Originally Posted - July 27, 2006

return home

Michael Schiavo put himself first in the issue of disability rights and decided that his incapacitated wife had to die.

Now he's putting himself first again, ahead of the Democratic party, the party to which he claims to belong.

Schiavo will appear in Hartford, Conn., on Friday to campaign for well funded political novice Ned Lamont who is challenging Joe Lieberman's reelection to the U.S. Senate in the Aug. 8 Democratic primary.

We hope Connecticut voters will see through this Schiavo grandstanding. He thinks America cares what he has to say. Apparently he was neglected as a child, bullied by his brothers and is now basking in all the attention. A typical show-off who needs to have his ego stroked. As Schindler attorney Pat Anderson says, he's had his 15 minutes of fame. Who cares?

Issues seem to make no difference to Schiavo nor does party loyalty. As usual, it's all about Michael, the selfish man, mad because Sen. Lieberman supported the bill last March that had the intent to grant the parents of Terri Schiavo a de novo review of the case in the federal court and to reinsert her feeding tube, to err on the side of life, an effort quickly shot down by district court judge James Whittemore who had been nominated to judicial power by a commission of which one of Michael Schiavo's lawyers was a member and chairperson.

Schiavo has been traipsing around the country, trying to flex what he considers political muscle, claiming to be endorsing candidates through his political action committee, TerriPAC which, according to filings with the Federal Election Commission earlier this month is close to insolvency. His balloon may soon be deflated. Are Pinellas County taxpayers funding Schiavo's time off for campaigning? Does the Pinellas County sheriff's office receive federal funding? Has Michael Schiavo and TerriPAC director Derek "Fig" Newton ever heard of the Hatch Act? Just how much time off does Michael Schiavo get and why isn't he spending his time off with his new wife and kids?

Schiavo has latched onto Lamont because Lamont has basted Lieberman for supporting the Schiavo bill passed last March and signed into law by President Bush, for "invading Michael Schiavo's privacy", you know, that old hollow whine of claiming government intrusion into his personal affairs. Killing an innocent woman should never be a personal and private affair. Again, all about Michael, memememememe. The House passed Terri's Law 203-58 while the Senate passed it on a voice vote. Not one Democratic Senator voted against it. Being an elected official means representing the best interests of your constituents, not embarking on a personal vendetta.

Lieberman called the Schiavo debate a "heartbreaking case" and says it illustrates the importance of everyone having a living will. In 2003, when the Florida Legislature adopted Terri's Law which gave Gov. Jeb Bush the authority to order that Terri's feeding tube be reinserted, Lieberman said he supported the lawmakers. "I believe that certainly in cases where there is not a living will….I feel very strongly that we ought to honor life and we ought not to create a system where people are being deprived of nutrition or hydration in a way that ends their lives" Lieberman.

Maybe it's because Lamont has a problem with being accountable, refusing to disclose his financial records and tax returns, just like Schiavo refuses to make pubic the accountings of the monies received in the malpractice award that was earmarked to provide therapy and rehabilitation for his wife that instead, Schiavo used to hire attorneys to obtain a court order for what he considered legalized homicide.

Lawrence Haas, a visiting senior fellow at Georgetown University's Government Affairs Institute in Washington, DC, penned an viewpoint on the Connecticut senatorial race which appeared in The Houston Chronicle. Here's the choice, Haas says, a proven leader who overwhelmingly sticks with Democrats and is always candid about where he stands, or a novice which a checkered record who already has raised doubts about who he is and what be believes.

No wonder Michael Schiavo is endorsing Ned Lamont, they seem to be two peas in the same pod.

Haas points out that as a local official in Greenwich, Lamont voted to cut public education, raise health care costs and limit coverage for public employees. Haas says that the antiwar insurgency behind Lamont's challenge to Joe Lieberman makes no sense on policy or political grounds and if successful, would haunt the Democrat Party for years to come. Lamont seesaws on the war issue, first saying that he opposes a plan to withdraw troops by mid-2007 but instead supports a plan merely to start withdrawing troops this year. The next day, he changed his mind, saying his supports both plans, Haas said.

Just what we don't need, another politician who talks out of both sides of his mouth, who says one thing and does another. 7-27-06

© 2006 North Country Gazette