[mburbank]

What FS said.

" They have not changed anything. Her tube is still out, and she still may very well die."

Which any member of congress even remotely familliar with the law knew would be the outcome, judges being less willing to throw away thr role of the judicial branch than congress. What more proof could you want that this is cynical grandstanding?AND they changed plenty, just not for Ms. Schiavo. They threw red meat to thier base while establishing the precedent that when motivted Congress may interfere in individual speciffic lives even after the court system has obeyed the existing laws of the land. They also have peformed at test on the degree to which the fundamental structure of government can be manipulated if you use an emotional enough issue.

What Congress did was vote to allow her case to be appealed beyond the state courts. This is unheard of in such cases, since this stuff is normally a private matter. But the differences between the family members is bringing the state's law into question, and Congress allowed a federal court to decide whether or not this woman's constitutional rights were being harmed.

Which they did by legislative fiat after the state courts had spent seven years making a decision that as the law stood until congress intervened, and STILL STANDS RIGHT NOW for everyone in america except Terry Schiavo.

Saying that this is simply about one woman is sort of like saying the Dred Scott ruling was just about a guy named Dred Scott. "

My history isn't good enough to tell me the lengths the writers of Dread Scott went to to say that the law did not constitute precedent and was meant only for the speciffic case of the speciffic individual, something the authors of this bill have done.

My point has nothing to do with wether the tube should stay in or out, and since I'm not a neurologist or an ethicist, I refuse to weigh in. My point is the R's used this families misery as a football, and I'm revolted, and the D's were too scared to say so and I'm disgusted.

Many members of congress may have deeply held personal beliefs about this case. But they also know the law, the constitution and the horrific load of suffering that goes on in our country and the world every day that they don't hold special sessions over and tat the President doesn't cut short his precious vacation for.

They've DONE a lot. Just nothing about Terry Schiavo. They've ACHIEVED a lot. Just nothing for Tery Schiavo or her family and they never intended to. This is all about political gain and showmanship and if Ms. Schiavo's parents were well versed in the law they might well be sickened by how they were used.

IF this was some truly sincere legislative initiative, in the days to come you will see congress working dilligently to craft new and speciffic federal laws about people in distress and living wills. You'll see an urgent government sponsored campaign to get people to make living wills so that this sort of tragedy can be avoided. The work will carry the passionate intensity that called for special sessions and missed vcations, because for thousands of people in similar condfitions, time is of the essence. But I'll bet you dollars to donuts you don't see much of any of that. Because I don't think this was ever about tht in the first place.