The New "Seriousness of the Charges"

Now that the autopsy results have come in, backing up (HT: The General) the contention that Terri Schiavo was in a persistent vegetative state with no hope for recovery and clearing Michael Schiavo of abuse, the religious right -- the one that wouldn't let Terri die (or finish dying, really) -- is now refusing to let her widower live.

Gov. Jeb Bush said Friday that a prosecutor has agreed to investigate why Terri Schiavo collapsed 15 years ago, citing an alleged time gap between when her husband found her and when he called 911.

Bush said his request for the probe was not meant to suggest wrongdoing by Michael Schiavo.

"It's a significant question that during this ordeal was never brought up," Bush told reporters.

The time, Jeb, for this to have been brought up was -- oh -- about 15 years ago.

[T]he request was immediately criticized by some lawmakers.

"Enough is enough," said Democratic Sen. Ron Klein. "I don't want to see it on TV any more, I don't want to hear politicians talk about it. Let her be at peace."

Bush acknowledged in his letter that an investigation may be difficult.

"I understand that these events took place many years ago, and that you may not be able to collect all the relevant records and physical evidence. However, Mrs. Schiavo's family deserves to know anything that can be done to determine the cause and circumstances of her collapse 15 years ago," Bush wrote. "The unanswered questions may be unanswerable, but the attempt should be made."

Bush is talking about investigating an allegation fifteen years after it might have occurred -- on the strength of allegations first made in 2002, twelve years after they should have been made ! (See Abstract Appeal, link above.) And the questions "may be unanswerable"?!?!? You're darn tootin' these questions are "unanswerable." If there is evidence that Michael Schiavo may have done something to endanger his spouse's life, perhaps Jeb Bush should be investigated for not having taken up the matter post haste. Why, governor Bush, did you dawdle for three years?

This is nothing more than a blatant attempt to smear Michael Schiavo. And the gall on Bush's part of admitting that the quest "may be" Quixotic reminds me of nothing more strongly than how the liberals categorized Anita Hill's charges of sexual harrassment during the confirmation hearings for Clarence Thomas during the term of George H. W. Bush.

All you ever heard was "the seriousness of the charges" chanted endlessly as if it were a magical phrase that would make actual evidence superfluous and the charges of sexual harrassment true. And so now all we're going to hear about is that "the attempt should be made" to determine whether a time gap exists endlessly and for the same reason. Governor Bush has already as much as admitted that he's a wee bit short of evidence. This is not even a fishing expedition for evidence. It's a way to permit endless speculation to the detriment of Michael Schiavo's character. It is government-funded character assassination.

In fact, the seriousness of the charges leveled against Clarence Thomas did not mean, by itself, that Thomas was actually guilty. And in fact, that a time gap can be alleged between an event that happened and a phone call that was placed -- both fifteen years ago -- does not mean, by itself, that Michael Schiavo was negligent or murderous. Evidence -- that little thing Bush isn't so sure he has -- must be brought to bear to prove criminal allegations in a society of laws and not men. (Though Jeb Bush may not think he lives in such a society....)

What is being implied about this newest victim of trial by media? And why is this being done? Clarence Thomas was a scuzball -- because the left needed him to be. Because a black man of solid character who is a conservative and wields power is a threat to the power of the left. Michael Schiavo was negligent -- because the religionists need him to be. Because a man living his own life as an end in itself defies the notion that God owns all lives, and that "life" must be defined in mystical terms. The main difference here is that the trial will be by conservative media this time around.

Terri Schiavo died fifteen years ago. You will believe this after considering the autopsy and the other other medical evidence used in the feeding tube litigation -- unless your definition of life depends on the mystical notion of a supernatural soul. And if you believe the latter, you will also believe that Terri Schiavo was murdered only recently. The courts sided with the man you think is the killer and so you will, oblivious to the irony of it all, attempt to implicate Michael Schiavo in a ficticious "murder" that took place 15 years ago. If Terri Schiavo was alive, then her husband's life was bound with hers, according to this view, by the sacrament of marriage. Michael Schiavo, however, pulled the tube and is now attempting to rebuild his life as if God's will doesn't matter.

The religionists will not let go of Michael Schiavo because they think they are doing God's will, and because they do not agree that Michael Schiavo's life is Michael Schiavo's life to live.

-- CAV

PS: E. J. Dionne turns in a very good column on the disingenuousness of Dr. Frist and Tom Delay. Here's an excerpt.

"As I understand it," Frist said on the Senate floor, "Terri's husband will not divorce Terri and will not allow her parents to take care of her. Terri's husband, who I have not met, does have a girlfriend he lives with and they have children of their own." No accusation here, just a brisk walk through innuendo city.

Dr. Frist, as he likes to be known, didn't just make his case as a pro-lifer. He invoked his expertise as a member of the medical profession. "I close this evening speaking more as a physician than as a U.S. senator," Frist said during the March 17 debate on the bill forcing a federal review of the case.

Proffering references to medical textbooks and journals, Frist led his colleagues through to his conclusion. He argued that "a decision had been made to starve to death a woman based on a clinical exam that took place over a very short period of time by a neurologist who was called in to make the diagnosis rather than over a longer period of time." Dr. Frist, in other words, was offering a second opinion.

In an appearance yesterday on ABC's "Good Morning America," Frist insisted: "I raised the question, 'Is she in a persistent vegetative state or not?' I never made the diagnosis, never said that she was not."

Well, that depends on the meaning of "diagnosis." In the midst of his impressively detailed medical review, Frist declared flatly: "Terri's brother told me Terri laughs, smiles, and tries to speak. That doesn't sound like a woman in a persistent vegetative state."

So, Frist wanted to be seen as having the medical expertise to support his conclusion when doing so was convenient -- and now wants us to think he did nothing of the sort.

Whatever you say, Doctor.

Crossposted to the Egosphere

Updates

Today: (1) Made some corrections. (2) Linked to E. J. Dionne in PS.