The death by starvation of Terri Schiavo will quell some of the animosity of the debate over her fate, but the Posse predicts that the fissue lines exposed by this tragedy will remain for some time.
We do not believe that this spells the imminent crack-up of the Republican coaltion. Much of that is wishful thinking and projection.
The most common way this is demonstrated is I am The World syndrome, where political commentators assume that their views are shared by a massive section of society when in fact their philosophical adherents are tiny in number.
It may be hard for luminaries such as the hated Instapundit to comprehend this. Indeed, he seems to be suffering from the same delusion that affects many Hollywood star: he is confusing his popularity with agreement.
That is to say, when he gazes at his hundreds of thousands of daily hits, he assumes that a large portion of them agree with just about everything he thinks.
He may not articulate this, but it is hard not to derive some sort of encouragement from his daily six-figure traffic totals.
Evil Glenn is not alone, of course. Andrew Sullivan seems to agree with him on this, but given Sullivan's demonstrated lack of logic, having him on your side cannot be said to mean much at this point.
The main lesson of this affair is that the judicial system is distrusted by an increasing number of Americans.
Reynolds is completely missing the point in this debate. It is all well for him to say "I'd prefer the tube to be in but the courts have spoken," because he is an attorney. For him the "game" aspect of law is what makes it so attractive.
But for people who believe in justice, it isn't enough to simply say "Look, all the paperwork was in order so she has to die."
As we all know, there is a difference between what is legal and what is just, and when it seems that the two are increasingly divergent, problems will result.
This brings us to the false debate about Federalism.
Federalism isn't about granting state courts autonomy to violate civil rights and kill people so long as the proper procedures are followed.
Federalism is the last recourse to preserving justice - that is why state law must take second place to federal law.
The Posse believes in allowing the states to run their own affairs. We are Federalists, but we believe that this does not extend into areas where injustice is the result.
If that makes us "fair-weather Federalists," then we plead guilty as charged.
We would also argue that most Americans are in agreement with us: In cases where local authorities are unwilling or unable to end corruption and injustice, the federal goverment has a duty to intervene.
This sentiment is so overwhelming that it proves that Federalism isn't the issue here.
Judicial overreach is the issue.
The courts have arrogated a dangerous amount of power unto themselves. The Schiavo case is merely the latest example of it.
Consider this: Were Terri Schiavo a murderess on death row, she could have been reprieved or pardoned by the executive.
Were she facing other legal difficulties, the legislature and executive branches could have changed the law to exonerate her.
In this instance, both branches attempted to keep her alive - and were denied.
Where is the check on this power?
The Posse has this challenge to and Sullivans and Reynolds' of the Web: Name one recent policy decision that was not decided by the courts rather than the other two branches.
Affirmative action? Immigration reform? Gay marriage? Death Penalty? Abortion?
Time and again, the courts have inserted themselves as the final authority in questions that more properly belong to the legislative and executive branches.
Sullivan isn't bothered by this because he agrees with the diktats of the courts.
Reynolds doesn't trouble about it because it ensures he'll be employed for decades to come. Judicial hegemony is good for his business.
And lest anyone misunderstand our last point, we do not accuse the Puppy Blender of basing his opinions purely out of greed or self-interest, merely that his choice of occupation gives him a comfort level far in excess of everyone else when looking a judicial overreach.
As a lawyer, he enjoys the game and the system. This probably means he's a pretty good lawyer, since usually the ones that get all worked up over minor glitches in the system don't last long and aren't very successful.
Reynolds understands how to game the system, and - comfortable in that knowledge - he looks down on those that don't as irrational.
Terri Schiavo is not a Christ-like figure. The Posse rejects this notion outright.
Instead, we believe she is similar to Jane Roe - an earlier example of judicial overreach that produced a backlash we are still feeling today.
And, like Roe, we may learn that the underpinning case was a lot weaker than its defenders claimed - too late to save the life involved.