Holy hell, Bush does know about veto power

[Deputy Nutz]

This is what I gather from the situation. Before the fetus is aborted, they collect a stem cell sample for research. Am I wrong if so, somebody that has the knowledge please share.

If this is the question it goes back to whether you accept the fact that these fetuses feel pain, and if they do does collecting the stem cells cause pain, that could be considered torture.

So far there are valid points on both side of this PackerRat argument, but to say Bush has morals or principles is laughable, he would cluck for a buck, just like every other president or politician.

[MJZiggy]

My bad. I thought they were using the frozen blastocyst cell clusters left over from fertility treatments. The ones that don't get implanted are destroyed.

[hoosier]

My bad. I thought they were using the frozen blastocyst cell clusters left over from fertility treatments. The ones that don't get implanted are destroyed.

You're right, according to NIH most come from frozen embryos, not from pre-aborted fetuses. NIH also says that stem cells coming from adults have limitations and won't necessarily yield as many medical benefits.

http://stemcells.nih.gov/StemCells/Templates/StemCellContentPage.aspx?NRMODE=Published&NRORIGINALURL=%2finfo%2ffaqs%2easp&NRNODEGUID=%7bA604DCCE-2E5F-4395-8954-FCE1C05BECED%7d&NRCACHEHINT=NoModifyGuest#wherefrom

[Deputy Nutz]

Right now this is a huge issue in the Governor race in the state of Wisconsin. Current Governor Jim Doyle is for opening up state tax dollars and allowing Wisconsin to rise to the front of stem cell research and stem cell therapy. Meanwhile, the President's choice Mark Green is a faction of the religious right, and wants to hault stem cell research in Wisconsin.

This is an important issue for me. I usually vote republican, but I do not support the corruption of my political party by the religious right, and crazies like Texaspackerbacker.

[hoosier]

I do not support the corruption of my political party by the religious right, and crazies like Texaspackerbacker.

Hasn't that been, like, 20 or 30 years in the making now?

[Joemailman]

this is a political loser for Bush, so I at least give him credit for acting on principle.

Don't be so sure Harlan. Right now considering where Bush is in the polls, his Christian Conservative base is about all he has left for support. He cannot afford to lose them with congressional elections coming up. This election could hinge on voter turnout, and he needs Christiian Conservatives to turn out in big numbers. Of course it could backfire, but it would ne naive to think he wasn't influenced by politics here.

[Harlan Huckleby]

If Bush had signed the bill, it would have received very little attention.

It is hard to imagine that this dramatic first veto could stimulate enough conservative christians to vote (who weren't already voting for him) to compensate for the people that are offended by the decision.

[Deputy Nutz]

I do not support the corruption of my political party by the religious right, and crazies like Texaspackerbacker.

Hasn't that been, like, 20 or 30 years in the making now?

I have only been voting for ten years, but it seems the Republican Party is relying more and more of the Christian Conservative base, especially in this presidency. I may be completely retarded, but it seems that either you vote repbulican because of the second amendment, or because you are pro-life. I voted republican for fiscal responsiblity, and because of Bush's Social Security Plan, and we can all see what how both of these reasons turned out.

[Joemailman]

Like Harvey, I can see both sides of this issue. However, I am bothered by what I see as inconsistency by people on the Christian right (For the record, I'm Catholic). They will argue that it is morally wrong to end human life even if doing so benefits many members of our society. And yet, isn't that how we justify our wars? Don't those who support the war in Iraq justify the killing of tens of thousands of innocent civilians on the basis that the war will lead to a better society in the future? I think Christian Conservatives would have more credibility on issues like abortion and stem-cell research if they would adopt a more consistently pro-life agenda.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Don't those who support the war in Iraq justify the killing of tens of thousands of innocent civilians on the basis that the war will lead to a better society in the future?

You were okay with Saddam Hussein killing tens of thousands of innocent civilians? I find this argument pretty illogical. Having problems with the war is fine, but this is a pretty weak argument IMHO. I'm not going to make a case for or against the war. At this point nobody is on the fence--although I hope everybody wants it turn out succesfully. However, this statement is right out of the left-wing fringe playbook. Playing to emotion rather than logic.

It's seems pretty hypocritical to me that many of the same people that make this argument also want us to stop the genocide in Sudan. People in both political parties are very inconsistent on this issue. It's really rather disingenuous.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Right now this is a huge issue in the Governor race in the state of Wisconsin. Current Governor Jim Doyle is for opening up state tax dollars and allowing Wisconsin to rise to the front of stem cell research and stem cell therapy. Meanwhile, the President's choice Mark Green is a faction of the religious right, and wants to hault stem cell research in Wisconsin. .

Do you mean he wants to halt the public funding fo stem cell research in Wisconsin? It's legal now to do the research. Does he want to make it illegal? I'm not familiar with his policies.

[Joemailman]

Don't those who support the war in Iraq justify the killing of tens of thousands of innocent civilians on the basis that the war will lead to a better society in the future?

You were okay with Saddam Hussein killing tens of thousands of innocent civilians? I find this argument pretty illogical. Having problems with the war is fine, but this is a pretty weak argument IMHO. I'm not going to make a case for or against the war. At this point nobody is on the fence--although I hope everybody wants it turn out succesfully. However, this statement is right out of the left-wing fringe playbook. Playing to emotion rather than logic.

It's seems pretty hypocritical to me that many of the same people that make this argument also want us to stop the genocide in Sudan. People in both political parties are very inconsistent on this issue. It's really rather disingenuous.

The point of my post was not to debate the Iraq war. I just think it is somewhat inconsistent that many of the same people who support a war in Iraq that kills innocent civilians, are totally opposed to the destruction of stem cells which may lead to better lives down the road. I agree that there are inconsistencies on both sides. Neither political party in this country really has much justification for claiming to be pro-life.

[Deputy Nutz]

Right now this is a huge issue in the Governor race in the state of Wisconsin. Current Governor Jim Doyle is for opening up state tax dollars and allowing Wisconsin to rise to the front of stem cell research and stem cell therapy. Meanwhile, the President's choice Mark Green is a faction of the religious right, and wants to hault stem cell research in Wisconsin. .

Do you mean he wants to halt the public funding fo stem cell research in Wisconsin? It's legal now to do the research. Does he want to make it illegal? I'm not familiar with his policies.

I am sorry I meant hault the advancement of Stem Cell research, by refusing to pass bills that provide tax dollars for funding Stem Cell Research.

[Joemailman]

Right now this is a huge issue in the Governor race in the state of Wisconsin. Current Governor Jim Doyle is for opening up state tax dollars and allowing Wisconsin to rise to the front of stem cell research and stem cell therapy. Meanwhile, the President's choice Mark Green is a faction of the religious right, and wants to hault stem cell research in Wisconsin. .

Do you mean he wants to halt the public funding fo stem cell research in Wisconsin? It's legal now to do the research. Does he want to make it illegal? I'm not familiar with his policies.

Green zone

Green dismissed the charge that he would stop stem cell research in Wisconsin, noting that he supports the embryonic stem cell research that is underway on the lines developed prior to 2001, and that he helped secure funding for the first National Stem Cell Bank at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

The true difference between the two candidates, Green said, is the issue of human cloning. Green has voted several times to ban human cloning, and characterized the bill Doyle vetoed as one that would have banned human cloning in Wisconsin. Green also said he has supported federal efforts to ban human cloning that have specific exemptions for stem cell research.

"Because he can't stand on his own record, Jim Doyle is trying to confuse people," Green said. "I can't think of a more crass political demonstration than trying to prey on human suffering for partisan gain. I've been a leader in making the fight to find cures a national priority for the past eight years - long before Jim Doyle said a word about medical research."

Green also cited his co-sponsorship of the "Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Act of 2005." As a result of that act, he said stem cells derived from cord blood already have has led to 67 clinical applications.

In contrast, he said embryonic stem cell research has yet to produce any clinical applications.

Green also said the stem cell research budget of the National Institutes for Health has doubled since he has been in Congress, and that he has worked to increase cancer research funding by $625 million, diabetes research funding by more than $120 million, and Alzheimer's research funding by more than $2 billion.

"I'll take that same commitment with me to the governor's office," he said.



This article doesn't address how much funding Green would provide for stem-cell research, or whether additional stem-cell lines would be provided. Obviously this will be a big issue this fall.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I want something clarified here. Is the research illegal? If public funding isn't provided, could the research go on with private donations? I'm just trying to figure out if this is similar to public funding of abortion rights groups. Some folks that aren't against this or abortion may be against the public funding of these things, so I'd like this clarified.