My bet is that many of the Democrats will wish that very thing after his move today to see Terri.
Now the Dems are going to have a very difficult time saying this is a right-wing group that wanted Terri to live....
Edit: People like Krugman, for instance..
siliconinvestor.com
Random Shooting
Former Enron adviser Paul Krugman is in rare form today. We're not sure we've ever read a column that is at once so incoherent and so inflammatory. The headline, "What's Going On?," captures the confusion. The column is basically a laundry list of Krugman gripes, prompted by the Terri Schiavo case:
o Schiavo's parents have enlisted antiabortion extremist Randall Terry as their spokesman. Although Terry "hasn't killed anyone," another antiabortion extremist murdered an abortion doctor.
o Gov. Jeb Bush considered taking Mrs. Schiavo into state custody, though he didn't actually do so.
o Some pharmacists refuse on moral grounds to fill prescriptions for contraceptives.
o Senate Republicans want to eliminate the filibuster for judicial nominees, so that judges would be confirmed by a simple majority vote.
o House Majority Leader Tom DeLay says his politics are based on a "biblical worldview."
Tellingly, he doesn't mention Valerie Plame. All this leads Krugman to the following conclusion:
America isn't yet a place where liberal politicians, and even conservatives who aren't sufficiently hard-line, fear assassination. But unless moderates take a stand against the growing power of domestic extremists, it can happen here.
Reread Krugman's list of complaints. Other than the murder of the abortion doctor--which happened in 1998, when Bill Clinton was in the White House--there's nothing that even remotely has to do with assassination. If Krugman and the New York Times want to combat extremism, a good way to start would be to refrain from loose talk about political violence. |
