Let me state up front that I am furious about the entire circus that the right wing has made out of a private medical matter. While I sympathize with the Schindlers, I disagree with them and believe Mr. Schiavo would best know his wife's wishes in this.
And I applaud the judges at all levels of our judicial system who took their responsibilities seriously and ruled as the law demands.
But about Reverand Jackson. Obviously, I don't agree with the position he's taking. But (and it's a big but)
why is this such a terrible thing for Jackson to do? It doesn't grant the right wing House and Senate any political cover. Reverend Jackson is simply not a player on that ball field. The passivity of Democratic legislators certainly
should provide better cover. Although, of course,
that doesn't seem to be happening, either.
So what does his support of the Schindlers say? That regular "culture of life" folks don't have to embrace Randall Terry's crusade to hold the beliefs they do? That the Democratic Party is, indeed, a big enough tent to include these folks?
Jackson's not calling for the National Guard. He's not exhorting violence or rash acts. And he waited until the 13th day to go to Florida. If he really wanted to do showboat and perform as many here suspect, he would certainly have jumped on that train a lot earlier. Like when Randall Terry did.
My .02