Did anyone see the clownish intelllectual antics of O'Reilly tonight? He gives flip flop a bad name.
In the Factor talking points, O'Reilly says he agrees with Judge Greer's decision - the judge that rendered Michael Schiavo's hearsay rendition of a "living will" as a legal document (even though friends close to Terri said she would want no such thing, and of course we know the Schindler's family position). But still, His magnificence admonishes anyone that would deny those fighting for Terri ................ aw
So magnanimous Bill! Thanks
And yet............later on in the program he takes the ACLU on (no friend of mine, mind you) for promoting a culture of death in defending the "Terri's right to privacy [to die]". He is such a full of shitnik.
According to Bill, she was already "dead".....the brain dead argument. Whos the hell died and made him G-d to say her life is unworthy of living. Would Bill kill all severely disabled citizens? That is the very argument he is making.......
And to my girl Terri, I believe (and yes it is merely a belief) that Terri is holding on as long and hard as she is because she is dying to LIVE. TO LIVE! Otherwise, why not let go?
Asher sent me these interesting talking points:As for the "other side" on this issue, I think there are various factors which may motivate different people.
(1) A genuine concern for individual rights and the freedom to make one's own decisions. Exactly as you have said, we have a visceral horror of being deprived of our freedom to move and to act.
(2) Lack of information. This case has been around for years, but it's been on the back burner. Many people may feel they still need more time to form an opinion.
(3) Defensiveness about right-to-die issues. Some people may fear that Schiavo will be used by pro-life absolutists as evidence for the "slippery slope" argument. I would argue that this is exactly why right-to-die partisans should have advocated in favor of saving Terri - because this case is an example of everything that can go wrong, and if we can't get this one right, then the pro-life people will invoke the "slippery slope" theory AND THEY'LL BE RIGHT.
(4) Biases stemming from a perception of Schiavo as a "right-wing" cause. It's unfortunate, but - as all of us in this group know - it's still a factor for a lot of people. [Note: I do not exclude myself on this one! At first I came to the case with a similar bias. Live and learn.]
(5) Misogyny. Pure and simple. No one will admit to it, but it's there.
(6) Appetite for destruction. Peggy Noonan was right. If we didn't know it before, the last few years have taught us that there is an atavistic, nihilistic element on the Left (and elsewhere) that seeks only death and destruction. "You desire life, and we desire death." And I really do think that there are people out there - individuals and groups - who are "in love with death" and who will use causes like "death with dignity" to advance their own twisted desires. Remember Dr. Kevorkian? He sounded reasonable enough, at first. Jonestown, Aum Shinrikyo, Bo and Peep - more tragic examples. That's why, although I remain cautious, I don't discount speculation of a cult connection (in this case Dianetics) with Schiavo.
It should be obvious - but I'll spell it out anyway - that not all of these points apply to everyone. I believe our best strategy is to stand firm, continue making strong arguments, and trust that reasonable people will eventually come around. When decent, undecided people begin to take a look at some of the folks from groups (5) and (6) above, they may begin to give more weight to the positive arguments in favor of our side