Posted on 03/13/2009 8:12:20 PM PDT by Between the Lines
Dumbo has ears just like him.
Great point, just about puts him in the same class too :)
Another illustration of vitually no experience
If that’s the case, then it’s good news it’s not funded.
The Clinton adminstration circumvented Dickey-Wicker by issuing a legal opinion opining that the federal funds could be used to fund experiments on cell lines derived from destroyed embryos but could not be used for the actual creation and destruction of the embryos themselves. I suspect that, until Congress specifically addresses Dickey-Wicker, the Obama administration will do the same thing.
He was for it before he was against it.
Dear Democrats:
Not reading legislation before voting has consequences.
...cause he ain't gonna want any bacon! (Pssst: Any updates on gettin' a dog, either??? Nope. Muslims don't like dogs - CERTAINLY NOT inside the house....mark my words a dog "for the girls" won't EVER happen.)
This was not a mistake, or a defeat for Obama or pro-embryonic-stem-cell-research people.
There’s a crucial point none of you here seems to see... There is a difference between the law today and the law under the Bush EO..
The Bush EO banned federal funds from being used on stem cells not derived from pre-existing cell lines (i.e. cells that are derived from newly destroyed embryos).
Obama rescinded that EO.
The Dickey-Wicker Amendment bans the use of federal funds to destroy embryos (including to extract stem cells).
The Bush EO and the Dickey-Wicker Amendment do not serve the same function.
Now, federal funds may be used to fund research on stem cells derived from newly destroyed embryos. However, those embryos must have been destroyed using private (or not federal, anyway) funds.
Now he re-instates the ban on funding and makes very little noise about it.
His intention is clear: Fool the left into thinking he did what they want, and then try to placate the right by signing the ban. He knows we will find out about the ban,(because we actually follow current events) but he is pretty sure the left will remain ignorant for the most part, mainly because they want to.
Regrettably, this is probably a case of 'never ascribe to conspiracy what can adequately be explained by incompetence.'
I really hate to date myself here, but Robert Heinlein nailed politicians here:
"... I don't mean that a business politician won't steal; stealing is his business. But all politicians are non-productive. The only commodity any politician has to offer is jawbone. His personal integrity--meaning, if he gives his word, can you rely upon it?" A successful business politician knows this and guards his reputation for sticking by his own commitments--because he wants to stay in business--go on stealing, that is, not only this week, but next year, and years after that. So if he's smart enough to be sucessful at this very exacting trade, he can have the morals of a snapping turtle, but he performs in such a way as not to jeopardize the only thing he has to sell, his reputation for keeping promises
“But a reform politician has no such lodestone. His devotion is to the welfare of all the people–an abstraction of very high order and therefore capable of endless definitions. If indeed it can be defined in meaningful terms. In consequence your utterly sincere and incorruptible reform politician is capable of breaking his word three times before breakfast–not from personal dishonesty, as he sincerely regrets the necessity and will tell you so–but from unswerving devotion to his ideal.
“All it takes to get him to break his word is for someone to get his ear and convince him that it is necessary for the greater good of all the peepul. He’ll geek.
“After he gets hardened to this, he’s capable of cheating at solitaire. Fortunately he rarely stays in office long–except during the decay and fall of a culture.”
To me, that pretty much covers the current situation, doesn't it?
Another Heinlein prediction was that the era after the 1980's were referred to as the 'Crazy Years'. By his lights, I believe the present pretty much qualifies as '...during the decay and fall of a culture.' God knows, we're living them just now ... only instead of Nehemiah Scudder, we've got Barak Obama!
Doesn't this mean that the funds made available in the "ACT", may be used for the purpose of human embryonic research, not other readily available government funds.
I think this inclusion was meant to appease and deceive the pro-life group.
I suspect Obama is trying to have it both ways here. Gotta keep that approval rating as high as possible.
Ok, who let Kerry type on the teleprompter?
Jean Carrié is that you?
Yo-Yo Bama.
Carter was.
So does this mean that you can use federal funds to experiment with live embryos and pluck cells from them as long as you don't intend to kill the them? And if the embryos die as a result of all that plucking, why, you didn't mean it, so it doesn't count? Yikes!!!
Mia, you are correct. I think we have to many speed readers and this just went over their heads This statement means it only applies to these funds. You can bet there are other funds that will be used.
Obama does a barrel roll!
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.