And Another Thing About Michael Schiavo...

To go along with the previous posting, I would like like to extract something from Hugh Hewitt's 3/23 column on the The Weekly Standard web site. (http://weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/391khfhv.asp)

In his column on "Runaway Judiciary," Hugh writes:
It was concern over Michael Schiavo's status of guardian that drove the congressional intervention, a concern primarily based on the jarring recognition that he has a girlfriend by whom he has had two children. Most people view that fact and conclude that his judgment may no longer be the judgment of a "husband" in the way that the law anticipated a "husband." Majority leader Tom DeLay bluntly leveled an assessment of Michael Schiavo that seems shared among those who have studied the case in detail:

Well I've got to tell you, I don't have a whole lot of respect for a man that has treated this woman in this way. He has refused to allow her to have therapy. He has refused to even let her have an MRI. For the last five years, five years, she's been kept in a hospice and every time they've asked just to take her outside, which they can do, he has refused. She's not been outside, I think, for the last three years. . . . I think his abuse and neglect of his position as guardian is outrageous. And, and, . . . and partnered with this judge that has allowed him to treat Terry like this for the last eleven years is outrageous. And my question is, what kind of man is he?

That is spot on! You may not like Tom DeLay much and you may question his ethics, but you must feel he is telling the truth here. And also, your dislike of him only furthers my "it takes one to know one" thesis in an earlier post.