The Schiavo Case: Winners and Losers

Over the past two weeks, the talking heads in the media have insisted that the actions by Congress (some just say Republicans) in the Schiavo case were motivated primarily by political purposes. I don’t agree with this analysis - I believe that there are many people who still consider killing innocent life an immoral act (not a subject many Democrats comprehend).

But with all the talk of “politics” and at the risk of sounding insensitive, I do think there are both winners and losers resulting from the case. None of them lose as much as Terri and her loved ones, but nevertheless, this is the way I see it:

The Losers:

Schiavo’s family: It goes without saying – Terri and her family lose the most important thing of all – and all because Terri’s life was deemed as unworthy of existing any longer.

Congress: Whether rightly or wrongly, the judicial branch essentially nullified Congressional legislation for a de novo trial. Some will argue that Congress’ action was unconstitutional, but that wasn’t a consideration in the court’s refusal. Judiciary 1, Congress 0.

Jeb Bush: Governor Bush asserted that Florida's Department of Children and Family Services had a legal right to intervene and take custody of Schiavo, but when Judge Greer decided otherwise, Governor Bush was put in a no-win situation. By following the judge’s order, Bush upset many Americans who wanted him to intervene to save Schiavo. If Bush did intervene, he would have been branded a “tyrant" by the media and potentially subject to contempt charges for defying a court order.

Michael Schiavo: Apart from Michael Jackson and OJ Simpson, I can’t think of many people who needed PR advice as badly as Michael Schiavo. He will be forever hated by millions of people and face death threats for the rest of his life. Even if everything he said about Terri’s wishes was accurate, several nurses who cared for Terri painted an ugly portrait of Michael as a caregiver. He also could have saved everyone a lot of pain and suffering by handing custody of Terri to her family.

ABC / WaPo, et. al: I could probably include other media sources who ran with the “GOP talking points memo,” but ABC News and the Washington Post’s Mike Allen were out in front. The authenticity of the memo has been shown to be dubious at best, but because the MSM is trying its best to ignore the issue, I doubt anyone will suffer the Dan Rather / CBS treatment.

Feminists: Gloria Steinem and her fan club can’t be too happy that a husband still has the final voice in many legal matters, even against the will of the rest of her family.

Tossup:

Republicans: There was a clear difference of opinion over which is more important – Federalism or protecting life. Also, the MSM’s embrace of the “GOP talking points memo,” even if fraudulent, helped shape public opinion that Republicans were motivated more by politics than beliefs. Still, as bad as the Republican division appeared on the issue of Federalism, I don’t think it hurts the party longer-term. Also, I believe it might even help mobilize many of the conservatives in the battle over judges (watch out red state Senators).

The Democrats looked equally pathetic and is now a leaderless organization that has no vision on controversial issues apart from decrying those of Republicans. (Can you think of a single memorable Democrat on the issue?) Based on Democratic history, the “states rights” argument just isn’t sincere. Remember when Liberals cheered Janet Reno for defying a court order in intervening in the Elian Gonzales case? Also, some Far-left Democrats still pull crap like this, which will never get them much public sympathy.

The Winners:

Judicial branch: By ignoring Congressional legislation for a de novo trial, the judicial branch of the government flexed its muscle. While many people argue that the courts merely upheld the separation of powers, it is clear that the judiciary has more power than ever before and is even more powerful than legislatures in many instances. This is why the fight for judicial nominees will make the Clarence Thomas confirmation look like a cakewalk by comparison.

Lawyers: First, the trial showed how important it is to hire good lawyers. Wizbang had a good summary that shows many of the early mistakes of the Schindler family’s lawyers. Second, lawyers who specialize in living wills are going to see a huge increase in business – heck, I might even get a living will now (Mine will just say, in the event of a similar situation, to turn the tv to The Simpsons or Fox News and occasionally read me a few entries from Instapundit, Polipundit and Right Wing News).

The Blogosphere: Like all big stories these days, bloggers covered the case better than the MSM. The blogosphere also reminded people of its increasing influence. Bloggers on the left helped spread the “GOP talking points memo” rumor, while those on the right later debunked it.

Democratic Underground / Daily Kos: More like self-proclaimed winners - many far left website visitors are happy to see Schiavo die for no other reason than to anger Christians and the “Christo-Taliban Regime” that rules our country...If you don’t believe it, spend 5 minutes on one of DU’s message boards. I don’t think this helps them in any way, but many will feel victorious nevertheless.

Hillary Clinton: Conscious not to appear too liberal to the red states but also not to alienate her base, Hillary avoided a potential landmine by not having to make a Senate vote on the Schiavo legislation. She can now straddle the issue as comfortably as Monica straddled Bill if it comes up during her 2008 campaign run.

Ralph Nader: After trying to muck up the 2004 election for Kerry, Nader remained consistent to his advocacy for human rights (if the right to live can be classified as such). He also helped enhanced his image among conservatives by firmly supporting Schiavo’s right to live (I don’t think this means he’ll be President anytime soon though).

That's a brief summary of the winners and losers - let me know if I missed anyone.