> Dana wrote: > I saw that editorial. This alleged extremist political line was the > proposed review of the Schiavo case to see if her civil rights had > been violated. That's the way I read it anyway. >
Yeah, that's it. The point the Republicans are making is that, as you've pointed out, the federal courts only reviewed the procedural facts of the case rather than the evidentiary ones. The Republicans are saying, "come on courts, you know what we meant with our law: for you to review the evidence. But you purposely didn't. Now you should be punished for your insolence." Basically the Republicans are saying that judges should be the enforcement arm of the legislative branch of gov't rather than a check on it. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support efficiency by 100% http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:152998 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
