BS: Shrub discovers the veto!

Subject: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 06:50 PM

President Bush today used the first veto of his presidency to stop legislation that would have lifted restrictions on federally funded human embryonic stem cell research.

"This bill would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others," Bush said at the White House, following through on his promise to veto the bill. "It crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect. So I vetoed it."

This is a major step to insure thar human embryo vcells will continue to be thrown out instead of helping to save lives.

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Rapparee
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 06:54 PM

It certainly is, Dick. And how he can say that he's "pro-life" beggars my imagination when he has started combats, invaded a country, and has allowed the death penalty in Texas? Now add to that the fact that he has condemned literally thousands to little or no hope....

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Amos
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 07:11 PM

The man has his head so far up his back end that his eyes are turning brown.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Bill D
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 07:12 PM

Life is sacred in the abstract and vaguely potential....after it is born and up & about, anything goes!

sadly, not an uncommon notion these days.

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: dianavan
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 07:13 PM

My curse for the day:

May George W. Bush be stricken with a disease that could have been cured with stem cell research. May he die a slow and painful death.

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: kendall
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 07:15 PM

That's not a very "Christian" attitude!

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 07:15 PM

Don't worry, the rest of us will do the research and reap the rewards. A classic "decline of Empire" decision. America is already falling behind in most things except military investment. In debt up to their eyeballs, in hock for energy from other nations, spending vast amounts of borrowed money on warfare, they are already well down the road the British have already walked. Very soon they will be as irrelevant as Britain but still clinging to the glory days as China, Russia and India partition the world and call in the debt.

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Amos
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 07:20 PM

The Nero of America has spoken, and tuned, and will now play.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Sorcha
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 07:20 PM

For once, I'm with the Dvan here!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: bobad
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 07:22 PM

And the more the American people elect such leaders as GWB the shorter that road will become.

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 08:00 PM

A few of the folks who elected Dubya might have served the nation better as stem cells in research. Clearly they were born brainless. It is a vicious cycle.

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Alba
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 08:20 PM

In what I thought was an ironic statement on one of the News channels tonight, NBC I think, the commentator said that Bush was making sure that his Supporters would see he was sticking to his Guns on this issue.

That would be literally then I thought. Let's see now, choices, choices. What's a Prez to do!! George can allow funding for stem cell research, which may be the only path to finding cures for many terrible diseases and afflictions .. or .. George can inflict death on innocent People by lying about the need to invade Iraq and by doing so has created a Hell in that Country resulting in overwhelming loss of Life and if that isn't enough to make George waver slighty he can also, into the bargain, help generate further death and destruction by supplying weapons and support to other Countries that will start a War that meets with his approval.

I guess this time round it was a no brainer for George as it would seem that for a man that advertises his religious orientation openly and by doing so implies that he obeys the ten commandments this President of the United States can tweek one of those commandments, 'Thou shalt not kill' ,until it is flexible enough to only apply when it suits his Political agenda.

George Bush, you are a hypocritical, amoral bastard. A death Salesman.
Shame on you and all of your festering twisted Administration tonight.

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 08:33 PM

Good.. that way someone in Europe or Canada will develop say a cure for Parkinson's, using stem cell research and the US FDA won't allow it into the country, and we can stand on the border and point and laugh....

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 08:38 PM

If people elect to view life as expendable starting from pregnancy, why does it surprise people when it is treated as so as that life grows? Every person alive today was at one time an embryo. How quickly we forget. And how conveniently we forget when it suits our purpose.

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: frogprince
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 09:12 PM

Not many of us were embryos (little clumps of cells with no brains or nervous systems) which were destined to either sit around frozen forever or be tossed in the garbage someday. Do you consider in vitro fertilization, to make parenthood possible for those with fertility problems, to be an evil, murderous practice?

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Rapparee
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 09:37 PM

Methinks W should contemplate the words of John Paul II, a man W claims to admire:

...On this matter [the death penalty] there is a growing tendency, both in the Church and in civil society, to demand that it be applied in a very limited way or even that it be abolished completely. The problem must be viewed in the context of a system of penal justice ever more in line with human dignity and thus, in the end, with God's plan for man and society. The primary purpose of the punishment which society inflicts is "to redress the disorder caused by the offence". Public authority must redress the violation of personal and social rights by imposing on the offender an adequate punishment for the crime, as a condition for the offender to regain the exercise of his or her freedom. In this way authority also fulfils the purpose of defending public order and ensuring people's safety, while at the same time offering the offender an incentive and help to change his or her behaviour and be rehabilitated.

It is clear that, for these purposes to be achieved, the nature and extent of the punishment must be carefully evaluated and decided upon, and ought not go to the extreme of executing the offender except in cases of absolute necessity: in other words, when it would not be possible otherwise to defend society. Today however, as a result of steady improvements in the organization of the penal system, such cases are very rare, if not practically non-existent.

                         -- Evangelium vitae: 56

And JP2 goes on, in Section 57:

...If such great care must be taken to respect every life, even that of criminals and unjust aggressors, the commandment "You shall not kill" has absolute value when it refers to the innocent person. And all the more so in the case of weak and defenceless human beings, who find their ultimate defence against the arrogance and caprice of others only in the absolute binding force of God's commandment.

If, indeed, George W. Bush believes what he said, that"this bill would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others," that "it crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect," and continues to support the death penalty and his unconstitutional invasion of Iraq, then he either has a very warped sense of morals and ethics or is duplicitious in the extreme (or both).

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Don Firth
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 09:49 PM

". . . that way someone in Europe or Canada will develop say a cure for Parkinson's, using stem cell research and the US FDA won't allow it into the country. . . ."

Clinton's right. And when that happens, just like abortions, only rich Americans, able to hop on a plane and go somewhere else, will be able to afford it.

As I mentioned on another thread, if a couple of months from now, the Swiss announced that their stem-cell researchers had come up with a cure for various conditions including Parkinson's Disease, and shortly thereafter George noticed he was having balancing difficulties and began developing an uncontrollable tremor in his hands—I wonder how long it would be before he booked a trip to Switzerland. And would he, perhaps, board Air Force One and fly to Switzerland at the taxpayers' expense?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Alba
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 10:16 PM

Of course he would Don, of course he would. He wouldn't think twice about it and he would lie to cover the fact that he went for treatment.

How ironic that his spin docs chose to surround him with Children conceived by in vitro fertilization when he was spouting about his moral stand on this issue.
Ironic because embryonic stem cells used in research are often taken from embryos left over after in vitro fertilization procedures.

Bush is a hypocrite of the lowest order.

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: kendall
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 10:24 PM

He's given the title "BASTARD" a bad name.

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Amos
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 10:24 PM

"Today George Bush chose political posturing over human life, denying hope to millions of Americans, their families and loved ones who are affected by debilitating diseases.

He used his first-ever veto to stop the discovery of new cures for diseases like juvenile diabetes, leukemia, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, and many others. More than 70% of Americans from every walk of life -- whether in the faith community, the science lab, the hospital or at the bedside of a sick relative -- and majorities in both chambers of Congress disagree, but that didn't stop him.

The bill he vetoed wasn't a sweeping change -- it was a small, practical measure that would have made a big difference for medical research based on sound science. But the consequences are sweeping: the proposed law would have allowed research on excess embryos generated during processes like fertility treatments -- embryos that would otherwise simply be discarded."

(Mailing from the Democratic party)

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: bobad
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 10:33 PM

Maybe now some leading researchers will relocate to countries that value humanity over religious mythology and continue in their endeavours to alleviate suffering.

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Peace
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 12:43 AM

Give it a go . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 05:35 AM

He used his first-ever veto to stop the discovery of new cures for diseases.

No Amos. This is very near to arrogance. Other countries will do it and then sell the cures to the self-righteous right wing bigots.It's only the scientists in America who have been stopped.

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 06:04 AM

I can't help wondering, once more, at the breathtaking stupidity of a man who believes that throwing excess embryos in the garbage can is somehow saving lives, while using them to find cures for disease is murder.

How did this character survive to adulthood? He has one of the finest minds of the twelfth century, braindead for 900 years.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Peace
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 06:25 AM

Read the book . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 09:17 AM

LOL Peace, but I have better uses for 25c.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 02:32 PM

How can they possibly sell a book that large for only $0.25?

Or print it in only one volume?

John

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 06:22 PM

Even if it were ten volumes, it still wouldn't be worth more than 25c, and that's only if it is absorbent enough for toilet tissue.

John, I think the real question is why, not how.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 07:47 PM

Perhaps, when England under a socialist Prime Minister discovers that a manufacturing industry is necessary to support a service industry, England's military powers will be fiscally supported (or the treasures of Porton Down used) and we will re-take our colonies.

The other thing important to see in this is the necessity to disestablish the church. I think England got there (I am subject to correction) in about 1588. C'mon America! Not far to go!

Oh, by the way, another factor in favour of a constitutional monarchy over a presidency.

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Peace
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 07:50 PM

Close. The Glorious Revolution was 1688.

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 08:04 PM

"federally funded human embryonic stem cell research"

What other governments support *any* stem cell research?

Companies here in the US are free to conduct any research they want.

When the US government does provide money to companies it is called corporate wellfare and government giveaways that increase the deficit.

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Alba
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 08:57 PM

You can check this info regarding Countries that do not have the same point of view as America regarding stem cell research: If your interested that is!

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: kendall
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 07:23 AM

Curing a multitude of diseases is a lot cheaper than funded research.

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 09:27 AM

According to the population figures, I estimate that somebody has disappeared about ten million brits (give or take a few). Has Tony been at it again behind the scenes?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Amos
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 10:23 AM

Guest:

Dumb question.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Amos
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 10:35 AM

Lakeland FL, Register:

Published Friday, July 21, 2006

Stem Cells Draw a Veto


President George W. Bush finally used his veto pen Wednesday. He's let bloated budget bills, laden with pork, cross his desk. He has been in office longer without producing a veto than any other president since Thomas Jefferson.

For 51/2 years, it seemed Bush would become the first president in modern history to leave office without throwing a bill back in the face of the Republican-controlled Congress.

Action was swift, coming hours after the bill was passed. Unfortunately, Bush's veto of a bill that would have overturned limitations he imposed over stem cell research five years ago means that finding cures for cancer, Parkinson's and Alzheimer's and other diseases will be severely restricted.

"This bill would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others," Bush said. "It crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect."

The stem cells for research would have come from frozen embryos. Those embryos were once candidates for in vitro fertilization and then implantation in the mother's womb. But the embryos used for stem research under the proposed bill would have been those rejected for implantation and would be destroyed eventually.

Yet, at a news conference Wednesday, Bush said he vetoed the legislation because it would encourage the destruction of embryos not used in the fertilization process.

---

If the illogical inconsistency of Bush's position is not obviosu from the above, you are probably a neocon, or some other sort of dullness-gifted being...




A

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Donuel
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 10:51 AM

The brain dead right wing has painted itself in a corner on the right to life issue.

They have come to the defense of Terry Schiavo, Frozen blastocysts, and W's brain.

They CAN NOT recognize brain death. Or of they could they can not define death as the absence of a brain.

If they did, then stem cells/blastocyts with no brain eyes or heart are not alive. Or the partial birth abortion (done only on fetuses that have no brain at all) would also be considered dead.

Our dear Senator Brownback said "Bald Eagles are bald eagles because they come out of an egg."
By that logic Senator Brownback is a vagina.

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Peace
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 12:20 PM

If you use the British slang term for it you'll be close.

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Rapparee
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 05:48 PM

Natalie just left; she's about 8 and has Down's Syndrome. Herb is 79 and was in yesterday; he has diabetes, among other things. My old neighbor, John, has myasthenia gravis. Stem cell therapy might help any of these (I said "might").

W, I hope that one of your grandchildren or even yourself...no, I won't say that.

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: dianavan
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 06:07 PM

What really disgusted me was seeing him holding a child who was conceived through in vitro fertilization while saying that he had just insured that children like this one would now have a chance at life.

Disgusting photo op. What kind of morons believe that stem cell research would halt in vitro ferilization?

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: Greg F.
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 06:36 PM

Q: What kind of morons believe that stem cell research would halt in vitro ferilization?

A#1: Republicans.

A#2: Fundamentalist "christians"[sic].

Q.E.D.

Subject: RE: BS: Shrub discovers the veto!
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 22 Jul 06 - 03:14 PM

Understanding the really sad part of it all requires understanding that although the veto doesn't prohibit the needed research, it prohibits federal funding of the research.

Federal funding of basic medical research is sparse, leaving much needed work to be funded by the pharmaceutical industry and thus enabling the holding of successful results at ransom by the sponsoring companies.

For most research that could have federal funding the privately supplied "make-up" in funding for the work can be applied in the same laboratories, mixing federal funding with private (big-pharm) research funds, thus allowing the pharm companies to "capture" results of the federally funded work and add them into the "patented" discoveries.

The ban on federal funding, as implemented, is so strict that any of this "illegal-to-fund" work requires the creation of complete and entirely separate facilities and staff to assure that RESEARCHERS, EQUIPMENT, CHEMICALS, CLERKS, LIBRARIANS, ACCOUNTANTS, LAWYERS, PURCHASERS, STOCK HANDLERS, STUDENT ASSISTANTS, JANITORS, PLUMBERS or ELECTRICIANS who might otherwise be also employed on government funded work cannot be charged with "applying government funding" to the project that is required to be done entirely under private funding.

A researcher who wishes to work in this field must, effectively, withdraw entirely from and avoid communication with any other programs on which his/her contributions might be of value, because of the possibility of being charged with "¹incorporating knowledge developed under federal funding" into the unfunded work. This withdrawal of key talent from existing programs alone represents a staggering expense to any company, university, or other medical research organization, since replacement personnel must be found and recruited for the other ongoing work.

A laboratory for one or a half dozen researchers is just as expensive, or nearly so, to build from scratch as one employing several dozen principal researchers simply because of the basic hardware and supplies that would normally be available on a shared-time basis, to all workers in the larger lab.

¹ Once it's published, and if it's not patented, results can of course be used, provided that each of the duplicate libraries purchases separate copies of the journals.

One suspects that MONEY has more to do with it than is apparent, but exactly who expects to make the most of the situation depends on how the ones with the money are rating the expectations vs risks for their own participation/withdrawal.

John