The Mudville Gazette debunks the source of much of the hysteria from the left regarding Terri Schiavo.

And yes, I'm aware that there's been plenty of hysteria from the right as well. I've tried not to blog this topic into the ground, if only to not add more to the swirling vortex of noise. But I do think this is a good tangential point:

The Democrats' embrace of post-election denial was painfully obvious to everyone who saw it. Most observers turned away wincing, hoping to spare them some shred of dignity. Now in the Schiavo case the specter of the Boogeyman of Jesusland rises up again and folks from all over are eager to believe. The left again, of course, but they are eager to believe virtually anyone or anything that trots down the pike under the banner of notBush. But for others there's a different sort of catharsis involved. Having sided with the powers that be for so long they need redemption, they must do something - perform some act of contrition to show they aren't becoming that way. Kicking an imaginary Boogeyman from Jesusland seems like a fine tonic for those who still haven't completely come to accept that whether one is a progressive or an entrenched zealot or something in between has nothing to do with degree of religious faith, any more than one's degree of gullibility does.

Speculation about a 'fracturing coalition' of libertarians and conservatives then follows.

To blame the political abuse of the "religious right" for the prolonging of the drama surrounding Terri Schiavo is to ignore the fact that responses to the case are no doubt the most personal of feelings, coming from some deep well of the human soul where politics can't reach. Whether you're for or against sustaining Terri Schiavo's life is no predictor of your demographic; political, religious, geographic, or otherwise. For most the decision is tough. Perhaps more so for those who'd say "let her die". It's hard for fundamentally decent, caring people to reconcile their humanity with letting someone starve to death, so it helps to create a Christian boogeyman that they can oppose. Starvation is certainly preferable to what the Boogeyman from Jesusland has in store for her, after all.

(Via Hugh Hewitt, who seemed surprisingly cool and moderate this afternoon--particularly when many of his callers weren't--at least for the 45 minutes or so I was able to listen in.)

Update: In a related post, Betsy Newmark writes:

It's strange how the media portrays this all as a GOP action and seems to ignore how the Democrats voted for this. In a way, it is the media that is striving to portray it along political lines. Maybe that is because they are most comfortable with looking at events through a political prism instead of any other way to look at an event.