Update [2005-3-26 16:12:47 by Armando]: From the diaries by Armando. I note that this analysis is apropos David Brooks and others. I also take it as a response to the tendency of "reasonable liberals" like Matt Yglesias to treat Brook's distortions as reasonable, instead of pointing out the important fact that Brooks' argument are premised on deliberate falsehoods.
For those of you still willing to think about the Schiavo matter, I wanted to offer my response to the radical right wing pundits' claim that they occupy the moral high ground on this issue, and that the response from the rest of us has been murderous (noonan) or coldly pragmatic (brooks).
My answer is that the radical right hasn't taken a moral position at all.
The radical right has not argued for reinsertion based on a moral position. Instead they are disputing the facts and claiming that Schiavo is not in a persistent vegetative state.