Wednesday, March 30, 2005

Boortz is wrong

On my way to pick up my son from the airport, I was listening to Neal Boortz, a nationally-syndicated libertarian talk show host. I agree with Boortz on a host of issues, but his lack of vision in the Schiavo case is simply amazing. Boortz read a story and went on to criticize a Florida police officer for stopping a doctor on his way to the hospital to assist in the birth of a baby:

FORT LAUDERDALE, Florida (AP) -- A police officer who stopped a doctor for speeding on his way to deliver a baby, and then took him to the maternity ward in handcuffs, has agreed to an unpaid suspension for lack of judgment.

Dr. Anthony Chidiac was driving his motorcycle 10 miles above the 25 mph speed limit last March when he was stopped by 15-year veteran Officer William Lilliston.

According to records released Monday from an internal police investigation, when the doctor explained he was going to a delivery, the officer allegedly asked if he was delivering a pizza and later said, "If you're a doctor, I'm Mickey Mouse or Joe Blow."

Lilliston called the hospital to confirm Chidiac's story, and drove him to the hospital as the baby's head was showing. The officer then asked to see the doctor's driver's license before letting Chidiac change into scrubs.

Chidiac delivered the baby 15 minutes after the handcuffs were removed.

The officer, who said the doctor had been slow in pulling over, later wrote Chidiac a traffic citation.

After having fun lampooning the officer for being so "strict" with the law, Boortz took a caller sympathetic to the parents of Terri Schiavo. The caller related that since Terri's parents were blood relatives, their wishes should take precedent over Michael Schiavo's wishes. Boortz went on to criticize the caller's ideas, saying that since the rule of law favored the next-of-kin, and since Michael Schiavo was by law, next of kin, that it was Schiavo's decision to make. Boortz went on to admonish the caller saying that we are a nation of laws, and we cannot disregard the laws as they stand.

This, after only moments before chiding a police officer for following the letter of the law?

Boortz failed to see the similarities in the two scenarios. He chided the officer for following the letter of the law in what could have been a life and death situation, but at the same time Boortz failed to see that the Schiavo case is a life and death situation as well. Boortz fails to take into account that Michael Schiavo is husband in name only. He discounts the fact that his behavior, including taking a live-in mistress and fathering two children with the same, all but negates his committment to Terri, and thus his motives and his ability to decide in Terri's best interest must seriously be called into question. So why does Boortz maintain that the letter of the law needs to be followed in Schiavo's case, but that the policeman should have looked the other way and/or used more discretion?

Boortz criticizes strict enforcement of speeding while overlooking court-imposed, premeditated murder? The man needs to get his head on straight.