Sunday, April 03, 2005

PURE BS: SCHIAVO AND THE "COMING GOP CRACKUP"

Many pundits - from the NYPOST'S Ryan Sager to Andrew Sullivan (who attacked the Schiavo Law as if it was a broadside on federalism led by a powerful minority made up of wacky theocrats) to Glenn Reynolds, argue that the GOP is going to crack up. (As Jonah Goldberg wrote):
... what has prompted the most recent bout of panic is the passionate - and legitimate - differences over the Terri Schiavo case. Just as hard cases make bad law, they also tend to make for bad analysis. Lots of people are pointing to the fact that the polls do not support Congress' decision to intervene on Ms. Schiavo's behalf (even as the nature of that involvement has been often wildly exaggerated). The Republican Party has exposed itself, if these pessimists are to be believed, with a dangerous overreach that will haunt it for years.
INSTAPUNDIT WROTE:
After talking about small government and the rule of law, Republicans overwhelmingly supported a piece of legislation intended to influence a single case, that of Terri Schiavo. As former Solicitor General Charles Fried observes:
In their intervention in the Terri Schiavo matter, Republicans in Congress and President Bush have, in a few brief legislative clauses, embraced the kind of free-floating judicial activism, disregard for orderly procedure and contempt for the integrity of state processes that they quite rightly have denounced and sought to discipline for decades.
I think he's right.
Glenn, Ryan, Andrew, and the rest of the "looming crack up doom'n gloom-sayers" are WRONG. They are wrong partly because they BELIEVED a PUSH POLL which was done on the Schiavo Controversy by the MSM. The most widely broadcast poll - (which PURPORTEDLY showed that about 70% of Americans would have preferred it if the Congress and the president had NOT interfered in the Schiavo Case at all) - was worded in a way which DISTORTED the facts of the Schiavo Case and made it harder for respondents to support what Congress did.

ACTUALLY, AN EXTREMELY BROAD MAJORITY of Americans support the GOP position on the Schiavo Controversy - (perhaps that's why the Schiavo Law passed UNANIMOUSLY in the Senate and passed by 75% in the House!).

Here's proof from FROM WILLISMS:
[POINT: Pollster Zogby asked non-LOADED questions which - UNLIKE THE MSM PUSH-POLLS - accurately reflected the true nature of the Schiavo Case - reliapundit]:

ZOGBY QUESTION - "If a disabled person is not terminally ill, not in a coma, and not being kept alive on life support, and they have no written directive, should or should they not be denied food and water," the poll asked.

A whopping 79 percent said the patient should
not have food and water taken away while just 9 percent said yes.

This is why the Schiavo Case WILL NOT lead to a GOP crack up:

The GOP position is the one most Americans agree with 4-out-of5! When a political party takes a moral and it's also VERY POPULAR stand it will not lead to a crack up. The GOP position is one held BROADLY, and not merely by a narrow minority of wacky theocrats.

This is why Reynolds and Sager and Sullivan are WRONG and why MARK STEYN is guffawing. And be sure to MICHELE MALKIN, TOO! More on the Zogby Poll here at THE AMERICAN THINKER, (hat tip POLIPUNDIT).

WELCOME CHRENKOFF READERS. He gave this posting the nod for Wednesday reading! If you haven't checked him out today, the use this link to see everything ELSE you should checkout on the blogs NOW!

3 comments:

  1. Reliapundit,

    Excellent post! You are quite right.

    And when the public gets the whole story and realizes how they have been had, and how the worshippers of death like George Felos and Ronald Cranford distorted the facts of the case in order to help her husband kill Mrs. Schiavo, there will be hell to pay o the liberal side of the aisle.

    Rather than a GOP crack-up, you are watching another nail shut down the coffin of the Democratic Party.

    All the best.

    Gandalin

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous9:00 PM

    I find the whole case interesting because there really is a split in the religious community over this. Not because of the actual ethics behind the case, but personal preference. Through multiple class discussions, I've found that some of the most devout evangelicals I know think 1) it's cruel to keep her alive and the parents are being selfish, 2) You can't reshape the law from the husband's directive because of an anomoly, terrible as it is, 3) She awaits a better afterlife.

    Even my own mother, a devout Catholic and conservative Republican, took up those reasons for opposing congressional interference. I think that poll is a tad vague. In any case, I think it's just better to talk to people and actually hear what they have to say and why they say it to get a better idea of how the religious community is handling it.

    Will their be a conservative crackup? Probably not, but that depends on more than just one case. The next four years of issues will determine anything by election time.

    But the whole split on the issue just gets dangerous when an unrestraining federal government gets involved. The state legislature should have resolved this. Since it failed to, there will probably be hell to pay come election season for their spots.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous5:16 PM

    Can't let this one pass, regardless of the passage of time. PVS counts as disabled, don't you think? Which is why 4 of 5 people agreed with this position. The thing that makes most Americans furious is that Congress ignored the more-than-a-decade judicial review, and in a knee-jerk response, decided They Knew Better.

    They didn't.

    ReplyDelete