An Edwards Outrage

f_rice

EFF GM AND CHRYSLER!!!!
Established Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2003
Messages
3,125
Location
SE MI, USSA
An Edwards Outrage

By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, October 15, 2004; Page A23

After the second presidential debate, in which John Kerry used the word "plan" 24 times, I said on television that Kerry has a plan for everything except curing psoriasis. I should have known there is no parodying Kerry's pandering. It turned out days later that the Kerry campaign has a plan -- nay, a promise -- to cure paralysis. What is the plan? Vote for Kerry.

This is John Edwards on Monday at a rally in Newton, Iowa: "If we do the work that we can do in this country, the work that we will do when John Kerry is president, people like Christopher Reeve are going to walk, get up out of that wheelchair and walk again."

In my 25 years in Washington, I have never seen a more loathsome display of demagoguery. Hope is good. False hope is bad. Deliberately, for personal gain, raising false hope in the catastrophically afflicted is despicable.

Where does one begin to deconstruct this outrage?

First, the inability of the human spinal cord to regenerate is one of the great mysteries of biology. The answer is not remotely around the corner. It could take a generation to unravel. To imply, as Edwards did, that it is imminent if only you elect the right politicians is scandalous.

Second, if the cure for spinal cord injury comes, we have no idea where it will come from. There are many lines of inquiry. Stem cell research is just one of many possibilities, and a very speculative one at that. For 30 years I have heard promises of miracle cures for paralysis (including my own, suffered as a medical student). The last fad, fetal tissue transplants, was thought to be a sure thing. Nothing came of it.

As a doctor by training, I've known better than to believe the hype -- and have tried in my own counseling of people with new spinal cord injuries to place the possibility of cure in abeyance. I advise instead to concentrate on making a life (and a very good life it can be) with the hand one is dealt. The greatest enemies of this advice have been the snake-oil salesmen promising a miracle around the corner. I never expected a candidate for vice president to be one of them.

Third, the implication that Christopher Reeve was prevented from getting out of his wheelchair by the Bush stem cell policies is a travesty.

George Bush is the first president to approve federal funding for stem cell research. There are 22 lines of stem cells now available, up from one just two years ago. As Leon Kass, head of the President's Council on Bioethics, has written, there are 3,500 shipments of stem cells waiting for anybody who wants them.

Edwards and Kerry constantly talk of a Bush "ban" on stem cell research. This is false. There is no ban. You want to study stem cells? You get them from the companies that have the cells and apply to the National Institutes of Health for the federal funding.

In his Aug. 7 radio address to the nation, Kerry referred not once but four times to the "ban" on stem cell research instituted by Bush. At the time, Reeve was alive, so not available for posthumous exploitation. But Ronald Reagan was available, having recently died of Alzheimer's.

So what does Kerry do? He begins his radio address with the disgraceful claim that the stem cell "ban" is standing in the way of an Alzheimer's cure.

This is an outright lie. The President's Council on Bioethics, on which I sit, had one of the world's foremost experts on Alzheimer's, Dennis Selkoe from Harvard, give us a lecture on the newest and most promising approaches to solving the Alzheimer's mystery. Selkoe reported remarkable progress in using biochemicals to clear the "plaque" deposits in the brain that lead to Alzheimer's. He ended his presentation without the phrase "stem cells" having passed his lips.

So much for the miracle cure. Ronald D.G. McKay, a stem cell researcher at NIH, has admitted publicly that stem cells as an Alzheimer's cure are a fiction, but that "people need a fairy tale." Kerry and Edwards certainly do. They are shamelessly exploiting this fairy tale, having no doubt been told by their pollsters that stem cells play well politically for them.

Politicians have long promised a chicken in every pot. It is part of the game. It is one thing to promise ethanol subsidies here, dairy price controls there. But to exploit the desperate hopes of desperate people with the promise of Christ-like cures is beyond the pale.

There is no apologizing for Edwards's remark. It is too revealing. There is absolutely nothing the man will not say to get elected.

[email protected]




http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34167-2004Oct14.html?sub=AR
 

speederdoc

New Member
Established Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2004
Messages
691
Location
Houston, TX
Sickening. Just like his "channeling" of dead babies that won him millions in undeserved legal fees. He thinks he is Miss Cleo and Jesus Christ rolled into one.
 

tommyhil4_6

Buh Bye
Joined
Oct 21, 2003
Messages
2,113
Location
Salt Lake City
What a ****er..... I like the man who wrote that, he makes a very good point.

I hate Kerry, and everyone is right when they say "he will do and say anything, just to be able to spin circles in his chair in the oval office"

I hope he dies....
 

ampstang

Nobody F's w/ a Lion
Established Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2004
Messages
4,031
Location
Texas
I'm also in class at a medical school. To be honest, everything Kerry and Edwards has ever said about anything relating to medicine is wrong. As a lawyer, Kerry knows that if he talks about stem cell research being the cure to everything and big bad Bush banning it, the majority of America who doesn't have anything to do with science will believe him. Remember the O.J. trial how nobody knew what DNA was. He just keeps on pulling crap out of his ass left and right. He's one shady character.
 

Joe King

Visual molester
Established Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2002
Messages
575
Location
NY
well..well.well..

Like all the partisan articles which you so proudly post from the WSJ..this to is political claptrap.

I..unlike you...look past politics for answers about science. When I read your previous post re: stem cell research...I googled the topic. Well..the first hit...was the Univ. of Wisconsin..who has a whole site dedicated to the topic...what do they say..oh...that "EMBRYONIC" stem sell research (which Bush DOESN'T support) ..DOES..have "potential" to cure Alzheimers & Spinal-cord injuries. I'm sure if you searched you'd find NUMEROUS other institutions that would echo their beliefs.

Whether or not Edward/Kerry are exaggerating is not the issue. The issue...IS..the GOV'T HAS NO BUSINESS GETTING INVOLVED IN RESTRICTING ..ANY..SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH!! Especially based on antiquated religious dogma. This reminds me of Gallaleo being excuminicated for stating the SUN was the center of the solar system..heresy!

I won't bore everyone with differentiating Adult..from Emryonic stem cells..but the point is that emryonic cells have FAR greater potential & NO POLITICIAN has the MORAL right to make the call. No, there may NEVER be a cure for these diseases...thats why its called.... RESEACH.... but sure as hell, I'm not going to be silent when Billy Graham or Pat Robertson are dictating science...this isn't 15th century Italy.

The whole premise of your argument is skewd (& morally indefensible). You take a religious belief (held by a few)..using embryos is killing...& then attempt to justify a policy..not funding scientific research which potentially can SAVE (or improve) lives of many. Science & religion have rarely mixed. The greater good must ..ALWAYS..take precedence...that is a politicians job.

Oh yes..BUSH said "its hard work"...15 times!
 

TrueBlueGT

is impressed!
Established Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2004
Messages
4,496
Location
In perpetual exile....
Re: well..well.well..

Joe, you are a smartass and with every post you make, you try desperately to create a facade of intelligence and superiority to the masses that form SVTP and I am tired of it. So just to put you in your place, lets dissect your statement shall we?

I..unlike you...look past politics for answers about science. When I read your previous post re: stem cell research...I googled the topic. Well..the first hit...was the Univ. of Wisconsin..who has a whole site dedicated to the topic...what do they say..oh...that "EMBRYONIC" stem sell research (which Bush DOESN'T support) ..DOES..have "potential" to cure Alzheimers & Spinal-cord injuries. I'm sure if you searched you'd find NUMEROUS other institutions that would echo their beliefs

Here it is. Right off the bat you assert the fact that you know more about the topic than all of us put together because you "googled it". Wow, you really broke a sweat on that one. Tell me, Joe, did the U of W cover the origin of these embryonic stem cells? Probably not, because that is a topic no one wants to touch w/ a ten foot pole.

Whether or not Edward/Kerry are exaggerating is not the issue. The issue...IS..the GOV'T HAS NO BUSINESS GETTING INVOLVED IN RESTRICTING ..ANY..SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH!! Especially based on antiquated religious dogma. This reminds me of Gallaleo being excuminicated for stating the SUN was the center of the solar system..heresy!

Yes, whether or not Edward/Kerry are exaggerating IS the issue. For you to state differently is a blatant denial of the fact of the matter. Two politicians whom possess no knowledge of the topics they discuss are promising to deliver w/in four years what has been impossible prior to this date in history. They are exploiting what is arguably the most debilitating injury for personal gain and the fact that you cannot see that shows your true level of perceptiveness.
The Gov't has no business restricting any scientific research? So that means there should be cloning, widespread nuclear testing (that is research, no?), persons subjected to random testing/injections to test the outcome (e.g. Hitler's so-called doctors in the prison camps of Nazi Germany), electro-shock treatment, etc. etc.?

I won't bore everyone with differentiating Adult..from Emryonic stem cells..but the point is that emryonic cells have FAR greater potential & NO POLITICIAN has the MORAL right to make the call. No, there may NEVER be a cure for these diseases...thats why its called.... RESEACH.... but sure as hell, I'm not going to be silent when Billy Graham or Pat Robertson are dictating science...this isn't 15th century Italy.

No, please bore us with it. Please display YOUR knowledge on the topic...not what you find on google.com because we all know internet=fact. I hate to be the one to break it to you but this government was founded by men whom adhered to 'antiquated religious dogma' and that impact is evident in goverment today. This country was made great by God-fearing men and I love to see that fact burn people like you. I am not a bible thumper but I have my beliefs and I believe you are wrong.

The whole premise of your argument is skewd (& morally indefensible). You take a religious belief (held by a few)..using embryos is killing...& then attempt to justify a policy..not funding scientific research which potentially can SAVE (or improve) lives of many. Science & religion have rarely mixed. The greater good must ..ALWAYS..take precedence...that is a politicians job.

The greater good must take precedence...that is a politicians job? What about protecting the rights of the minority? I am sure there is some law about trampling rights of those who cannot defend themselves. Do you truly think that unborn baby wants to be harvested for it's stem cells to benefit people like you? A more selfish argument I have never heard...take a life before it begins to 'possibly' better the life of someone else.

The whole premise of your argument is skewd (& morally indefensible).

Pot, meet Kettle.
 

Tuyo

Whitexican Extraordinaire
Established Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2004
Messages
1,484
Location
Califas
It's pretty damn sad when you use the death of someone to try and get votes by pointing fingers and blaming the president for "Superman" dying.
 

TO_04Cobra

New Member
Established Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2004
Messages
246
Location
Toronto, Ontario
In defence of "Joe King", since he is getting attacked from all sides:

Politicians exaggerate, mislead, spin the truth and often outright lie. That's a fact. George W Bush has been caught misleading, spin doctoring and lying as well. Welcome to the real world.

Thus the dilemma of politics. Choose one liar, G.W. or another, Kerry.

I have some knowledge of Stem-cell research and I understand that Georgie's legislation on the issue have placed great limits on the extent and source material for scientific research. New embryonic is out (the most desired source). Fact.

Any reasonably intelligent person (any out there???) can deduce that this is Georgie's favour to the "Evangelicals" that he is counting on for votes and his own, misguided, ignorant beliefs coming from his "Born Again" illness.

The stem cells, harvested from a 1, 2, 3 week or whatever, "zygote" is no more killing a baby than is picking your crusty nose and wiping it on the wall (like a good dumb partisan follower).

Religious belief that a person's "soul" is created at the time of conception is the definition of ignorance. We have no souls... we are hairless monkeys, evolved from early primates... end of story.

When religious ignorance, farts its way into public policy, dumbas# decisions are made (like this one). Keep it in the closet.....

Separation of church (ignorance) and State!
 

wizbangdoodle

Inslee is an Idiot
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
May 3, 2004
Messages
7,078
Location
Land of Loonies
Ditto TrueBlueGT, Joe has got it all wrong (including spelling and punctuation).

The question is, where would it stop? If we, the people, authorized embryonic stem cell research where would the line be drawn? Would people start harvesting embryo's just to have research material? Would poor young girls get pregnant just to have those embryo's harvested?, Much like some blood donors do for a few extra bucks. It IS a moral question, and what defines our morals? Our belief in a supreme being. All, I repeat, ALL life is sacred, not just the life that can walk and talk on it's own. Aren't these pro-choice people glad their parents didn't believe the way they do?
 

TrueBlueGT

is impressed!
Established Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2004
Messages
4,496
Location
In perpetual exile....
Originally posted by TO_04Cobra
In defence of "Joe King", since he is getting attacked from all sides:

Politicians exaggerate, mislead, spin the truth and often outright lie. That's a fact. George W Bush has been caught misleading, spin doctoring and lying as well. Welcome to the real world.

Thus the dilemma of politics. Choose one liar, G.W. or another, Kerry.

I have some knowledge of Stem-cell research and I understand that Georgie's legislation on the issue have placed great limits on the extent and source material for scientific research. New embryonic is out (the most desired source). Fact.

Any reasonably intelligent person (any out there???) can deduce that this is Georgie's favour to the "Evangelicals" that he is counting on for votes and his own, misguided, ignorant beliefs coming from his "Born Again" illness.

The stem cells, harvested from a 1, 2, 3 week or whatever, "zygote" is no more killing a baby than is picking your crusty nose and wiping it on the wall (like a good dumb partisan follower).

Religious belief that a person's "soul" is created at the time of conception is the definition of ignorance. We have no souls... we are hairless monkeys, evolved from early primates... end of story.

When religious ignorance, farts its way into public policy, dumbas# decisions are made (like this one). Keep it in the closet.....

Separation of church (ignorance) and State!

Saying that harvesting a 1-2-3 week old zygote is not killing a person is ridiculous. If you don't kill it, it would be a person naturally....you have to KILL it for it not to become a human being. But yeah, that's not life:rollseyes. Maybe your grandparents were chimps but I like to think differently and that does not make me a dumbass or a 'good dumb partisan follower'.

Religious ignorance, as you call it, is the basis for morality. If there were no religion, where would the sanctity of life come from? And if it is okay to murder a zygote (as you profess is perfectly fine) which would become a person, why can't I come over and shoot you in the head and claim the laws against murder are unjust and biased? Explain the difference there for I fail to see it. The only difference is the timing of the murder in the lifespan of the organism.

Decisions made and propaganda spread by politicians does not make the church wrong or science/state right.....and vice versa.
 

LogiWorld123

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2000
Messages
11,172
Location
OK
Originally posted by TrueBlueGT
Saying that harvesting a 1-2-3 week old zygote is not killing a person is ridiculous. If you don't kill it, it would be a person naturally....you have to KILL it for it not to become a human being. But yeah, that's not life:rollseyes. Maybe your grandparents were chimps but I like to think differently and that does not make me a dumbass or a 'good dumb partisan follower'.


It is not a person. Do you allow your semen (which are quite alive and could be a person!) to prosper or do you flush them down the toilet? Hmm how many could-be people have you murdered? I know that I personally have killed billions.

A zygote is nothing but a parasite. It is not a human being, and it is not until around the 24th week. Why the 24th week? Because that is the earliest a fetus (not zygote) could possibly live outside its mothers womb.

And if it is okay to murder a zygote (as you profess is perfectly fine) which would become a person, why can't I come over and shoot you in the head and claim the laws against murder are unjust and biased? Explain the difference there for I fail to see it. The only difference is the timing of the murder in the lifespan of the organism.

Because you are taking the life of a sentient being. What you are saying is if its ok to kill trees or cows or pigs (zygotes), it must be ok to kill humans too. Wrong!
 

DaleM

ATACMS changing the game!
Established Member
SVTP OG 4 Life
Joined
Dec 27, 2002
Messages
23,821
Location
FlahDah man.
Now let's not forget. The President did allow stem cell research, it's going on as we speak. Once the current chains are used up ain't no more harvesting allowed. I don't think there is any way in hell Kerry can get it restarted. His party is a decade away from regaining a majority in either house, he is talking shit. As far as the potential for curing Alzhiemers, it also has the potential for us sprouting wings and flying too. SWAG but no proof, what about the adult stem cell science. A better option?
 

ampstang

Nobody F's w/ a Lion
Established Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2004
Messages
4,031
Location
Texas
TrueBlueGT has it dead on. By the way, if you missed it originally, there are 3,500 stem cell lines currently available for research. I think Kerry needs to brush up on his science before he makes huge policy changes. People in the science field, like me, can catch his BS a mile away. If you are trying to argue your point, a basic biology class you took freshman year of college will not be sufficient.
 
Last edited:

TrueBlueGT

is impressed!
Established Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2004
Messages
4,496
Location
In perpetual exile....
Originally posted by Scoriox


It is not a person. Do you allow your semen (which are quite alive and could be a person!) to prosper or do you flush them down the toilet? Hmm how many could-be people have you murdered? I know that I personally have killed billions.

A zygote is nothing but a parasite. It is not a human being, and it is not until around the 24th week. Why the 24th week? Because that is the earliest a fetus (not zygote) could possibly live outside its mothers womb.



Because you are taking the life of a sentient being. What you are saying is if its ok to kill trees or cows or pigs (zygotes), it must be ok to kill humans too. Wrong! [/B]

No, Scoriox, you are wrong on this one. If you do nothing w/ your handful of jizz, all you will have is a dried up mess on your palm like usual. If you do nothing w/ a fertilized egg, it becomes a person.

Your argument about trees, pigs, etc is a moot point because if left alone, they will still be pigs and trees but never sentient beings. If left alone, the embryo will become a sentient creature and it must be killed to stop it from becoming such.
 

LogiWorld123

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2000
Messages
11,172
Location
OK
Originally posted by TrueBlueGT
No, Scoriox, you are wrong on this one. If you do nothing w/ a fertilized egg, it becomes a person.


If the mother (in this case her body) does nothing, the egg dies. The mother's body has to house and nourish it for life to happen; and even then there's a chance life won't happen at all.

Your argument about trees, pigs, etc is a moot point because if left alone, they will still be pigs and trees but never sentient beings.

I kill an egg, you cry murder? Allow me to laugh at you some.

If left alone, the embryo will become a sentient creature and it must be killed to stop it from becoming such.

We aren't talking embryos here.
 

Users who are viewing this thread



Top