The Passion of the Embryos - Frank Rich

[NT]

July 23, 2006

Op-Ed Columnist

The Passion of the Embryos

By FRANK RICH

 

HOW time flies when democracy is on the march in the Middle East! Five whole years have passed since ominous Qaeda chatter reached its pre-9/11 fever pitch, culminating in the President’s Daily Brief of Aug. 6, 2001: “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.”

 

History has since condemned President Bush for ignoring that intelligence. But to say that he did nothing that summer is a bum rap. Just three days later, on Aug. 9, he took a break from clearing brush in Crawford to reveal the real priority of his presidency, which had nothing to do with a nuisance like terrorism. His first

prime-time address after more than six months in office was devoted to embryonic stem-cell research instead.

 

Placing his profound religious convictions above the pagan narcissism of Americans hoping for cures to diseases like Parkinson’s and diabetes, he decreed restrictions to shackle the advance of medical science.

 

Whatever else is to be said about the Decider, he’s consistent. Having dallied again this summer while terrorism upends the world, he has once more roused himself to take action — on stem cells. His first presidential veto may be bad news for the critically ill, but it was a twofer for the White House. It not only flattered the president’s base. It also drowned out some awkward news: the prime minister he installed in Baghdad, Nuri al-Maliki, and the fractious Parliament of Iraq’s marvelous new democracy had called a brief timeout from their civil war to endorse the sole cause that unites them, the condemnation of Israel.

 

The news is not all dire, however. While Mr. Bush’s Iraq project threatens to deliver the entire region to Iran’s ayatollahs, this month may also be remembered as a turning point in America’s own religious wars. The president’s politically self-destructive stem-cell veto and the simultaneous undoing of the religious right’s former golden boy, Ralph Reed, in a Republican primary for lieutenant governor in Georgia are landmark defeats for the faith-based politics enshrined by Mr. Bush’s presidency. If we can’t beat the ayatollahs over there, maybe we’re at least starting to rout them here.

 

That the administration’s stem-cell policy is a political fiasco for its proponents is evident from a single fact: Bill Frist, the most craven politician in Washington, ditched the president. In past pandering to his party’s far-right fringe, Mr. Frist, who calls himself a doctor, misdiagnosed the comatose Terri Schiavo’s condition after watching her on videotape and, in an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, refused to dispute an abstinence program’s canard that tears and sweat could transmit AIDS.

If Senator Frist is belatedly standing up for stem-cell research, you can bet he’s read some eye-popping polls. His ignorance about H.I.V. notwithstanding, he also knows that the facts about stem cells are not on Mr. Bush’s side.

 

The voting public has learned this, too. Back in 2001, many Americans gave the president the benefit of the doubt when he said that his stem-cell “compromise” could make “more than 60” cell lines available for federally financed study. Those lines turned out to be as illusory as Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction: there were only 22, possibly all of them now contaminated or otherwise useless. Fittingly, the only medical authority to endorse the Bush policy at the time, the Houston cancer doctor John Mendelsohn, was a Bush family friend. He would later become notorious for lending his empirical skills to the Enron board’s audit committee.

 

This time around, with the administration’s credibility ruined by Iraq, official lies about science didn’t fly. When Karl Rove said that embryonic stem cells weren’t required because there was “far more promise from adult stem cells,” The Chicago Tribune investigated and found that the White House couldn’t produce a single stem-cell researcher who agreed. (Ahmad Chalabi, alas, has no medical degree.)  In the journal Science, three researchers summed up the consensus of the reality-based scientific community: misleading promises about adult stem cells “cruelly deceive patients.”

 

No less cruelly deceptive was the photo op staged to sell Mr. Bush’s veto: television imagery of the president cradling so-called Snowflake babies, born via in vitro fertilization from frozen embryos that had been “adopted.” As Senator Arlen Specter has pointed out, only 128 of the 400,000 or so rejected embryos languishing in deep freeze in fertility clinics have been adopted. Many of the rest are destined to be tossed in the garbage. (GOP =better to be trashed than curing cancer!)

 

If you believe, as Mr. Bush says he does, that either discarding or conducting research with I.V.F. embryos is murder, then fertility clinic doctors, like stem-cell researchers, belong on death row. But the president, so proud of drawing a firm “moral” line, will no sooner crack down on I.V.F. than he did on Kim Jong Il: The second-term Bush has been downsized to a paper tiger. His party’s base won’t be so shy.

Sam Brownback, the Kansas Republican who led the Senate anti-stem-cell offensive and sees himself as the religious right’s presidential candidate, has praised the idea of limiting the number of eggs fertilized in vitro to “one or two at a time.” A Kentucky state legislator offered a preview of coming attractions, writing a bill making the fertilization of multiple eggs in I.V.F. treatments a felony.  ROFL!

 

Tacticians in both political parties have long theorized that if a conservative Supreme Court actually struck down Roe v. Wade, it would set Republicans back at the polls for years. Mr. Bush’s canonization of clumps of frozen cells over potential cancer cures may jump-start that backlash. We’ll see this fall. Already one Republican senatorial candidate, Michael Steele of Maryland, has stepped in

Mr. Bush’s moral morass by egregiously comparing stem-cell research to Nazi experiments on Jews during the Holocaust.   LOL

 

Mr. Reed’s primary defeat is as much a blow to religious-right political clout as the White House embrace of stem-cell fanaticism. The man who revolutionized the face of theocratic politics in the 1990’s with a telegenic choirboy’s star power has now changed his movement’s face again, this time to mud.

The humiliating Reed defeat — by 12 points against a lackluster rival in a conservative primary in a conservative state — is being pinned on his association with the felonious lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who also tainted that other exemplar of old-time religion, Tom DeLay. True enough, but it’s what Mr. Reed did for Mr. Abramoff’s clients that is most damning, far more so than the golf junkets and money-grubbing. The causes Mr. Reed enabled through manufactured grass-roots campaigns (unwittingly, he maintains)

were everything he was supposedly against: Indian casinos and legal loopholes that allowed forced abortions and sexual slavery in the work force of an American commonwealth, the Northern Mariana Islands.

 

Hypocrisy among self-aggrandizing evangelists is as old as Elmer Gantry — older, actually. But Mr. Reed wasn’t some campfire charlatan. He was the religious right’s most effective poster boy in mainstream America. He had been recruited for precisely that mission by Pat Robertson, who made him the frontman for the Christian Coalition in 1989, knowing full well that Mr. Reed’s smarts and youth could do P.R. wonders that Mr. Robertson and the rest of the baggage-laden Falwell generation of Moral Majority demagogues could not. And it worked. In 1995, Mr. Reed was rewarded with the cover of Time, for representing “the most thorough penetration of the secular world of American politics by an essentially religious organization in this century.”

 

Actually, the Christian Coalition was soon to be accused of inflating its membership, Enron-accounting style, and was careening into debt. Only three years after his Time cover, Mr. Reed, having ditched the coalition to set up shop as a political consultant, sent his self-incriminating e-mail to Mr. Abramoff: “I need to start humping in corporate accounts!” He also humped in noncorporate accounts, like the Bush campaigns of 2000 and 2004.

By 2005 Mr. Reed had become so toxic that Mr. Bush wouldn’t be caught on camera with him in Georgia. But the Bush-Rove machine was nonetheless yoked to Mr. Reed in their crusades: the demonization of gay couples as boogeymen (and women) in election years, the many assaults on health (not just in stem-cell laboratories but in federal agencies dealing with birth control and sex education), the undermining of the science of evolution. The beauty of Mr. Reed’s unmasking is the ideological impact: the radical agenda to which he lent an ersatz respectability has lost a big fig leaf, and all the president’s men, tied down like Gulliver in Iraq, cannot put it together again to bamboozle suburban voters.

 

It’s possible that even Joe Lieberman, a fellow traveler in the religious right’s Schiavo and indecency jeremiads, could be swept out with Rick Santorum in the 2006 wave. Mr. Lieberman is hardly the only Democrat in the Senate who signed on to the war in Iraq, but he’s surely the most sanctimonious. He is also the only Democrat whose incessant Bible thumping (while running for vice president in 2000) was deemed “inappropriate and even unsettling in a religiously diverse society such as ours” by the Anti-Defamation League. As Ralph Reed used to say: amen.

http://select.nytimes.com/2006/07/23/opinion/23rich.html?hp=&pagewanted=print

War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. ~ General Smedley Butler

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ImpeachBushNOW

 

 

[Larry Wilson]

I'm just sitting here, in Texas, thinking that if a hunter shoots a pregnant duck, and the hunter is only one short of his limit, shouldn't he be prosecuted?  Shouldn't game wardens check for pregnant - whatevers - to make sure you haven't exceeded your limit?

No... wait!  The game wardens should do an autopsy on the animal (if female) to see if there were any fertilized eggs; those should count toward your total.  After all, a duck embryo is a duck, right?

Oh, gad!  If you catch a female salmon (in Washington St. - not Texas), with dozens of little eggs inside, you could be doing hard time, because you just massacred a whole family!

Oh, the animalinity!! ;)

Jes' tryin' to help!
Larry

On 7/22/06, NT <nancy...@yahoo.com> wrote:

July 23, 2006

Op-Ed Columnist

The Passion of the Embryos

By FRANK RICH

 

HOW time flies when democracy is on the march in the Middle East! Five whole years have passed since ominous Qaeda chatter reached its pre-9/11 fever pitch, culminating in the President's Daily Brief of Aug. 6, 2001: "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S."

 

History has since condemned President Bush for ignoring that intelligence. But to say that he did nothing that summer is a bum rap. Just three days later, on Aug. 9, he took a break from clearing brush in Crawford to reveal the real priority of his presidency, which had nothing to do with a nuisance like terrorism. His first

prime-time address after more than six months in office was devoted to embryonic stem-cell research instead.

 

Placing his profound religious convictions above the pagan narcissism of Americans hoping for cures to diseases like Parkinson's and diabetes, he decreed restrictions to shackle the advance of medical science.

 

Whatever else is to be said about the Decider, he's consistent. Having dallied again this summer while terrorism upends the world, he has once more roused himself to take action — on stem cells. His first presidential veto may be bad news for the critically ill, but it was a twofer for the White House. It not only flattered the president's base. It also drowned out some awkward news: the prime minister he installed in Baghdad, Nuri al-Maliki, and the fractious Parliament of Iraq's marvelous new democracy had called a brief timeout from their civil war to endorse the sole cause that unites them, the condemnation of Israel.

 

The news is not all dire, however. While Mr. Bush's Iraq project threatens to deliver the entire region to Iran's ayatollahs, this month may also be remembered as a turning point in America's own religious wars. The president's politically self-destructive stem-cell veto and the simultaneous undoing of the religious right's former golden boy, Ralph Reed, in a Republican primary for lieutenant governor in Georgia are landmark defeats for the faith-based politics enshrined by Mr. Bush's presidency. If we can't beat the ayatollahs over there, maybe we're at least starting to rout them here.

 

That the administration's stem-cell policy is a political fiasco for its proponents is evident from a single fact: Bill Frist, the most craven politician in Washington, ditched the president. In past pandering to his party's far-right fringe, Mr. Frist, who calls himself a doctor, misdiagnosed the comatose Terri Schiavo's condition after watching her on videotape and, in an interview with ABC's George Stephanopoulos, refused to dispute an abstinence program's canard that tears and sweat could transmit AIDS.

If Senator Frist is belatedly standing up for stem-cell research, you can bet he's read some eye-popping polls. His ignorance about H.I.V. notwithstanding, he also knows that the facts about stem cells are not on Mr. Bush's side.

 

The voting public has learned this, too. Back in 2001, many Americans gave the president the benefit of the doubt when he said that his stem-cell "compromise" could make "more than 60" cell lines available for federally financed study. Those lines turned out to be as illusory as Saddam's weapons of mass destruction: there were only 22, possibly all of them now contaminated or otherwise useless. Fittingly, the only medical authority to endorse the Bush policy at the time, the Houston cancer doctor John Mendelsohn, was a Bush family friend. He would later become notorious for lending his empirical skills to the Enron board's audit committee.

 

This time around, with the administration's credibility ruined by Iraq, official lies about science didn't fly. When Karl Rove said that embryonic stem cells weren't required because there was "far more promise from adult stem cells," The Chicago Tribune investigated and found that the White House couldn't produce a single stem-cell researcher who agreed. (Ahmad Chalabi, alas, has no medical degree.)  In the journal Science, three researchers summed up the consensus of the reality-based scientific community: misleading promises about adult stem cells "cruelly deceive patients."

 

No less cruelly deceptive was the photo op staged to sell Mr. Bush's veto: television imagery of the president cradling so-called Snowflake babies, born via in vitro fertilization from frozen embryos that had been "adopted." As Senator Arlen Specter has pointed out, only 128 of the 400,000 or so rejected embryos languishing in deep freeze in fertility clinics have been adopted. Many of the rest are destined to be tossed in the garbage. (GOP =better to be trashed than curing cancer!)

 

If you believe, as Mr. Bush says he does, that either discarding or conducting research with I.V.F. embryos is murder, then fertility clinic doctors, like stem-cell researchers, belong on death row . But the president, so proud of drawing a firm "moral" line, will no sooner crack down on I.V.F. than he did on Kim Jong Il: The second-term Bush has been downsized to a paper tiger. His party's base won't be so shy.

Sam Brownback, the Kansas Republican who led the Senate anti-stem-cell offensive and sees himself as the religious right's presidential candidate, has praised the idea of limiting the number of eggs fertilized in vitro to "one or two at a time." A Kentucky state legislator offered a preview of coming attractions, writing a bill making the fertilization of multiple eggs in I.V.F. treatments a felony.  ROFL!

 

Tacticians in both political parties have long theorized that if a conservative Supreme Court actually struck down Roe v. Wade, it would set Republicans back at the polls for years. Mr. Bush's canonization of clumps of frozen cells over potential cancer cures may jump-start that backlash. We'll see this fall. Already one Republican senatorial candidate, Michael Steele of Maryland, has stepped in

Mr. Bush's moral morass by egregiously comparing stem-cell research to Nazi experiments on Jews during the Holocaust.   LOL

 

Mr. Reed's primary defeat is as much a blow to religious-right political clout as the White House embrace of stem-cell fanaticism. The man who revolutionized the face of theocratic politics in the 1990's with a telegenic choirboy's star power has now changed his movement's face again, this time to mud.

The humiliating Reed defeat — by 12 points against a lackluster rival in a conservative primary in a conservative state — is being pinned on his association with the felonious lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who also tainted that other exemplar of old-time religion, Tom DeLay. True enough, but it's what Mr. Reed did for Mr. Abramoff's clients that is most damning, far more so than the golf junkets and money-grubbing. The causes Mr. Reed enabled through manufactured grass-roots campaigns (unwittingly, he maintains)

were everything he was supposedly against: Indian casinos and legal loopholes that allowed forced abortions and sexual slavery in the work force of an American commonwealth, the Northern Mariana Islands.

 

Hypocrisy among self-aggrandizing evangelists is as old as Elmer Gantry — older, actually. But Mr. Reed wasn't some campfire charlatan. He was the religious right's most effective poster boy in mainstream America. He had been recruited for precisely that mission by Pat Robertson, who made him the frontman for the Christian Coalition in 1989, knowing full well that Mr. Reed's smarts and youth could do P.R. wonders that Mr. Robertson and the rest of the baggage-laden Falwell generation of Moral Majority demagogues could not. And it worked. In 1995, Mr. Reed was rewarded with the cover of Time, for representing "the most thorough penetration of the secular world of American politics by an essentially religious organization in this century."

 

Actually, the Christian Coalition was soon to be accused of inflating its membership, Enron-accounting style, and was careening into debt. Only three years after his Time cover, Mr. Reed, having ditched the coalition to set up shop as a political consultant, sent his self-incriminating e-mail to Mr. Abramoff: "I need to start humping in corporate accounts!" He also humped in noncorporate accounts, like the Bush campaigns of 2000 and 2004.

By 2005 Mr. Reed had become so toxic that Mr. Bush wouldn't be caught on camera with him in Georgia. But the Bush-Rove machine was nonetheless yoked to Mr. Reed in their crusades: the demonization of gay couples as boogeymen (and women) in election years, the many assaults on health (not just in stem-cell laboratories but in federal agencies dealing with birth control and sex education), the undermining of the science of evolution. The beauty of Mr. Reed's unmasking is the ideological impact : the radical agenda to which he lent an ersatz respectability has lost a big fig leaf, and all the president's men, tied down like Gulliver in Iraq, cannot put it together again to bamboozle suburban voters.

 

It's possible that even Joe Lieberman, a fellow traveler in the religious right's Schiavo and indecency jeremiads, could be swept out with Rick Santorum in the 2006 wave. Mr. Lieberman is hardly the only Democrat in the Senate who signed on to the war in Iraq, but he's surely the most sanctimonious. He is also the only Democrat whose incessant Bible thumping (while running for vice president in 2000) was deemed "inappropriate and even unsettling in a religiously diverse society such as ours" by the Anti-Defamation League. As Ralph Reed used to say: amen.

http://select.nytimes.com/2006/07/23/opinion/23rich.html?hp=&pagewanted=print

War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious.  ~ General Smedley Butler

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ImpeachBushNOW

 

 

--
Larry
In actual fact those who do not care for politics and sit on the fence do indeed side for a political party: The ruling party.
Max Frisch

Politicians are always interested in people. Not that this is always a virtue. Fleas are interested in dogs.
P.J. O'Rourke

[Sooz...@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/22/2006 11:02:31 PM Central Daylight Time, nancy...@yahoo.com writes:

No less cruelly deceptive was the photo op staged to sell Mr. Bush’s veto: television imagery of the president cradling so-called Snowflake babies, born via in vitro fertilization from frozen embryos that had been “adopted.” As Senator Arlen Specter has pointed out, only 128 of the 400,000 or so rejected embryos languishing in deep freeze in fertility clinics have been adopted. Many of the rest are destined to be tossed in the garbage. (GOP =better to be trashed than curing cancer!)

 

If you believe, as Mr. Bush says he does, that either discarding or conducting research with I.V.F. embryos is murder, then fertility clinic doctors, like stem-cell researchers, belong on death row. But the president, so proud of drawing a firm “moral” line, will no sooner crack down on I.V.F. than he did on Kim Jong Il: The second-term Bush has been downsized to a paper tiger. His party’s base won’t be so shy.

Sam Brownback, the Kansas Republican who led the Senate anti-stem-cell offensive and sees himself as the religious right’s presidential candidate, has praised the idea of limiting the number of eggs fertilized in vitro to “one or two at a time.” A Kentucky state legislator offered a preview of coming attractions, writing a bill making the fertilization of multiple eggs in I.V.F. treatments a felony.  ROFL!

I wonder who many "good Christian Republicans" have availed themselves of the benefits of IVF & now are blessed with families as a result. I also wonder if those who are against stem cell research (not just federal funding for it) will NEVER avail themselves or their children of the cures that one day may come from it. Sure, & I can walk on water. Can you?

[Larry Wilson]

***************

A number of the flaming hypocrites at Bush's staged propaganda event had IVF babies.

I wrote the software that ran Reproductive Genetics. P.C. in Denver, CO., and Jon Van Blerkom, a CU prof, was an IVF researcher based there.  They not only had lots and lots of fertilized eggs in storage, but they had a break-in that resulted in about 20 of them being stolen.  That was just after one fertilized egg was stolen in Europe, which resulted in a firestorm of publicity, but RGC's break-in got NO publicity, even though the FBI was involved.  Wonder why??

The Reich would have been appalled at what Van Blerkom was doing - even though what he was doing was standard research.  They haven't been my client for 7 years, so I don't know if Jon is still doing work there. Hm...  I guess he isn't.

The general manager of RGC was Rick Blackham, (search for 'Blackham' to see him quoted in this old article from the NYT) a VERY, VERY devout Mormon.  He didn't have a problem with flushing fertilized eggs.  Then again, he wasn't running for office.

I see, from RGC's website, that they've quit IVF after Jon left.  George Henry is still the head doc, but everyone else that I knew is gone.  I had a feeling that the break-in would be the downfall of them; I guess that was right.

One thing I always argued with George about was WHO they were giving babies to.

Women would come in that were obviously drunk or who had track marks on their arms or who appeared high, but George didn't care.  He said it wasn't his job to screen them.  However, he wouldn't do IVF for anyone over 40, because of the high risk of birth defects (for which their cytogenetics side would screen after 3 mos of pregnancy).  I always thought it strange that they'd screen for just one thing but not others.  His head nurse said, "It's all about the money."  George and Rick are both rabid (and that's the correct word) Rethuglicans, of course.

George's job was (is) not all that easy.  I was waiting for him, one time, outside of Sonogram Rm. 1, and he came out and we talked about his home computers that I'd just installed.  He then said he had to go back into the room, but didn't look at all happy.  I asked what was wrong, and he said that he had to go back in and tell the woman that her fetus was dead.  (yes, an IVF fetus - and no, not a unborn or a pre-born or anything-born; it was a fetus)

I can't even begin to imagine what that was like for him or the couple in the room.

Gad.

[Bold...@aol.com]

Teacher, Economist, Programmer, Winter Soldier bravely deciding to not go to Nam after a seminal ethical moral decision concerning war crimes. Are we truly in the presense of Liberal intellectual superiority or has Josef Mengele been reincarnated?

[Larry Wilson]

You know; somehow, a death squad member's opinion just doesn't register.

On 7/23/06, Bold...@aol.com < Bold...@aol.com> wrote:

Teacher, Economist, Programmer, Winter Soldier bravely deciding to not go to Nam after a seminal ethical moral decision concerning war crimes. Are we truly in the presense of Liberal intellectual superiority or has Josef Mengele been reincarnated?

[NT]

Rightwing extremists like Bush keep the death squads going by vetoing

hope for millions of Americans with cancer, diabetes, alzheimer's, etc.

[JScr...@aol.com]

 

 

 

 

FASCISM BUSH'S AMERICAN STYLE!!

 

 

 

 

Fascism is classically a radical totalitarian political philosophy that combines elements of corporatism, authoritarianism, extreme nationalism, militarism, anti-rationalism, anti-communism and anti-liberalism.

The Bush Fascist Index : "Fascism: Any program for setting up a centralized authcratic national regime with severely nationalistic policies, exercising regimentation of industry, commerce, and finance, rigid censorship, and forcible suppression of opposition." --Merriam-Webster Dictionary (Laurence W. Britt's, Fascism Anyone?, analyzed seven fascist regimes in order to find the common threads that mark them as fascist, 2002)

The Bush, Rove, Cheney Administration has produced a form of Fascism that has exceeded any yet seen in world governments It is especially evident in fact that the USA Public coffers have been raped so badly through privatization of Government Services, contracting of government services using no bid or sole source private for profit corporations. The ease of the privatization of governmental services was made easy by the characterization of governmental employees as "Bureaucrats.! Bureaucrats are inefficient, ineffective, lard bricks, and nonproductive. This bogus definition was used to sell privatization to the public! Her is a brief exploitation of The so called Bureaucrat that facilitated this reaping of the government coffers!

THE REASON THE BUREAUCRACY FAILS:

To really understand why the Bureau icy fail can be seen when analyzing its nature.

The objectives of a business which us run by a governmental Bureaucracy is usually set by the political legislature of a governing body (e.g. Congress, ) In others words the goals and objectives are set by the vote(s) of politicians. Some times there is not unanimous approval of such goals and objective or even the law in general. These laws usually for services to the citizens are given to an organization with hires personal to conduct these services. These personal have been labeled "Bureaucrats)".

The personal of a governmental business or bureaucracy have position descriptions which provides for the over seeing the expenditures and save guards against waste, fraud, and abuse, and the measure of the services delivered. There in lies the problem. The job of the personal hired to be responsible for the services are especially inhibited by the political operatives in process of conducting their business duties as described in their job descriptions and in providing accurate reports they make to the public. This is where the collation of corruption takes it a toll on the efficiency of the people in the bureaus.

Each and every report and activity has to meet the approval of the politicians who made the law. Such reports and activities are "politically sanitized" by the agents of the politicians to assure that they do not have any issuers That make voters of any side angry with the bureau personal and its activities, Further, any employee who continually violates the unwritten rules of the sanitation process are fired outright or labeled as trouble makers, and worst whistle blowers. Therefore, the bureaucracy personal are forced to be too couscous, to vague in the execution of their duties, carry out more process than conclusive actions and thus ineffective in demonstrating their professional prowess of their duties.

Thus, the negative label bureaucrats is born of the pressures from the collation of political corruption. Essentially the personal in a bureaucracy are as efficient as the employees in any other private business, It is just that a private business does not corrupt the money making objective of it’s basic goals and objectives.

CONCLUSION:

Moreover, the process of moving governmental power and money to corporation has under Bush cumulated in the accumulation of more money and power in these corporations than many worlds governments!

Finally, Rove’s conduct of power through Bush is as authoritarianism, as any in history. In the area militarists Bush is using America's combined military to conduct an international police force for corporation making excess profits by exploiting ether nations and peoples. Our military is nothing more than a mercenary force being presentably used as an enforcement arm for American Corporations/businesses.

Dr. J. Alva Scruggs, BS. Chemistry, MS. Chemistry,
MA. Urban Planning, Doctorate, Education Administration
Look Forward to Your Comments
E-MAIL JSCRU5750 (at) AOL.COM
Website ; http://franklyspeaking.info

[Sooz...@aol.com]

A couple of other issues in this that the wingnuts don't consider:

 

1.  There are not enough adoptive parents for all of the frozen embryos out there.

 

2.  Not every parent who had IVF wants their leftover embryos implanted in "x" number of their "children" running around the world. It's not quite the same as placing one child that was born up for adoption.

 

And, if we see one of them in an MD's office or clinic, seeking treatement in the future for a disease that is now fatal & thanks to stem cell research can be cured, may we boot their asses out the door?

[NT]

The issue is complicated - and really hasn't been explained that well to the public. Maybe that was by design. But - when Bush said these cells were HUMANS!!  I guess the Nuts believed him.  But it sounds like he never read the bill.

The cells will be thrown in a garbage dump - HUMANS TRASHED!!!

But that's preferable for WingNuts - rather than finding a cure for cancer.  Makes no sense!!  but when did they ever??

 

color=#ff0000> 

 

[Sooz...@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/23/2006 2:47:27 PM Central Daylight Time, nancy...@yahoo.com writes:

A couple of other issues in this that the wingnuts don't consider:

 

1.  There are not enough adoptive parents for all of the frozen embryos out there.

 

2.  Not every parent who had IVF wants their leftover embryos implanted in "x" number of their "children" running around the world. It's not quite the same as placing one child that was born up for adoption.

 

And, if we see one of them in an MD's office or clinic, seeking treatement in the future for a disease that is now fatal & thanks to stem cell research can be cured, may we boot their asses out the door?

The issue is complicated - and really hasn't been explained that well to the public. Maybe that was by design. But - when Bush said these cells were HUMANS!!  I guess the Nuts believed him.  But it sounds like he never read the bill.

The cells will be thrown in a garbage dump - HUMANS TRASHED!!!

But that's preferable for WingNuts - rather than finding a cure for cancer.  Makes no sense!!  but when did they ever??

 

What's "human" about the embryos is that they have the potential to become a human being (versus a chicken or a turtle). But they are not, as Mark Green who is the GOP candidate for governor in WI, said, "living." Being frozen is NOT LIVING. It is still potential life. And, until any fertilized egg is implanted, it is potential life. Without the nourishment it receives from the placenta in the uterus, it cannot live. Little details that they ignore.

[Larry Wilson]

Here ya go, JK.  How new does a member have to be to be granted leeway to post - over a period of months - some favorite piece, over and over?

I believe that this is the 3rd rant he's been on.  Thread relevence??

[Preda...@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/23/2006 2:39:27 PM Central Standard Time, Sooz...@aol.com writes:

A couple of other issues in this that the wingnuts don't consider:

 

1.  There are not enough adoptive parents for all of the frozen embryos out there.

 

2.  Not every parent who had IVF wants their leftover embryos implanted in "x" number of their "children" running around the world. It's not quite the same as placing one child that was born up for adoption.

 

And, if we see one of them in an MD's office or clinic, seeking treatement in the future for a disease that is now fatal & thanks to stem cell research can be cured, may we boot their asses out the door?

No, you can bitch if the cure comes from the use of EMBRYONIC stem cells. But you shouldn't get the cure either since public money won't be used, so I don't understand why you should feel entitled.

[Ann...@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/23/2006 7:13:19 PM Eastern Standard Time, la...@larry-wilson.com writes: Here ya go, JK.  How new does a member have to be to be granted leeway to post - over a period of months - some favorite piece, over and over? I believe that this is the 3rd rant he's been on.  Thread relevence??

Larry. There are some glitches with google. When ever duplicate posts are sent to me for approval, I reject if already posted.  I do not get all of them.  Again, cool off

[Ann...@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/23/2006 7:13:19 PM Eastern Standard Time, la...@larry-wilson.com writes: Here ya go, JK.  How new does a member have to be to be granted leeway to post - over a period of months - some favorite piece, over and over? I believe that this is the 3rd rant he's been on.  Thread relevence??

And this is your second~~ same post

[NT]

Preda...@aol.com wrote:

So - this issue is about money to you - NOT killing humans??

[Bold...@aol.com]

Sooz,

    Adult and embryonic stem cell research has been going on for decades,  One has produced results, the other hasn't.  The former advantage of the possibility of fetal stem cells possibly being capable of differentiating into almost any other type of organ has now become OBE by the fact that some adult stem cells can also differentiate.  What diseases have been treated or cured by fetal stem cells in the previous 40 years?  Any?   The following is a partial list of those that can now be treated, cured or ameliorated by the use of adult stem cells OR cord blood.

1.  Rebuilding livers devastated by cirrhosis
2. Repairing spinal cell injuries using nasal and sinus stem cells.
3. Putting Crohn's disease into remission with the patient's own blood stem cells.
4. Putting Lupus into remission using the patients own blood stem cells.
5.  Treating sickle cell using umbilical cord blood stem cells.
6. Repairing heart muscle in CHF patients using bone marrow stem cells,
7. Repairing cardiac damage post MI using the patients own blood stem cells.
8. Restoring bone marrow in Ca patients using umbilical cord blood stem cells.
9.  Putting Leukemia into remission using umbilical cord blood stem cells.
10.  Healing bone fractures using bone marrow stem cells.
and more......

So what exactly IS the justification for demanding government sponsored research on fetal stem cells?  Only that private investors are willing to fund adult stem cell research and unwilling to fund what they've come to see as a money pit? I hope it's NOT something far deeper.

[NT]

I thot those adult cells were running out.  And they're very limited --

i.e... only liver cells can cure liver, etc.

The bottom line is - it's all about money.  It always is with Bush.

More money for Iraq - the 51st state - and USA, Jr. (Israel)

 

 

 

 

 

 

color=#0000bf>War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. ~ General Smedley Butler

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ImpeachBushNOW

 

 

[Ann...@aol.com]

Every issue, to Pred , is about money.

[Sooz...@aol.com]

  

[NT]

Ann...@aol.com wrote:

But Bush - the leader of the Free World - was free to lie to Americans -

and claim the issue was about KILLING HUMANS!!!  And all those poor dumb Bushies believed him!!  Probably the same flock that believe

in Dumb Design.

But now Pred confirms - IT WAS REALLY ABOUT MONEY!!!

Bush lies!   shocking - I tell you - shocking.

-~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open Debate Political Forum IMHO" group.
To post to this group, send email to OpenDeb...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to OpenDebateFor...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

[Bold...@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/23/2006 7:51:32 PM Central Standard Time, nancy...@yahoo.com writes:

So what exactly IS the justification for demanding government sponsored research on fetal stem cells?  Only that private investors are willing to fund adult stem cell research and unwilling to fund what they've come to see as a money pit? I hope it's NOT something far deeper.

I thot those adult cells were running out.  And they're very limited --

i.e... only liver cells can cure liver, etc.
The bottom line is - it's all about money.  It always is with Bush.

It's the fetal stem cell lines that are running out.  Also I pointed out above that the primary advantage held up by Fetal Stem Cell researchers was the possibility that they could differentiate.  Well now Adult stem cells have also been found to have that ability.  RE: About money.  You bet your bippy it is and that's why fetal stem cell researchers are so involved in trying to get federal funding.  Again, as stated above, adult stem cell researchers are funded more than adequately by veture capitalists.  The fetals were too for a number of years and as I stated, those investors finally decided that the fetals were just a money pit with no results while the adult researchers were producing more and more results daily. 

[NT]

Link for adult stem cells differentiating?

Also - Bush lied.  There is no scientist claiming adult stem cells hold more possibilities than embryonic.  He flat lied!!!

 

[Larry Wilson]

Annie,

  I'm not even warmed up, much less hot over this! ;)

  Is it just the day to have people making leaps of illogic?

  I'm not mad or even upset of Scruggs posting - again and again.  I DO have a 'delete' key, ya know.   It's just annoying, though less so than two people in one day reading things into what I've written that aren't there - by any stretch.

  This, too, shall pass.

  We have bigger beasts to slay, nyet?

[Larry Wilson]

BS is, of course, full of BS.  Trying to sound all knowledgeable and all, which - if we were talking about death squads - I would agree that he is, but about real science? 

Bwahahahaha!

SOME adult stem cells can differentiate into a COUPLE of things, but only SOME embryonic stem cells can differentiate into almost anything.

There is also a parallel issue: embryonic stem cells can propagate very rapidly and create viable tissue - or whatever.  Adult stem cells don't have that abililty to propagate rapidly; they lose that.  Only CANCER cells really have that ability - and that's a good thing.  We wouldn't want adult cells propagating out of control like cancer cells.  So, because adult cells - the non-cancerous ones - lose the ability to propagate rapidly, they are much less useful for most things.

The most successful adult stem cell use, so far, has been bone marrow transplants to treat cancer.  Those are, essentially, transplanting the stem cells that create blood.

So, LimpSwissKnife, are you going to count a preganant fish's eggs or babies (depending on the fish) toward your daily catch?  Remember, they're fish, just like the mommy! ;)

(Hmmm.... bet not.  Hypocrisy is good for the Republican - er... hmm... what do we call they thing - or space - that Republicans have where the soul is supposed to be??)

[Ann...@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/23/2006 10:19:43 PM Eastern Standard Time, la...@larry-wilson.com writes: Annie,   I'm not even warmed up, much less hot over this! ;)   Is it just the day to have people making leaps of illogic?   I'm not mad or even upset of Scruggs posting - again and again.  I DO have a 'delete' key, ya know.   It's just annoying, though less so than two people in one day reading things into what I've written that aren't there - by any stretch.   This, too, shall pass.   We have bigger beasts to slay, nyet?

Yeah we do, Larry.

[Preda...@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/23/2006 7:32:57 PM Central Standard Time, Ann...@aol.com writes:

Here ya go, JK.  How new does a member have to be to be granted leeway to post - over a period of months - some favorite piece, over and over?

I believe that this is the 3rd rant he's been on.  Thread relevence??

You haven't witnessed his auto respond rant.

[Preda...@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/23/2006 7:47:16 PM Central Standard Time, nancy...@yahoo.com writes:

No, you can bitch if the cure comes from the use of EMBRYONIC stem cells. But you shouldn't get the cure either since public money won't be used, so I don't understand why you should feel entitled.

 

So - this issue is about money to you - NOT killing humans??

The only time I want taxpayer money spent killing humans is money spent to protect the state from foreign and domestic enemies.

[Preda...@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/23/2006 7:51:33 PM Central Standard Time, nancy...@yahoo.com writes:

So what exactly IS the justification for demanding government sponsored research on fetal stem cells?  Only that private investors are willing to fund adult stem cell research and unwilling to fund what they've come to see as a money pit? I hope it's NOT something far deeper.

I thot those adult cells were running out.  And they're very limited --

i.e... only liver cells can cure liver, etc.

The bottom line is - it's all about money.  It always is with Bush.

More money for Iraq - the 51st state - and USA, Jr. (Israel)

Running out, huh? You piss and maon once again on a subject of which you are clueless.

[Bold...@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/23/2006 8:44:54 PM Central Standard Time, nancy...@yahoo.com writes:

Bold...@aol.com wrote:

In a message dated 7/23/2006 7:51:32 PM Central Standard Time, nancy...@yahoo.com writes:

So what exactly IS the justification for demanding government sponsored research on fetal stem cells?  Only that private investors are willing to fund adult stem cell research and unwilling to fund what they've come to see as a money pit? I hope it's NOT something far deeper.

I thot those adult cells were running out.  And they're very limited --

i.e... only liver cells can cure liver, etc.
The bottom line is - it's all about money.  It always is with Bush.

It's the fetal stem cell lines that are running out.  Also I pointed out above that the primary advantage held up by Fetal Stem Cell researchers was the possibility that they could differentiate.  Well now Adult stem cells have also been found to have that ability.  RE: About money.  You bet your bippy it is and that's why fetal stem cell researchers are so involved in trying to get federal funding.  Again, as stated above, adult stem cell researchers are funded more than adequately by veture capitalists.  The fetals were too for a number of years and as I stated, those investors finally decided that the fetals were just a money pit with no results while the adult researchers were producing more and more results daily. 

Link for adult stem cells differentiating?
Also - Bush lied.  There is no scientist claiming adult stem cells hold more possibilities than embryonic.  He flat lied!!!

Here's one:

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/New_Source_of_Multipotent_Adult_Stem_Cells_in_Human_Hair_Follicles_999.html


BTW, The Earth really isn't flat ya know.