will notice that the values of the group in power are at odds with their own?

[ElvisL1ves]

“Well, double dumbass on you!” - James T. Kirk

[rjung]

The Republicans don’t need to listen because they were already set to stick to their talking points:

ABC News obtained talking points circulated among Senate Republicans explaining why they should vote to intervene in the Schiavo case. Among them, that it is an important moral issue and the “pro-life base will be excited,” and that it is a “great political issue — this is a tough issue for Democrats.”

Terri Schiavo – newest pawn of the “compassionate” GOP.

[Chance_the_Gardener]

@rjung

The Republicans don’t need to listen because they were already set to stick to their talking points:

Terri Schiavo – newest pawn of the “compassionate” GOP.

Tom DeLay is denying these talking points? Hoo-boy! Cockroach Man doesn’t do so well when the light is shined on him, does he?

Sorry, Tom. Not convinced. You’ll have to do better than that. Thanks for the link, rjung.

[ShibbOleth]

@rjung

The Republicans don’t need to listen because they were already set to stick to their talking points:

Terri Schiavo – newest pawn of the “compassionate” GOP.

ABC had best be careful. I wouldn’t be surprised if they hadn’t obtained a forged version of the talking points which are almost exactly identical to the actual talking points, save some minor pedantic detail which will deflect all discussion of the issues to how strange Ted Koppel’s hair is.

[rjung]

FYI, the full text of the memo is here.

[AskNott]

As Jon Stewart pointed out last night, “This shows just how bad you have to get before Congress cares about your health care.”

In 1999, then-governor GW Bush signed a right-to-die law, the complete opposite of what he’s saying now.
http://www.indystar.com/articles/7/231002-6267-010.html
If Terri Schiavo had been in Gov. Bush’s Texas, she’d have been dead a long time ago.