Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader apologizes for just up and leaving you all last week. He opted to stop blogging on Good Friday and cruise through the weekend without thinking of blog posts.

But here is a thought (and probably not an original one) that popped into his head yesterday while he ate his traditional roasted lamb dinner on Easter Sunday…

Jesus was the “Lamb of God.” Many families eat lamb on Easter Sunday to celebrate the ressurection of Jesus.

Connection? Coincidence? Discuss amongst yourselves…

Carry on.

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader reads on the news wire that: Guitarist Rod Price of Foghat Dies at 57.

Did he choke on his own vomit?

Just wondering. You know if it was someone else’s vomit you wouldn’t know. You can’t very well dust vomit for fingerprints now can you?

Carry on.

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader has received quite a few e-mails on the recent spat of postings on the Schiavo situation. Most are unworthy of comment. (They are just filled with vitriol. Which your Maximum Leader admires generally; but of which he is tired now.) But of the ones he has received, there are a few that stand out. Allow your Maximum Leader to reproduce and comment upon them now. Here we go.

Minion Celeste writes:

My objection to removing the feeding tube from Terri Schiavo is that neurologists have not actually found the seat of consciousness. It actually isn’t something that can be measured. They assume it is to do with cortical activity - but that is an assumption only.

As all sorts of animals right down the evolutionary scale appear to have some form of consciousness, it stands to reason that it is a very basic function, which would suggest that it is quite difficult to knock out. Often the medical profession, and science in general, is completely convinced of something, only to realise they were totally wrong.

For this reason alone, there may be some basic sort of self awareness in people in persistant vegetative states.

Then there is the argument of Peter Singer to justify abortions. His argument is that an unconscious being, or being of reduced consciousness, only has a right to life in so far as the relatives want it to live. In this case, Terri’s parents want her to live. Therefore she has a right to life. (I don’t know whether Professor Singer would agree with this analysis, but I do know that he and his siblings kept his mother alive after she fell into a coma following Alzheimers disease).

So, what’s so wrong with keeping her alive? It doesn’t make a shred of difference to her either way. Michael Schiavo in contrast, needs to move on and get on with his life.

If her parents did not want her to live, it would be a different story.

Is it just a resources issue?

I am at a loss to understand why people are so vehement that Mrs Schiavo’s tube be removed.

Another minion, and frequent writer, “Powermfn” writes:

Graduate work in psych required me to dissect brains in the lab. Damned interesting! Not at all repulsive. Actually felt awe. Consequently, cannot jump in with the politicians (either on the Hill or in the pulpit) who are screeching that Terri Schiavo is being murdered by the courts. Have dropped the same subject on my own offspring from time to time: are you prepared to be the only one around to make a certain decision in regards to my life should it ever come to that? Who will pull the plug, especially if my own Living Will is ignored? And such documents, no matter how legal, have been ignored in the past.

One thing the Schindlers don’t seem to have considered and I can’t imagine why: should they actually get custody of the husk that used to be their daughter, what happens to her should she “survive” so long that they pre-decease her? Same question for her brother. What happens to your sister if she “outlives” you? She becomes the ward of the state and depending on what state she resides in at the time, that state can summarily pull the plug without anyone’s permission or oversight.

What this country needs a a revision of the legal definition of brain dead to include persistent vegetative states. Just watch the rockets red glare from the pulpit when that happens!

Another reader, Amy from Florida writes:Please also note that Mr. Schiavo also has been pursuing extra-marital relationships both before and (roughly 2 years) after Terri’s incident and now fathers two children with the woman he has cohabitated with for about a decade; Judge Greer prohibited the FL Dept. of Children & Families from postponing the feeding tube removal to review prior allegations of abuse and neglect; he has prevented the family from visiting Terri on several occasions and extended periods of time including the last time her feeding tube was removed; a board certified neurologist testified to Governor Jeb Bush this afternoon that Terri is not in a PVS in his medical opinion but he was not allowed to examine her medically; Terri has not received a neurological evaluation in over three years. Thank you.

This is a not very representative sample of messages your Maximum Leader has received. Of the roughly 50 e-mails he’s received, these are the best of what he’s read. (And people sometimes wonder why your Maximum Leader has mixed feelings on comments…)

Anyhow…

Allow you Maximum Leader to say a few things here. His own feelings on this matter are that Michael Schiavo should have stepped aside years ago and let Terri’s parents care for their daughter as they obviously want to.

He also thinks that withholding sustinance from Terri is a barbaric and uncivilized thing to do.

He doesn’t consider himself vehement about removing Terri’s feeding tube. Indeed, he is saddened that Michael Schiavo and the Schindlers couldn’t come to some sort of agreement concerning Terri’s treatment and continuted care.

What he is vehement about is how we must approach this case from the perspective of the law and courts which have to adjudicate situations where two interested parties disagree.

Your Maximum Leader will concede Celeste’s point that we have not nailed down the seat of consciousness, in as much as we cannot point out a particular region or part of the brain and say, “There it is.”

But we do know that damage to certain areas of the brain, there is a resultant loss of memory, change of personality, and change of behaviour.

That said, we also are pretty darned confident the “conciousness” is somehow associated with many areas of the “upper” brain. The area of the “lower brain” is where breathing, continued heart beat, and automatic functions seem to reside. It is this “lower” area Terri Schiavo’s brain that is undamaged. The major lobes of her brain, as he understands it, have been decimated beyond hope of repair or recovery.

Because her brain is so badly damaged, she is unable to do much more than she is doing now. She breathes, her heart beats, and she can make some vocalizations that don’t require more than forcing air out of her larynx. She, to the best of our knowledge, completely unaware of the world and unable to take a decision for herself.

In a situation where someone is in this state, another competent person must be appointed by an establish authority as guardian. That person, barring written instruction to the contrary, is the next of kin - a spouse, or in absence of a spouse a parent or sibling. Or another person appointed by the court.

Michael Schiavo was her guardian. She has also had a number of court appointed guardians. And the Schindler’s were fine with this situation until Michael decided that Terri was never going to recover. That is where the courts got involved. And that is where we are now.

Does your Maximum Leader want to see Terri’s body starved to death? No. It is a gruesome spectacle.

Would he prefer that the Schindler’s be Terri’s guardian and let them care for her as they obviously want to do? Sure.

But unfortunately all those things are outside the purview of the law in this case. The Schindler’s have not been able to prove at any point that Terri has any mental capacity at all. Thus, all a court can do is appoint a guardian who is empowered to take decisions for her. That has happened. And the guardians (including Michael Schiavo) have all been of the sameopinion for the past 8 years.

Excursus: Your Maximum Leader also concedes that Terri Schiavo has not had a comprehensive neurological examination in a while. (He sees different ranges of time - so he can’t confidently quote one. But he’ll concede it’s been at least one year.) But he doubts that another examination would make any difference. Additionally, if the tube was reinserted, and Terri received new neurological examinations (which was the intent of the legislation passed by Congress), what then? What happens when a federal judge rules that Terri is in a persistent vegetative state and that the will of Michael Schiavo be carried out? Remember people, the standard here is not “beyond a reasonable doubt” as it is in a criminal proceeding. The standard in these cases is “clear and convincing.” If a preponderance of medical experts find that Terri is in a PVS, then the feeding tube is removed again. To be explicitly clear here, the question is not if the Schindler’s can find one or two experts who will certify that Terri has some level of conciousness. They need to find a slight majority of experts who will certify that Terri is not in a PVS. That is the standard that applies. So what happens if the tube was reinserted, she was examined, and the preponderance of evidence shows that Terri Schiavo is in a persistent vegetative state? The tube comes out again - because the established decision-maker in this case is Michael Schiavo.

Admittedly, Michael Schiavo is not a sympathetic figure in the least. Everything that Amy has written appears to be factual. But no attempt to show that Michael has a conflict of interest has proved to be fruitful. Money (and he’s been offered lots of it) isn’t an issue. (And the Schindlers don’t seem to have problems concerning funds for continued care.) Your Maximum Leader is convinced that Michael Schiavo is completely and totally earnest in his conviction that Terri would have wanted to die in this situation; and it is encumbent upon him to make sure her wishes are carried out.

Sensible people (compasionate people even) can (and many are) argue the merit of Michael’s stance. But legally, Michael’s opinion is the only one that has been found to matter.

All of the work by politicians and activists to overturn the law for the benefit of one person is nearly as disgusting a spectacle as Terri being starved. The law is pretty settled in the matter of custody of a mentally incapacitated person - as best I can tell. And all that is being overthrown in a rush of hysteria.

That is pretty much it. There is a very narrow focus to this argument - or rather there should be. The argument, from a public perspective, should be who is empowered to make the decision. The courts have ruled that Michael Schiavo is. It is his wishes that are being carried out.

Now your Maximum Leader wants to add one more thing. He doesn’t believe that courts are perfect. They are just as falible as any of us. But the courts and the rule of law are really the foundation of our stable civilization. Judge Greer has made a few decisions concerning the access the Florida Department of Children and Families that are open to differing interpretations. But in all cases, his decisions have withstood appellate tests. This is not to say that you have to intellectually agree with them, but they are the decision. Your Maximum Leader thinks lots of court decisions are wrong-headed - but that doesn’t change the fact that they are the law. He’d be happy to appoint less wrong-headed people to the bench. He’d be happy to support laws that might change the outcome of future situations. But new appointments and hastily constructed legislation rushed through Congress (which by the way is almost always bad) isn’t going to change anything right now. And it isn’t going to save what remains of Terri Schiavo’s life.

I feel terrible for the Schindlers. I wish that Michael would have just left the picture a long time ago. But that didn’t happen. This is the result.

Carry on.
(more…)

67% of the American public believes that the Republicans are cynically manipulating the Schiavo case in a purely political ploy. That the Republican congressional leadership admitted as much in a strategy memo doesn’t help their cause.

Many Republicans and conservatives do believe in the principle of federalism. The Analphilosopher and Annika are good examples. But for the vast majority of Americans (in both parties) the issue of states’ rights and federal power is a sham.

A sham, pure and simple.

The “principle” of states’ rights has rarely been a principled principle. Instead, throughout American history, it has been a justification for other goals or a simple stratagem to achieve those goals.

Northern states in the ealy national period were all for national power when it came to administering a protective tariff. But they embraced “states’ rights” in opposition to Jefferson’s embargo or Madison’s war (Or Polk’s for that matter).

The South wanted national power to be used to enforce the Fugitive Slave Law, overturn states’ personal liberty laws, or the Dred Scott Decision. But they trotted out the states’ rights theory to oppose the tariffs of ‘28 and ‘32, to protect slavery (and its expansion), and to justify secession.

The South also trotted out states’ rights after Brown v. Board of education, conveniently forgetting its support of a national alcohol policy. But we all know what was at stake: They didn’t want little Johnny going to school with black kids.

Today, pro-life advocates say they believe in states’ rights, vociferously decrying the federal imposition of Roe v. Wade. They know that, absent federal control, many states would ban abortion outright. But once Roe is overturned and local prohibition is achieved, you know that they will begin calling for a national law outlawing abortion in the blue states. The pro-life people have a principled position: They believe abortion is murder. But their support of states’ rights is tactical, not principled.

So, while the Christian Rights abandonment of their tactical acceptance of states’ rights may be interesting, we ought not to be that surprised.

A more striking result of the Christian Right’s ascendancy in conservative circles is the abandonment of the rule of law, as illustrated by DOMA and Terri’s law.

When Congress passed the patently unconstitutional Defense of Marriage Act (knowingly so; why else would there be such a drive for an Amendment?), most Americans, in their bigotry against a tiny minority, weren’t that alarmed. Although similarly motivated by the desire to impose a set of values on the nation, Terri’s law may backfire, bringing home to the American people that the Nanny-state Republicans are willing to impose their own interpretation of scripture on EVERYONE.

The agonizing decision to allow a loved one to slip away is an experience that many Americans have had. More importantly, ALL Americans can imagine facing that situation themselves as their parents and/or spouses age. And we want our family’s death experience to be a personal one.

Terri’s law is not an abstract diminuation of someone else’s rights.

The religious right, in the name of the absolute sanctity of all life, wants to tell us how to make decisions for our families. Normally, we could count on the constitutional protections offered by the court. But the Republicans in Congress have demonstrated that they do no respect the independence of the third branch of government. Like Jefferson’s impeachment campaign, Jackson’s defiance of Marshall, and FDR’s attempt to pack the court, Terri’s law, “de novo” clause and all, is an attempt to subordinate the judicial branch.

Checks and balances, my friends, are our most important check against tyranny.

Now, your humble Smallholder is not running for the hills and stocking up for my own personal Ruby Ridge. I have great faith in the democratic process. Now that the Christian Righties have unmasked themselves as a aspiring tyrants, I suspect Americans will punish them at the polls.

I also expect that conservatives who value individual liberty, smaller governments, and states’ rights may begin to rethink their alliance with the Rick Santorums of the world.

The ironic thing, if an attenuation of Republican power occurs, is that that change will not be wrought by the persuasiveness of the Democratic Party, which seems mired in denial of the bankruptcy of its own stagnant ideology. The Republicans are committing suicide.

With Bill Frist leading the charge, it will be physician-assisted suicide.

UPDATE FROM YOUR MAXIMUM LEADER: Your Maximum Leader believes that the “strategery memo” to which the Smallholder is referring is being debunked on the news (Fox and CNN) as a fake. But that is a developing story. And while the American peole see partisan manoeuvering for what it is, a sizable number of Americans also don’t want to see Terri Schiavo die. If the Smallholder is suggesting that the Terri Schiavo decision is going to do long-term harm to the Republican party, he ought to lay off the hard cider.

BEFORE I START… can someone pleas tell me the secret to using apostrophes and periods in a post without freaking out the HTML shit???? I get all this weird stuff that I have to go back and edit and it looks fine in the preview but when it gets published its whacked.

I think that this is what its really about. Most of the Ministers here at Nakedvilliany are parents. And with all the legal mumbo-jumbo, rights, and postulating I think we are missing the big picture here.

The way the parents of Terri see it is that if there is life in there daughter there is still hope. Hope for recovery, cure, or whatever. Besides, if the left gets its way with stem cell research, why is there no hope?

But if the tube is not inserted and the body dies, ALL hope is gone for her in this life.

I personally would not want to ‘live’ as a vegetable. I would have given up on hope for MYSELF years ago if I was Terri. It seems to me that Michael Schiavo has given up as well and needs to move on with his life. Maybe hook up with that little cutie at the grocery store he has had his eyes on for the last 10 years (or whatever).

But I am glad to know that Terri’s Mom and Dad have NOT given up on their daughter. Because, as quick to pull the plug on myself as I am (if I were in Terri’s shoes) I would not be able to do it for my daughter (Heather: almost 3) or son (Hugh: 2 months). I would step in front of a train, car, bullet, etc to save them, so why would I pull the plug or take out the tube to kill them… even if they were in a vegetative state. Because I would still have hope for them to live or recover or have some miracle bring them back.

Now maybe the other Ministers here are more INTJ types that can calculate the odds and spout law and personal rights knowledge and be able to take the tube out of their own children but I am certainly not in that camp.

Since she apparently can’t feel pain or have any idea what is going on with her, why not give her and her parents hope? Obviously, Michael can’t be THAT concerned with what his wife wishes if she has no thoughts or feelings now.

Is it any less cruel to keep her alive than it would be to remove the apparatus that keeps her alive? If yes, how so? If she doesn’t meet any of your requirements of being a human being than why not just let her continue in the state she is in?

Obviously, her folks don’t mind the expense of keeping her alive and her husband has said that it is not about money as well.

Also, while we are healthy and have all of our mental faculties we might say a lot of things like, “I wouldn’t want to live if I was _____”. I don’t think that I want live to be old and feeble either, but it is the rare senior citizen that is really done with life when they hit their 70s and 80s and truly wants to die (even if they are old and feeble).

So… I feel it is a shame that M Schiavo has given up, but for others who love her dearly, and those that respect the spark of life, no matter how faint, don’t take our hope away.

Back to the trenches

My father and I built the Sweet Seasons Farm calf barn together out of recycled materials. I think it is pretty cool, particularly considering that it was built by rank amateurs. Here is a guy who loves to build barns and actually has some skill.

Even if you aren’t one of our readers who like farm posts, I encourage you to click through and enjoy the pictures.

Responses to the Grafting Giddiness post keep coming. The Maximum Leader forwarded some links from one minion.

I enjoyed the Brownsnout blog tremendously. We need to have a “farm” section of the blogroll. I’d set it up myself, but the Maximum Leader keeps all the reigns of power in his own sweaty palms (patience, minions, his food taster can’t catch everything…)

Foreign Minister, I highly commend the Brownsnout site for your reading enjoyment.

Those advocating prolonging Terri’s twilight existence seem to be operating using a set of facts that are not verifiable in nonbiased documents.

I have been unable to find any court instances referencing Michael’s alleged mistreatment of Terri. The charge that he is seeking to kill her before evidence of his abuse is commonly repeated (wanting a cremation = coverup!), the charge that he asked nurses if “the bitch is dead yet” is often raised. But all the court rulings say that both Michael and the Schindlers have exhibited nothing but care for Terri. I would like to see hard evidence to support those claims.

I have also been guilty of attributing malignant designs to Michael. I confess that I accepted many of the undocumented accusations as having some reality. But non-partisan sites never make any such claims. Terri’s family, which maintains the Terri’s fight website, does not make any of those claims in a forum in which they might be charged with libel. The harshest thing they officially say is that “Michael has moved on with his life.” Since any evidence of Michael’s nefariousness would buttress their case, the conspicuous absence of such evidence is telling, ne c’est pas?

The “Keep Terri Alive” crowd often claims that she has never had a guardian. She, in fact has. Her is the report of the court-appointed guardian, posted at National Review. Interestingly, while the guardian finds (as has everyone else) that Terri is in a persistent vegetative state with no awareness and that the folks who say otherwise have no scientific basis for their spurious claim (note: even the Schindlers did not challenge this diagnosis until recently), he does not say she should necessarily be disconnected.

And this is what the real argument boils down to: does cognitive functioning matter? Does it define a human being? The Schindlers, when discussing the case with the guardian, have said that there are NO circumstances in which they would every stop prolonging any quality of life.

We should stop pretending this case is about Terri’s cognitive ability. The case is really about whether any glimmer of physical existence, no matter how blind and unconscious, should be preserved indefinitely.

Descartes, as Terri’s guardian notes, would not have understood this American controversy. He would have applied the inverse of his famous phrase: I think, therefore I am.

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader was just over at the Ministry of Minor Perfidy and saw this very cool little piece.

Space bombs. Very cool. But it does make you wonder about what would happen if they just started dropping from the sky…

Carry on.

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader sees that the Smallholder has declared this blog to be all Schiavo all the time. And since your Maximum Leader does have a few things to say on this subject, he will continue with this theme.

In case you are living under a rock or just ignoring the news, a Federal Judge (empowered by the new - and bad - law) has denied the Schindler’s request to reinsert Terri Schiavo’s feeding tube. They are appealing the decision.

Your Maximum Leader, up to this point, hasn’t said much on this case. Indeed, he finds himself in nearly total agreement with his good friend the Smallholder on this.

Let us revisit the tragic facts here. Terri Schiavo had an attack related to an eating disorder. She recieved incorrect or otherwise bad care from doctors immediately after the attack. The result of the attack and subsequent mistreatment was that many portions of Terri’s brain were liquified. For 7 years Michael Schiavo and Terri’s parents, the Schindlers, worked with many different doctors and specialists to try and treat Terri’s condition. All attempts failed. After 7 years of trying, Michael Schiavo determined that Terri’s feeding tubes should be removed, and action that would result in Terri’s death. (He did this in the absence of some legal document stating the same.) The Schindler’s objected and have been fighting the action in court for 8 years or so. In the intervening 8 years, Michael Schiavo has moved on, started a new family - while not divorcing Terri - and has fought to remove the feeding tubes.

What is in dispute here? From a legal perspective few items are in dispute. First is if Terri would have wanted to “live” in her current condition. Second is if Terri’s due process rights have been denied to her. Basically that is it. Those are the two legal issues here. And frankly, legal issues are all that we are left with in this case.

Allow your Maximum Leader to state a few opinions of his own on this. First off, insofar as your Maximum Leader is concerned Terri Schiavo died 15 years ago. Large portions of her brain have been liquified. No doctor has ever disputed this point. Nothing will regrow brain tissue. Nothing! The video distributed by her family, as well as many stories about her vocalizing sounds ultimately mean nothing. The human brain is as fragile as the rest of the body is strong. What we have in this case is, unfortunately, a body that is kept going by the autonomic nervous system of the brain. It is capable of making vocalizations. Itis capable of some muscle movement. It may make some basic responses to outside stimuli (like sounds and light). But that is it. No amount of therapy, medicine, or treatment will change any of this.

Legally speaking, when you have a person in this condition, the next of kin is responsible for taking decisions concerning the person’s care - or withdrawl of care. In this case the legally competent person to make that determination was Michael Schiavo.

It is clear that when this case began, Michael Schiavo had the legal right to do what he has sought to do - remove the feeding tubes and starve Terri’s body to death. When the Schindler’s first objected to this course of action, hearings were heard and a judge adjudicated according to established case law and tradition that Michael’s wishes were those that would prevail.

That is it from a legal perspective. Michael Schiavo had the legal authority to take a decision. He took a decision. The Schindler’s objected. A court heard the evidence. The court examined the records. And the court decided the case according to the law and the Constitution.

Your Maximum Leader will go so far as to say that this case can be heard by any in the land, and the same decision will be reached.

What makes this case hard are the other facts. The fact that now Michael Schiavo has moved on, had kids with another woman, and generally seems to be an unreasoning asshole. The fact that the Schindler’s still hold out false hope. And the fact that Terri Schiavo doesn’t look dead.

Your Maximum Leader will grant anyone that Michael Schiavo appears to be a bastard of the first rank. But that doesn’t matter from a legal perspective. Even the rankest bastards are entitled to equal justice under the law.

Your Maximum Leader must also confess that he feels pity for the Schindlers. Pity that they engage in, what the Smallholder has called, “magical thinking.” Nothing anyone can do now will restore Terri’s liquified brain. Nothing anyone can even speculate about doing will restore Terri’s liquifed brain. The parents want to keep the husk of their daughter alive because they want to believe that somehow something will happen to change the facts.

Excursus: Your Maximum Leader is familiar with the basic breakdown here between Michael Schiavo and the Schindlers. It is a breakdown that could have occured in his own family. You see… Your Maximum Leader’s venerated mother was drafting her Advanced Medical Directive (Living Will) and designated your Maximum Leader as the person with authority. She chose to bypass your Maximum Leader’s sainted father. This caused a little bit of surprise when it was revealed to your Maximum Leader in the lawyer’s office. He specifically asked why his dad was not to have the legal authority over his mother should an Advanced Medical Directive be required. His mother spoke bluntly to your Maximum Leader. She said, “Your father believes that where there is breath there is life. You know that isn’t the case. He can’t pull my plug. You can. And I want you to if it comes down to it.”

Excursus Pt 2: Your Maximum Leader had a difficult converstation with Mrs. Villain on this same subject. (That is Advanced Medical Directives.) When his attorney was drafting the documents for your Maximum Leader; Mrs Villain confessed that she wasn’t sure she could pull the plug on your Maximum Leader. We discussed the possibilities over and over again. Finally your Maximum Leader just told Mrs Villain that to avoid the pain and anguish being put on her shoulders - he would designate someone else (either the Big Hominid, Smallholder, or AirMarshal). Indeed a first draft was done naming people other than Mrs. Villain. But in the end, she determined that she could carry out my wishes - should it ever come to that.

And your Maximum Leader will admit that when he sees the video of Terri, he finds it hard to believe that so much of her brain could be liquified. But that is the fact. Other bloggers have mentioned that Terri hasn’t had a CT scan, or MRI on her brain. What would they show that wouldn’t be shown on the X-rays which have been taken? You would see the missing parts of Terri’s brain in glowing colour?

It is tragic. It is heartbreaking. And is it all repulsive. Starving a body to death. That is horrifying. Absolutely horrifying. But that is the only recourse in this case. Administering life-terminating drugs is a crime. So we are left with a barbaric way to go.

Your Maximum Leader is very sad that it has come to this. But the situation is what it is. You have a man who will not give up his position for anything. And a family who will not give up in their attempts to stop him. This is a family dispute gone horribly horribly wrong. One wishes that Michael Schiavo would just up and leave. That he would just give in, but he will not. 8 years should have proven that to everyone.

But that said, it is not appropriate for Congress to intervene in these affairs. The special session of Congress, the actions of many Representatives and Senators on both sides of the asile, they are all replusive. This is not a case where the Federal Government has any standing. It is horrifying to thing that there is serious business before the Congress, but it is not getting done so that a debate that is more about grandstanding than policy can occur. It goes against every principle your Maximum Leader wants his elected representatives to live up to.

So. Where do we stand now? The courts will not reverse themselves. Politicans are grandstanding. Everyone is leaping to conclusions based on emotional hype - not the law, the facts, or anything else it seems. And the body that was once Terri Schiavo keeps dying slowly from starvation.

It is a horrible spectacle. And it is sickening.

Carry on.

Eugene Volokh’s law blog has a lively discussion going on in its comments thread about the Schiavo law. Check it out.

Plunge writes:

“There’s no need to go digging for a fundamental right to food and water (although I assume some enterprising jurist could find it as an emination formed by penubras). This is one of the rights that’s actually in the text: the right to due process before someone’s life can be taken.” AK, I’m sorry, but this is not a death penalty case, and no court is going to treat it as such. Legally, Terri Schiavo is not being put to death by the state, she is by proxy refusing the use of artificial life support from _doctors_ as defined in Florida law. The real problem here is that, as I don’t think a lot of people recongize, this is a very common and well established and really very uncontroversial process. Refusal of care, whether directly or by proxy, is not considered murder or euthanasia. The only issue any court is going to review, de novo or not, is whether Terri really would have wanted to be maintained in this state in the way that the original court found that she would not. Given that a state appeals court affirmed the original decision, saying that it passed even the “err on the side of life” test, I think arguments for putting the tube back in are going to have to be pretty inventive. “In line with TM Lutas’ post, which I think raises good points, would medical advancements during the past 15 years be relevant in a de novo review? I understand that there are affidavits of medical experts that have been submitted by the parents stating that incomplete medical testing was done (by today’s medical standards) in diagnosing Terri as in a persistent vegetative state.” To be honest, after reviewing these affidavits, I can see why no court takes them seriously. Almost all are based purely on viewing the video clips being passed around by the family, and thus they speak in ignorance of her actual clinical findings. There have been no medical advances in the last 15 years tat can regrow missing brain tissue, and none of the experts even mention or address that matter. Most seem to think she’s in a sort of coma or minor stroke situation. She is not. She is so clearly missing her cerebral cortex that it shows up on a CT. No serious doctor can have both looked at that CT, appreciated what it means, and then turn around and suggest that she might be improved by speech therapy or acupuncture: which is exactly what these cited experts do. For instance: the speech centers of her brain aren’t just damaged, they are completely missing! Asking for finer detail and diagnosis is medically absurd at this point. Every doctor I’ve talked to that’s actually looked at the clinical findings and read the reports of her various examinations agrees that she is classic PVS (motions and vocalizations and all: those are not uncommon in PVS) and that there is no hope of recovery. This is not like a coma, or stroke damage. The only serious issue here was whether the original court correctly inferred her wishes from the several testimonies and consideration of her known values and personality.”

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader had planned to write a post or two today… But in light of the rash of postings by the good Smallholder, your Maximum Leader has decided to save his “content” for tomorrow.

Lest you all get too much of a good thing. And as we all know, too much of a good thing can kill ya.

Carry on.

The good foreign minister and I share a love for cider presses. I have plante a pretty good sized apple orchard. Some of the varieties were chosen specifically for their cider-making potential.

When they come into production, I will borrow the neighbor’s press. I’ll probably never be able to afford one of my own - they can get quite pricey.

But if I had a million dollars?

I would build a two story frame into the hillside. The top level, accessible from the uphill side, would contain grape pressing and cider making equipment. I would situate them so that the pressed juice could flow by gravity into oak barrels on the lower level. The lower level, almost entirely underground, would stay at around 55 degrees year round - the right temperature for fermentation.

In the front half of the building, I’d keep syrup making supplies so that I could carry them out to the firepit (which I already have) when I was boiling down sugar maple sap. The giant cauldron could also be used to make apple butter. Mmmmm.

I would also put in a still. Of course, since fermenting cider into brandy is illegal, the still would be for “display purposes only.”

The United States Military does not leave its bodies behind.

This is criminally stupid.

I clearly remember an ROTC military ethics class in which I got into an extended dispute with the instructor.

The correct answer for the “tactical problem” was to send soldiers into enemy fire to recover the body of the point man prior to a withdrawal.

I explained that I would order my men to withdraw from the kill zone and to leave the corpse behind. I was not going to risk the lives - Private Snuffy was dead and his family would have to grieve, with or without the shell.

The instructor railed about honor and dignity. I stood fast. Obligations are for the living. I was not about to write a family and tell them that they had to grieve too - all because I sent Private Smith out to grab a body.

Heh. I was never very good at accepting asinine policy.

The living Schiavo has come in for a fair amount of calumny.

People hate him with an intense, visceral passion.

Why does he persist in his chosen course?

Many claim that he is just interested in the money. He’s a murderer for cash, the Schindler camp proclaims to the world.

But their are a few problems.

By the Schindlers’ own admission at Terrisfight.org, Michael offered to give his inheritance to charity if they allowed his wife to die.

The inheritance now stands at less than $50,000.

A businessmen offered Michael ONE MILLION dollars to turn custody over to the parents. Michael refused.

So it is not money.

Michael must be motivated to carry out what he believes his wife’s wishes to be. And he has endured a tremendous amount of libelous abuse in the process.

Perhaps he should stop.

Allowing Terri’s parents to take over guardianship will not influence him in any appreciable economic way. In fact, it might allow him to move on with his life and turn his efforts to remunerative pursuits.

If we accept that his attempt to withhold food is an attempt to carry out Terri’s wishes, perhaps he should consider this: She is already dead and we have no obligations to the dead*.

Terri’s frontal cortex is gone. She is incapable of feeling pain. Can it make any moral difference if her shell continues to breathe for decades? One would think that Terri, aside from being outraged at her parents’ actions, when faced with those actions and their implacable determination to deny the obvious, that she would want Michael to get on with his life.

Turning Terri’s shell over to the parents ends the controversy with no harm to Terri and an end to the litigation to all involved. It sounds like a win-win.

* See upcoming post.