Posted on 10/31/2006 1:02:59 AM PST by YaYa123
If Republicans lose the Senate, it could be because of the issue that George W. Bush put on the national agenda in his very first televised prime-time address to the nation, serving as yet another reminder of how the GOP’s chances in next week’s elections are inextricably linked to his presidency.
Although a Democratic takeover of the Senate is still less than likely, political oddsmakers point to the contest in Missouri as a must-win in any scenario that leads to such a changeover. And that race seems to be turning on stem cell research, the issue Bush introduced to most Americans during a speech in August 2001 in which he announced restrictions against federal funding of embryonic research.
(Excerpt) Read more at cq.com ...
Craig Crawford's position (sounds to me), is the opposite of Fred Barnes, who said last night on Brit's round table, that support for this Missouri initiative is "sinking like a stone."
the use of embryonic stem cells to combat disease had long been a hot topic among anti-abortion conservatives who see it is a threat to the “sanctity of the unborn”
Little creep...
I heard him say that.
And we can thank Rush Limbaugh for being willing to deliberately make himself a target once again and blowing the RAT'S cover.
I always appreciate confirmation that what I wrote was accurate. In this instance especially because Fred Barnes is the only one on TV I've heard say, the #2 initiative on the Missouri ballot is in trouble. Makes sense the MSM wouldn't want to admit Rush challenging Fox is reaping rewards, but failing to report how this might impact the Talent/McCaskill race is just plain dereliction of duty.
A few days ago I watched Charlie Cook be interviewed about the Michael J. Fox ad and the responding ad. Cook cooed how effective the Fox ad was, on and on he praised it. When shown the responding ad, Cook said it meant nothing to him, he didn't know who those people were, it was a bad, ineffectual ad. I don't know when I've seen Cook be so in the tank! He would have us believe he didn't know Jim Caveisal, Patricia Heaton, or the athletes, and be willing to predict because of his own ignorance, the ad wouldn't work.
O'Reilly did a sort of expose` last night on his program about exactly "who" is behind this whole thing. I was doing other things at the time, so I'd have to rewind my videotape to get the details. Big money interests are involved and they're using "infallible victims" as front people.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.