I'm Just a Soul Whose Intentions Are Good

Michael Barone breaks out the flagstones for that road to Hades:

On the Schiavo issue, most members of Congress, on both sides, were not indifferent but acted on moral convictions in a difficult situation. They were trying to do what they believed was right. They deserve respect, not contempt.

Link via Hugh Hewitt, who adds: "Michael Barone, as usual, has it exactly right."

Comments

[Franklin Harris]

Congress is scariest when acting from "moral" convictions.

[Henry]

Michael Barone is full of shit. Presuming the best intentions of any legislature is the hallmark of an ass.

[Jennifer]

Bin Laden thought he was doing the right thing, too. How morally blind do you have to be to assume sincerity trumps all?

[JonBuck]

What was that about the road to hell being paved with good intentions? Hm?

[Julian Sanchez]

In the unlikely event that Hugh Hewitt ever describes me as "exactly right" about anything, it's seppuku time.

[fyodor]

As Dale Carnegie pointed out, pretty much everyone thinks they're in the right.

[Dynamist]

...all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men...

This was a rare instance where it seems our representatives were putting intention into action with the proper spirit. There's no pork to divide, and not so much posturing and pandering. They weren't demanding an ultimate outcome, merely a review. It seems blindly cynical to dismiss all the individuals intent with "legislators suck. period." And to echo the anti-tubers ultimate argument, they followed the law.

[madpad]

I'd be willing to give some folks in congress some slack on that.

I pretty much despise most politicians as universal scumbags composed of loose parts that otherwise couldn't be used to assemble used car salesmen or cockroaches.

Nonetheless, statistics indicates at least some are either genuine and capable of good or bound to get something right occassionally if only by mistake.

But I DON'T see that in the case of many of them - most prominently (but far from exclusively) Tom Delay and Bill Frist.

I don't know Hugh Hewitt or Michael Barone but IMHO, the analysis is flat wrong.

Having convictions is one thing, and certainly admirable.

Cynically taking advantage of a gross public spectacle to showcase conviction is another thing entirely.

[db]

Having convictions is one thing, and certainly admirable.

Not as admirable as relying on evidence to arrive at rational conclusions.

Rep. Ron Paul (R), TX, however, generally deserves respect. Can anyone tell me offhand whether he made any public statements on the Schiavo case? Did he vote?

[SR]

db, I haven't heard of any comments from him, but I do know he was listed in the roll call as abstaining. However, I don't if that means he actually showed up for the session and actively abstained or if he was already out of town for the weekend and didn't fly back for the vote.

[Jim Henley]

Translation of Barone and Hewitt from the political: "Our guys lost big. The mood of the country is so overwhelmingly against our guys' position that it would be counterproductive to smear our opponents. So we'll settle for trying to sprinkle happy dust on the whole enterprise."

[joe]

Julian, reading your post, I received the strong impression that you would actually want to live, so I'm getting a court that would give Jeb Bush the authority to decide for you whether you should commit seppuku.

LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE! LIFE!

[Evan Williams]

When in doubt, we should err on the side of whatever the fuck I decide.

[Henry]

Ron Paul:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul240.html

[Sepiku]

I'll grant you that they acted out of moral conviction, but that conviction shriveled like a penis at a Polar Bear Club dive once the polls started coming in.

[Jon]

Dynamist writes: "This was a rare instance where it seems our representatives were putting intention into action with the proper spirit. There's no pork to divide, and not so much posturing and pandering"

Er, they subpoena'd a woman who's been in a vegetative state for 15! And then didn't follow through on it!

What else can you call that, other than posturing and pandering?

[Seamus]

"Bin Laden thought he was doing the right thing, too. How morally blind do you have to be to assume sincerity trumps all?"

But plenty of people were arguing that the politicians didn't really give a rat's ass about the moral issue but were simply engaging in a cynical political ploy. The argument seemed to be that the Congressional Republicans were happy to pander to the pro-lifers, but that none of them were truly pro-lifers themselves. While I'm ready to concede that all too often the Republicans are just interested in throwing bones to the pro-life movement without really intended to do anything effective, I find it hard to believe that no *real* pro-lifers have actually managed to get elected themselves.

[Ruthless]

Barone's best column wouldn't hold a candle to Dowd's worst.
So is it sexism here? (I'm still smarting from the thread knocking Dowd.)
I mean we need to make it clear who is a good columnist, even if we may disagree with what they're saying.