Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Now he vetoes a bill
Posted by: mcq on Wednesday, July 19, 2006

I'm going to stay away from all the moral arguments here:
President Bush rejected legislation Wednesday that could have multiplied the federal money going into embryonic stem cell research, using the first veto of his presidency to underscore his stand on the emotionally charged, life-and-death issue.
I'm only going to point out that vetoing your first bill after 6 years in office borders on dereliction of duty.

Part of governing is opposing legislation that is contrary to the ideological and political agenda of your party. And for the Preident, the tool for doing that is the veto. Anyone who believes this is the first bill in those 6 years which fits that description just aren't paying attention. It also says alot about the legislative and executive priorities of this administration. It's one of the reasons many of us see gridlock as a viable short-term alternative to single party rule.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
Hey look on the bright side, at least it was a spending bill.
 
Written By: kyle N
URL: http://impudent.blognation.us/blog
Bush’s father didn’t veto many bills, either. Maybe it’s a genetic thing.
 
Written By: Steverino
URL: http://steverino.journalspace.com/
Heh


Lets see this reasoning again to veto the bill that 70% of America strongly supports, harvest embryonic cells from extra fertility clinic stock = bad and immoral (as long as taxpayer money is involved). Kill people that walk , talk and breath, = moral.

Dam I hope the congress flips in November. This reminds me of how religious scholars killed people who said the earth was round. Funny how they want to regulate everything to their mold. Have you ever needed medicine?treatment for a disease? I guess you better not and just let God heal you since they are scared of science! I suppose there will be a bill next passed claiming the earth is 6000 years old.Jeesh.

Leave science to scientists, will they never learn?
 
Written By: x2master
URL: http://
Hi steverino,

Bush Sr had 44 clinton 37. King George Jr has 1.
 
Written By: x2master
URL: http://
x2Master Yo so funnnny....
Embryonic Stem Cells HAVE PRODUCED NO CURES. Now Adult Stem Cells have been shown to produce results. You’re right it’s about a religion... a religion of Liberalsim masquerading as Science. The Religious, by-and-large have no prtoblems with Stem Cell Research, we ask "WHY MUST IT ALWAYS BE EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS?" The state of the Science, suggests that Adult Stem Cells will produce results far sooner.
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
Gridlock only occurs when the parties are at odds - and stubbornly so. That Bush hasn’t vetoed any legislation, particularly the more stupid pandering bills, indicates that he’ll likely acquiesce, with minor tweaks, on future legislation.

And with the fickle nature of some Pols, a possible veto-proof Congress along with the lame duck Exec. is certainly NOT going to result in a divided government.
 
Written By: bains
URL: http://
and just to be clear for the idiots and partisans, there is no ban on stem cell research; there is no ban on embryonic stem cell research. In fact, there isn’t even a ban on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. Bush’s veto merely said that federal funds wouldn’t be spent while he is President.

I’ve no doubt however, that certain quarters will spin this as Bush killed Superman.
 
Written By: bains
URL: http://
Embryonic stem cells can be cultured to create different tissue. They can not do this with umbilical and adult stem cells, yet.. I said when tax payer money is involved and it should be.

Joe put down the coulter book! Science has done more to advance the human race than preachers!
If I listen to them I would have to concede that we rode on the back of Dinosaurs.... and that the earth is flat on pillars and that the plants came before the sun yadi yada BS.

Let them find a cure! Give them time, money,and the tools they need. The religious community cursed and killed many who pioneered the direction that science has taken because they fear that more and more will be disproved in there primitive texts!

Since when did a church find the cure for polio, mumps, measles, bubonic plague,the list goes on and could go further. The best you could expect from dear old priest when you caught one of the "old" illnesses was a Its Gods will you die!and of course your last rights!

Let religion control science again?, wow you reallllll funnnnnnyyyyyyy!!!!!
 
Written By: x2master
URL: http://
There’s no doubt that this is a stupid bill to exercise a veto over....unless, that is, you think about why he did it. This is purely a political move to placate the religious right.

Personally, my opinion is that if there is any scientific benefit to be derived from embryos that are going to be destroyed in any case, then it needs to be done. I’ve been too personally involved with people suffering from diseases that might benefit from this research to feel differently.

As for the dereliction of duty point, I guess I should say that Thomas Jefferson didn’t exercise the veto power once while in office.

Then again, George W. Bush is no Thomas Jefferson.



 
Written By: Doug Mataconis
URL: http://www.belowthebeltway.com
The difference, Doug, between now and Jefferson’s day is Congress wasn’t trying to spend us into the poor house and pass legislation which had the fed involved in almost every aspect of your life.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://qando.net
Awesome McQ!!!!!
 
Written By: x2master
URL: http://
The fun part of this is seeing Frist’s part in having this show up on the Presidents’ desk at all.

I find it endlessly amusing that he thinks he’s engaging in a Hillary-like bit of presidential triangulation when in fact his presidential ambitions are DOA
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
This is purely a political move to placate the religious right.
really now...

As an atheist who thinks a mother has the right to kill the human fetus growing in her womb (some limitations - parental and spousal notification first trimester for example) I’m pleased with Bush’s veto. Slippery slope issues...
 
Written By: bains
URL: http://
Ah yes x2master the wonderful world of science has brought us :

AIDS
Nuclear weapons
Greenhouse gases
Industrial pollution
Acid Rain
Crack cocaine (and most of our other party drugs)
Sarin nerve gas (and pretty much every other type of Bio/Chem weapon)
Modern weaponry
Pesticides
Genetic alteration of plants and animals (soon to include humans)

What a wonderful plate of goodies!

Personally, I find a nice balance of science and religion to be best. Religious wisdom must balance scientific innovation.
 
Written By: The Poet Omar
URL: http://
Come on Omar,

you can’t be arguing to throw the baby out with the bath water.

For 500 years common law has essentially defined a graduated set of rights and responsibilities for parents over their offspring based on their age. Roe v. Wade extrapolated this into the womb, although based on an unsustainable set of assumptions about the viability of a fetus, thus completely ignoring mothers altogether.

This law would have simply extrapolated the same model into the earliest stage of reproduction, giving parents the right to donate embryos they will never use—entities comprised of about 24 utterly undifferentiated cells—for use in scientific research.

But thanks to this veto, it is perfectly okay to incinerate these embryos, but illegal to donate them to government sponsored science, which these days is about 99% of all science. This veto represents a violation of my reproductive rights.

yours/
peter.
 
Written By: Peter Jackson
URL: http://www.liberalcapitalist.com
Well put and point taken Poet omar and I truly respect your intelligent posts however,

Which religion do we use to balance the plate of goodies.Which by the way happened because of the will of certain types of people.

IE
Split the atom (atomic energy)= good

War mongers turn into weapon(nukes)= bad


Its odd to me that religion in all its so called wisdom is corrupted by people claiming to know Gods will by starting strife, division, bigotry,hate, predjudice, and of course the ever classic killing for God(war)


 
Written By: x2master
URL: http://
This veto represents a violation of my reproductive rights.
You’ve got to be kidding.

If you aren’t, lobby to have your state fund the research. Like California does.
 
Written By: Mark A. Flacy
URL: http://
Joe -
x2Master Yo so funnnny....
Embryonic Stem Cells HAVE PRODUCED NO CURES. Now Adult Stem Cells have been shown to produce results. You’re right it’s about a religion... a religion of Liberalsim masquerading as Science. The Religious, by-and-large have no prtoblems with Stem Cell Research, we ask "WHY MUST IT ALWAYS BE EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS?" The state of the Science, suggests that Adult Stem Cells will produce results far sooner.
Lets see, since fusion research has produced not a single watt of commercial electricty, but research on trash burning has, we are better off ending fusion research and focusing on better trash CoGen incinerators? Solid tissue cancer research and genetic studies....70 billion over 50 years and no cure. Isn’t it time we scrap that and focus all our efforts on diseases that are more curable, like toenail fungus? And all that silly basic research science? No money in that. Nothing in the Good Book about men fillin’ their heads with impractical high falutin stuff. But money spent on applying existing scientific knowledge to making money does, so shall we end basic research, just to applied, and use the savings to prove the Intelligent Designer did a lot of tricks to fool scientists, but with enough money we can establish the Earth is 6,000 years old, Joe? [End brief sarcasm indulgence. Cheer up, Muslim true believers are also against most things Christian Fundies are against, and they chop the heads off people they have disputes of science vs. religion with. Galileo was denounced. The Muslim Galileos that emgerged were beheaded]

Getting serious, now. - The problem with the Religious Right’s insistance that Adult Stem cells show results is they only work on a small subset of diseases affecting a very few, come with immune rejection problems, and are more treatments than cures. No significant mass killing disease has shown a cure from adult stem cell treatments after 40 years of work - and despite the misleading large number of "70 different conditions show results" the treatments are only applicable to a very small number of conditions and patients (under 5 million possible patients) and no real adult stem cell cure has been established for any condition yet...

Embryonic stem cells, on the other hand, allow study and understanding of cell differentiation, disease formation. And allow for cultivation of cardiac muscle, new CNS tissue affecting all diseases and injuries of the eye, spine and brain. And have also demonstrated in test animals the implantation of Pancreatic Isles CURING diabetes. Unlike the small population of diseases the adult or umbilical blood cells are applicable towards - IF Embryonic cells work on just a few of the diseases adult stem cells by their very nature cannot be made into nerve, cardiac, pancreatic lines..we MIGHT end a major killer or crippling disease affecting significant portions of the population - congestive heart failure, diabetes, nailing the point of transformation from benign to malignant in a few of trillions of genetically identical cells. And outside the major killers, the extremely expensive crippling diseases of Muscular dystrophy and Parkinsons are thought to have far better prospects of treatment by embryonic cells. And only a successful CNS nerve cell line obtainable only from embryonics has any chance to restore retinal function to gain sight, even reverse spinal paralysis.

Just for a single major cure from embryonic cells that saves millions - diabetes is the most promising - or ending the living hell of paralysis for about a hundred thousand - it would be one of the greatest advances of science and medicine. 2-3 dozen cures or the insight in how defective genes express and can be treated with genetic reversals - in cancer - and embryonic cells would be as significant as the invention of antibiotics, sanitation, surgery..

Now the Religious folks are perfectly welcome if they have visions of burning in hell as "tacitly accepting baby killers" if embryonic therapies pan out - to not partake in any cures or treatments. Just as many shun blood transfusions, in vitro, birth control drugs for religious reasons today.

And Bushes befuddled notion that the millions of unwanted frozen embryos can all be Saved by Jesus’s grace with willing Snowflake parents adopting all the embryos for implantation instead of discarding them ...or worse....possibly saving lives or ending crippling conditions in the living...should be addressed. Let all the Jesus Lovers wanting another couples embryo rather than create a baby themselves and willing to spend the money on implantation have 1st dibs on the embryos! Announce that all the unwanted embryos in a State are to be discarded annually on such and such a date, but will be given to a "baby-loving" Christian wanting a snowflake if they show up at the deep freeze facility and fork over the money for uterus prep hormone treatments, implantation fees, and have it done by contract in 2-3 months or they hand the "blessed frozen baby of Jesus" back over, to be tossed in the trash. Next ask the researchers if they want any of the tissue specks in the test tubes the Religious Right people somehow haven’t lined up the needed 10s of thousands of uteruses for. Even if the researchers take all they want, and all the "snowflakes" Jesus wants saved based on the past experience with the very small number of Jesus lovers actually willing to spend the money, carry an unknown couples offspring, and lose child creating time of the couple themselves to "save" other people’s discards ——fertility clinics and ethicists say that at least 95% after the religious right uteruses are deployed and researchers get the few healthy lines they want established and the genetic disease lines they wish to research through differentiation —-95% of unwanted embryos, at the least, will still be chucked in the trash or poured down a sink or toilet.



 
Written By: C. Ford
URL: http://
C.Ford all your arguments pale into insignificance with the single argument that if we begin harvesting unborn human beings for their parts then In my view it will most certainly escalate into creating those embryos for just that purpose.
Between the selfish people and the worshipers of science at all costs people and the greed of the medical community it most certainly will.

BTW, embryonic stem cells have showed an amazing ability for one thing, to mutate into cancer cells. I believe it is dangerous technology that should be pursued with upmost caution. Of course you don’t hear that from the research community.
But Scientists would never say something just to get more funding would they? OH NO! scientist aren’t like other people they are pure as the driven snow.
 
Written By: kyle N
URL: http://impudent.blognation.us/blog
If scientists used only discarded embryos,that would be discarded would you still feel the same way?You do know they are flushed at this time.If there is even a possibility for a cure think of all the LIFE we would be saving all around the world. Now thats PRO-LIFE.

One could go in circles here because I could say how many embryos had to "die" so you could have the one that took in the uterous that you parade at a press conference?
Instead of flushing them down the bio-medical sink, lets give this a chance on a large scale level.

To all religious pundits: it is inevitable that as soon as congress flips and I have a feeling that wont be long from now , for this to rise to the forefront and survive any vetoe.

Add it to the list of invitro, blood transfusions, abortion, antibiotics , and every other thing that the religious community says is the devil, oh and when they do find a cure we can have a scientific experiment:

how long will a religious person suffer with a disease knowing there is a cure? Long time ago I remember a process called open heart surgery. I also remember religious wackos saying it was playing GOD.
Heh you dont have to recieve the cure if you dont want to, or it offends you now do you? God forbid we let others make up their own mind.
 
Written By: x2master
URL: http://
Let them find a cure! Give them time, money,and the tools they need.
Right! Onward with the missile defense program!

Oh, wait. Stem cell research. Sorry, I lost the narrative there.
 
Written By: Jon Henke
URL: http://www.QandO.net
The state of the Science, suggests that Adult Stem Cells will produce results far sooner.
And driving will get you there faster than public transportation, yet we manage to fund both. Framing adult vs. embryonic stem cell research as an either/or issue is disingenuous.

Embryonic stem cells are pluripotent. Adult cells are not. The difference in potential is tremendous.

And why we’re not going all in on cord blood banking and stem cell derivation is beyond me.
To all religious pundits: it is inevitable that as soon as congress flips and I have a feeling that wont be long from now , for this to rise to the forefront and survive any vetoe.
This Republican controlled Congress passed the legislation in both houses. The House bill was Republican authored. What does control of Congress have to do with it?
 
Written By: Pablo
URL: http://
Why didn’t he just issue a signing statement declaring that the bill could not be construed to limit the President’s Article II powers to decide what is morally correct for the country?

 
Written By: David Shaughnessy
URL: http://dsthinkingloud.blogspot.com/
If it’s all so promising, where’s all the private funding?

Why is it good for ’limited government’ to get involved in yet another business (it’s a business, anything that comes out of it, with all your government spent funding, isn’t going to be free, no matter how wonderful it is remember?)

Allocation of funding, regulation of activities, government spending to oversee the whole schmeer, think of the opportunities for more government generated pencil pushing REMF’s!

Oh never mind, fund it now, why the hell not. We need more reasons for more government.

As to final use of the veto? - bring on the gridlock circus!, praise Allah and A-M-E-N.
 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
Cheers to KyleN and Pablo for explaining this issue better than I could have.

x2master : I appreciate your agreement that science and religion must balance each other. If they don’t we become either lunatic fundamentalists or soulless technocrats. Your argument about using discarded embryos, while attractive on the surface, seems, unfortunately like "the ends justify the means." As for the "faith healer" types, please that’s a straw man argument. Those guys make-up about as much of the mainstream religious community as Scientologists.

looker and Jon : Yep, I agree 100%. This is simply more of an excuse to create yet another government agency to prop up what essentially boils down to a business : the cultivation, buying and selling of human organs, cells, and embryos. If it’s going to be such a great thing, let the private sector support it.

C.Ford : at first, I thought you were an anti-Muslim bigot (all Muslims are just fundamentalist psychos waiting for you to say boo to chop your head off). Then, I thought you were an anti-Jewish bigot (all Jews are rich "money men" who control the world through the offices of the Democrat party). All this is fine and I could have happily lumped you in as the modern reincarnation of one of the Know Nothing Party’s most fervent members. Now, with the anti-Christian screed, I am forced to move you from simple Know Nothing bigot to religion hating bigot period. Where does this level of hatred and scorn for the beliefs of the orthodox religious community come from? Where you abused by a priest, or kidnapped by scientologists and forced to watch L. Ron Hubbard videos? Do you consider all Christians to be simply hypocritical rubes led on by medieval notions of morality preached to them by scam-artist evangelists?

For the life of me, I cannot understand the enormously skewed perceptions that more than a few of the posters here at QandO seem to have of religion. Every Christian is not Jerry Falwell. Every Jew is not George Soros (who isn’t even an identifying religious Jew). Every Muslim is not OBL.

Could one of you die hard secularists please explain this attitude to me?
 
Written By: The Poet Omar
URL: http://
Yep, I agree 100%. This is simply more of an excuse to create yet another government agency to prop up what essentially boils down to a business : the cultivation, buying and selling of human organs, cells, and embryos. If it’s going to be such a great thing, let the private sector support it.
The National Institutes of Health budget for FY 2007 looks to be about $28.5 billion, the vast majority of which is medical research funding. If it’s worth doing, shouldn’t the public sector then also support all of that as well?

The thing is that such research costs huge piles of money that no private firm can afford to lose. And unlike drug research or device invention, there’s no guarantee of the exclusivity via patent that would allow private investment to be recouped.
 
Written By: Pablo
URL: http://
Let them find a cure! Give them time, money,and the tools they need.
Right! Onward with the missile defense program!

Oh, wait. Stem cell research. Sorry, I lost the narrative there.
Very good! Wiping coke off my keyboard, but very good.

I am glad he vetoed the bill. If the figures above are correct he needs to catch up with his dad. I say 43 more.
 
Written By: Lance
URL: http://
Pablo, if stem cell research really is "the next big thing," as so many seem to swear to, then why wouldn’t a private company be willing to risk its future on this?

If it goes the way of Betamax, then, oh well. If they don’t believe in the product enough to stake their future on it, it musn’t be that great of a product, no?
 
Written By: The Poet Omar
URL: http://
Pablo there is not enough to override the vetoe. When there is the bill will pass.
 
Written By: x2master
URL: http://
Pablo, if stem cell research really is "the next big thing," as so many seem to swear to, then why wouldn’t a private company be willing to risk its future on this?

If it goes the way of Betamax, then, oh well. If they don’t believe in the product enough to stake their future on it, it musn’t be that great of a product, no?
P/O:

In my opinion, basic scientific research is an appropriate task for the Federal government. American capitalism is not perfect and one of its shortcomings, I think, is an excessive aversion to threats to short-term profitability, especially in large, public-traded companies. Small companies simply don’t have the resources to sustain basic research.

Basic research is notoriously ill-suited to profitability analysis. Indeed, even stem cell research supporters — of which I am one — merely speculate about its ultimate success on a scientific or commercial level. I compare this to Eisenhower’s interstate highway program, the government erecting the infrastructure upon which American capitalism can grow. (I fully expect an economic-libertarian condemnation of this view, but that’s how I see it.)
 
Written By: David Shaughnessy
URL: http://dsthinkingloud.blogspot.com/
Pablo, if stem cell research really is "the next big thing," as so many seem to swear to, then why wouldn’t a private company be willing to risk its future on this?
The Poet Omar, "Risk it’s future" is probably the operative phrase there. And as I mentioned, there’s no guarantee that a private company which makes some grand discovery will be able to reap all of the monetary benefits of such a discovery.

Further, I won’t suggest that we know what’s ’going to be the next big thing". That’s why we do research, to test hypotheses and either confirm or discard them. What the Federal resarch program does that private programs will not do is impose and engender collaboration among scientists in a given field. This is the difference between conducting science to further the public interest versus conducting it for shareholder renumeration. The field moves forward faster as experiments don’t need to be replicated by every lab doing a given type of work.

Again, from your position, why should the federal government fund any research at all?
 
Written By: Pablo
URL: http://
the government erecting the infrastructure upon which American capitalism can grow. (I fully expect an economic-libertarian condemnation of this view, but that’s how I see it.)
Except that wasn’t what Eisenhowers’s system was for - it was modeled on the Autobahn in Germany as a means of moving troops from point A to point B and evacuating citizens from major cities in the event of nuclear attack.

The economic part was, at least partially, an unintended consequence.


...When President Eisenhower went to Kansas to announce the interstate highway system, he announced it as "the National Defense Highway System." In 1956 President Eisenhower signed legislation establishing the National System of Interstate and Defense Highways (about 41,000 miles of roads). Since then, DOD has continued to identify and update defense-important highway routes. The National Defense Highway system was designed to move military equipment and personnel efficiently...

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/ndhs.htm

I do note though, it was lobbied for in the 30’s FOR economic reasons.

Still, while you may consider the moral reasons for not funding it inconsequential, or irrelevant, others do not just as I’m sure some people objected to funding highways when private railroads were available to move people from point A to point B). Do note that the highway system economically killed off a lot of the smaller railroad systems while it encouraged other areas of the economy to grow.

 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
Agreed looker. The interstate system was not built (primarily) for economic purposes. It was built as part of the military infrastructure. The economic benefits were realized by capitalists willing to risk all by investing in businesses linked to the interstate in one way or another. Had it flopped, they would have been bankrupt, but, to a certain extent, oh well. You pays your money, you takes your chances. That’s the essence of capitalism. Big risk, big reward.

Stem cell research is the same kind of thing. Does it have possibilities of benefitting billions of people, sure. So do blu-ray technology. Here’s the difference : Sony is willing to stake a good part of its future on the outcome of blu-ray. The stem cell folks are almost all arguing for 0 risk (but high cost) government spending instead.

Now taking advantage of products and research that the private sector has done is one thing, but spending millions on projects that may or may not bear fruit is another. Let the private industry folks pave the way for stem cell research. If it pans out, then let Uncle Sugar take advantage of it, until then we are just throwing money at another problem with no real guarantees.
 
Written By: The Poet Omar
URL: http://
Cmon Poet Omar Blu-ray Vs Embryonic Stem cell research as a comparison of potential to aid the human race?

Apples and oranges my friend.

So lets stop funding all medical research because its expensive and risky.

You can watch your blue-ray while your dying in the hospital !



 
Written By: x2master
URL: http://
Looker & Omar:

I beg to differ regarding the rationale behind the Interstate Highway System and I refer you to page 250 of Volume Two of Stephen Ambrose’s Eisenhower The President, in which the military rationale is described as secondary to the economic purposes.
Eisenhower wanted the highways built. To him, it was an ideal program for the federal government to undertake. First, the need was clear and inescapable. Second, a unified system could only be erected by the federal government. Third, it was a public-works program on a massive scale . . . Finally, Eisenhower wanted the highways as part of his overall Cold War program . . ."
While I concede that my analogy to stem cell research is imperfect, I have no objection to basic research (or infrastructure work) being done by the federal government pursuant to a military rationale. The internet, for instance, has worked out fine for all concerned.
 
Written By: David Shaughnessy
URL: http://dsthinkingloud.blogspot.com/
To a certain extent x2, you’re right Blu-ray and stem cell research are apples and oranges in terms of benefit to humanity, but that misses my larger point.

Sony is staking all on Blu-ray (home theater, PS3, etc.). It isn’t going to be like Betamax if they fail. They are facing corporate life and death over this issue.

I propose the same to those who want stem cell research. Let a corporation that really believes in stem cell research stake its life on the research. If they honestly believe in the product they should have no problems supporting it. If they are hesitant, then let’s ask why.

Don’t get me started on Ambrose, David. He was a narrative historian at best, and a plagiarizing hagiographer at worst. Put simply, he was a pop culture historian, not a serious academic. Lump him in with Shelby Foote, a much more readable author. Eisenhower was a general first and foremost. He had seen the Soviet threat firsthand in the early days of European reconstruction (1945-46). I suspect based on his personal experience and demonstrated attitudes that his approach to the interstate system was primarily military, not economic.

I feel exactly the opposite way as regards federal research. Let the private sector suck up the big costs and take the big risks (they have the most to gain anyway), then after research has been proven to bear fruit, let the feds step in. What we are proposing regarding stem cell research is just more potentially wasted government funds (also known as tax payer dollars). Remember the feds are accountable to pretty much no one regarding spending. Private companies are enormously and immediately accountable. Which would you prefer?

 
Written By: The Poet Omar
URL: http://
Let the private sector suck up the big costs and take the big risks (they have the most to gain anyway), then after research has been proven to bear fruit, let the feds step in. What we are proposing regarding stem cell research is just more potentially wasted government funds (also known as tax payer dollars). Remember the feds are accountable to pretty much no one regarding spending. Private companies are enormously and immediately accountable. Which would you prefer?
Omar, it’s not so much what I would prefer, it’s what will work that counts. I think you have it backwards: the fact that "[p]rivate companies are enormously and immediately accountable" is precisely the problem. To succeed in basic research one must be prepared for failure, and for failure that takes a long time in coming. Large private companies will not risk that; small private companies don’t have the resources to do it. That doesn’t mean it’s not worth doing; it merely means that the American capitalist system deems it as such.

As for Ambrose, well I’m not sure how hagiographic it is to suggest that Eisenhower was motivated more by economics than defense with respect to the IHS. And i think that, at the height of the Cold War, it would be exceedingly unlikely that anything, let alone a massive government project, could be sold politically without reference to national defense. Perhaps most importantly, I LIKE IKE so maybe the adulatory tone (certainly manifest in Ambrose’s discussion of Eisenhower’s private life) is easier for me to take. One thing though: you are evidently a tough book critic and I will certainly bear that in mind.
 
Written By: David Shaughnessy
URL: http://dsthinkingloud.blogspot.com/
Lol. As always David, I very much enjoy my discussions with you. Although we disagree on the stem cell research issue, it is a pleasure debating it with a well informed, reasonable, and obviously well educated person such as yourself.

From a purely historical perspective, I do greatly admire what Eisenhower accomplished as a supreme commander during the second world war. As a president, I’m much less impressed. On a personal level, I’m also less than enthralled with Ike and I suppose I certainly fall into the minority on this issue. I’ve always been much more impressed by Slim, Auchinleck, and Alexander on the Western Allied side (and, to a lesser extent by Patton and Douglas M.)

I also suppose I am a bit of a tough book critic, but to a certain extent it comes from dealing PROFessionaly with certain literary and academic material. Although literary criticism isn’t my professional specialty (neither is English literature or poetry), I do have a certain degree of exposure to it in my daily work. I still look forward to reading any work (fiction or otherwise) which you have published. ;)
 
Written By: The Poet Omar
URL: http://
Hi Poet Omar,

When a breakthrough does happen you can bet your behind some private companies will jump in. Always been that way since the birth of capitalism!

They just do not see the $ signs, yet.

Gedon has successfully cultured spinal cord tissue in rats restoring limited .

I bet Christopher Reeves would be proud!

Take care Poet always nice talking with you!!!
 
Written By: x2master
URL: http://
You’ve got to be kidding.
Not at all. Look, it’s not my fault that the government is up to it’s eyeballs in research funding, any more than it is yours, but there it is. And now if my wife and I have left over embryos from an IVF attempt, I can’t donate it to the the most promising researcher in the field studying the disease that killed my first child because he accepts Federal money? Yet I don’t even have to fill out a form to have them tossed into a dumpster.

I’m sorry, but that’s nonsensical. It’s anti-humanity and anti-life, denies me the full ownership of my reproductive material and is furthermore an ivasion of my privacy, all predicated on the government having decided to drive out good money (private money) with their bad money ("free" money). So now I have to adhere to the personal religious superstitions of whoever happens to be in control of those government purse strings? It would be absolutely no different if the government arbitrarily prevented me from allowing a couple to "adopt" one or more of MY embryos because that couple received some kind of Federal assistance such as food stamps.

No, dude. I’m not kidding at all.

yours/
peter.
 
Written By: Peter Jackson
URL: http://www.liberalcapitalist.com
Peter as with all things related to the feds, I think this mess could be remedied by Congress just saying no.

No federal involvement in the stem cell debate period. Leave it up to the market entirely or such states as want to contribute. Let voters decide if they want to support state legislators who vote for or against stem cell spending.

This issue falls very squarely within the framework of personal morality. If you decide that you want any embryos you and your wife produce to go to research, so be it. It’s your moral choice. If I decide that I would rather die than do such a thing, ok also a personal moral choice. The government has no place involving itself in such things. I think that this is a common ground that we can agree on, don’t you?
 
Written By: The Poet Omar
URL: http://

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider