Crap Throwing Monkey Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 Well, then improve the crap. It's agonizingly pedestrian, and I am certain you can do better. Ad at Astra. Excelsior. You must, must do better with the deliberate cruelties you rain on innocents. Do it for me. I will even use your favorite smilie... 726321[/snapback] Waaah! The crap throwing monkey's crap stinks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 Yep. And of all the things he could have vetoed...thanks for hindering scientific research... 725379[/snapback] I disagre with him, but the fact is, that he's doing what he was voted in to do. If you don't like it, find someone electable to replace him in 2008. Last time the democrats couldn't do it, and Hillary Clinton is not the answer either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 I disagre with him, but the fact is, that he's doing what he was voted in to do. If you don't like it, find someone electable to replace him in 2008. Last time the democrats couldn't do it, and Hillary Clinton is not the answer either. 726406[/snapback] I highly, highly doubt that he was voted in to keep the federal government from funding stem cell research. The simple fact that a wide majority (something like 75%, last I heard) of Americans disagree with him on stem cell research leads me to believe that just maybe there were one or two other issues that might have driven the election... But thanks for the advice. Damn, I wish I'd realized earlier that I could vote for someone else. I'll keep it in mind next time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Avenger Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 And that would also mean the "issue" has a relatively simple solution: 1) Only allow funding on stem cell lines that do not come from an aborted pregnancy. 2) Require patients in fertility clinics to give express permission to have their stored blastospheres used for scientific research (as I can imagine some - quite a few, actually - patients to prefer the idea of a "cremation" to scientific research). That, in theory, would satisfy everyone involved. Scientists get research funds, research moves forward, no one's "selling their children" for science. It just doesn't satisfy the lunatic crowd that believes a blob of undifferentiated cellular material in a freezer has greater rights as an Alzheimer's patient or a quadrapelegic. 726219[/snapback] A simple solution indeed, except that it is riddled with politics and grandstanding. With this solution politicians couldn't stand up and rail again abortion even though abortion doesn't really have anything to do with it. They also would have to still take heat from the religous conservatives who believe that using a 200 cell blastosphere is "murder" (not sure why they don't get riled up by the multitude of blastospheres detroyed every day by fertility clinics but froth at the moth if these same blastospheres could actually serve some good to human kind in the process of being destroyed - then again these folks often times aren't too big on logic - some think the earth is flat). By linking this issue to "abortion" and "murder" the politicians can pander to whatever group they like. Witness the veto of the stem cell bill - Bush was surrounded by children who were "adopted as embyos" and "shouldn't be used for spare parts" although they have nothing to do with the subject at hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromagnum Posted July 21, 2006 Author Share Posted July 21, 2006 By linking this issue to "abortion" and "murder" the politicians can pander to whatever group they like. Witness the veto of the stem cell bill - Bush was surrounded by children who were "adopted as embyos" and "shouldn't be used for spare parts" although they have nothing to do with the subject at hand. 726418[/snapback] I listened to the media the last two days and there was talk equating stem cell research with nazi german concentration camp medical experiments. Here's an audio clip of rush saying the only way to get embryonic stem cells is through abortion. Do you think he still got the gift on loan from god http://mediamatters.org/static/audio/limba...719-science.mp3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromagnum Posted July 21, 2006 Author Share Posted July 21, 2006 Little more on stem cells from a worker in that field( mostly adult stem cells) Embryonic stem cells show promise because it may be possible to turn them into any kind of cell need..... For example, neurons in ALS, Parkinsons ,or Alzheimers. Neurons,once dead, do not regenerate no new ones are ever made. The other stem cells such as adult stem cells are already ''marked'' and they know what kind of cell they are becoming.. ..For example, cordblood(if any of you have babies) is rich in stem cells, but they are already to the point that we know they're going to become blood cells.. So therefore they only work for diseases such as blood cancers.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 Little more on stem cells from a worker in that field( mostly adult stem cells) Embryonic stem cells show promise because it may be possible to turn them into any kind of cell need..... For example, neurons in ALS, Parkinsons ,or Alzheimers. Neurons,once dead, do not regenerate no new ones are ever made. The other stem cells such as adult stem cells are already ''marked'' and they know what kind of cell they are becoming.. ..For example, cordblood(if any of you have babies) is rich in stem cells, but they are already to the point that we know they're going to become blood cells.. So therefore they only work for diseases such as blood cancers.... 726526[/snapback] Not all adult stem cells are that limited. They are all much more limited than embryonic stem cells, but the adult mesenchymal stem cells i work with can differentiate into osteoblasts, chondrocytes, adipocytes, or cardiomyocytes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 I highly, highly doubt that he was voted in to keep the federal government from funding stem cell research. The simple fact that a wide majority (something like 75%, last I heard) of Americans disagree with him on stem cell research leads me to believe that just maybe there were one or two other issues that might have driven the election... But thanks for the advice. Damn, I wish I'd realized earlier that I could vote for someone else. I'll keep it in mind next time... 726411[/snapback] Well, there still is political process- his veto can be overriden, thats why we have the best system in the world! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromagnum Posted July 21, 2006 Author Share Posted July 21, 2006 Well, there still is political process- his veto can be overriden, thats why we have the best system in the world! 726652[/snapback] And hopefully when the next president is in office he won't pass every spending bill for 6 years, before deciding to dust off his veto stamp and use it for limiting access to research in medical science.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 And hopefully when the next president is in office he won't pass every spending bill for 6 years, before deciding to dust off his veto stamp and use for limiting research in medical science.... 726680[/snapback] We can take action before that. Congress is the one creating the behemoth that is the federal budget. Start voting people out, not just rubber-stamping incumbents. They are all to blame and should all pay the price. Even if the President vetoes everthing that crosses his desk, Congress can still override the veto. Address the root cause of the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromagnum Posted July 21, 2006 Author Share Posted July 21, 2006 We can take action before that. Congress is the one creating the behemoth that is the federal budget. Start voting people out, not just rubber-stamping incumbents. They are all to blame and should all pay the price. Even if the President vetoes everthing that crosses his desk, Congress can still override the veto. Address the root cause of the problem. 726686[/snapback] I agree... Even though I side with dems/libs on a good percentage of issues in this forum. I do not agree with everything they do, there are issues I side with reps/cons,guns-taxes-insane spending.. ( And one issue is the direction and example were instilling in our children in school, lack of discipline, due to laws and lawyers being allowed to sue teachers if they confront a student deemed to harsh by wimpy parents....At some point if both parents are working full time and unable to correct thier childrens behavior, teachers should to an extent.. But teachers have learned that these actions can lead to job loss and suits, so they refrain from disciplinary action. Fear to an extent is a good behavior tool, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Tate Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 We can take action before that. Congress is the one creating the behemoth that is the federal budget. Start voting people out, not just rubber-stamping incumbents. They are all to blame and should all pay the price. Even if the President vetoes everthing that crosses his desk, Congress can still override the veto. Address the root cause of the problem. 726686[/snapback] Or, everyone could just keep voting for the GOP/Dem's, because they're better than the other guy and that will fix everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 Address the root cause of the problem. The root cause of the problem lies not with Congress, but with the American people. Until people learn to think critically instead of being led by emotionalism or demagoguery, until people learn objective truth is more important than people's feelings or shallow yet strongly held ideologies, we will continue to see present problems go unsolved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 The root cause of the problem lies not with Congress, but with the American people. Until people learn to think critically instead of being led by emotionalism or demagoguery, until people learn objective truth is more important than people's feelings or shallow yet strongly held ideologies, we will continue to see present problems go unsolved. 726766[/snapback] You would be correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 You would be correct. 726776[/snapback] It's a habit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 The root cause of the problem lies not with Congress, but with the American people. Until people learn to think critically instead of being led by emotionalism or demagoguery, until people learn objective truth is more important than people's feelings or shallow yet strongly held ideologies, we will continue to see present problems go unsolved. 726766[/snapback] Where are they going to learn that? This government (and past ones) view learning as gaining the ability to answer tests correctly. They don't foster critical thinking. This government (and past ones) have let the media become a generally monolithic enterprise engineered for the creation of spectacle through both de-regulation and the idea that a select few companies owning most of the pie is somehow better than a monopoly. How is what you posit here going to happen? I'm all for it. But it ain't just "the public's dumb." It's a whole net of systems working in concert to maintain the status quo, because it's making enough people (on both sides of the political aisle) very wealthy and powerful. That's a lot to work against -- but not too much, IMO, if people get fed up enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 And hopefully when the next president is in office he won't pass every spending bill for 6 years, before deciding to dust off his veto stamp and use it for limiting access to research in medical science.. 726680[/snapback] Please remember, I don't agree with him- I am just saying that thankfully we have a great process in place, which can override a veto if enough disagree with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromagnum Posted July 21, 2006 Author Share Posted July 21, 2006 Please remember, I don't agree with him- I am just saying that thankfully we have a great process in place, which can override a veto if enough disagree with it 726999[/snapback] I figured that, no bad feeling directed your way man, I was just adding to your post with my thoughts.. Btw how's the chevy and new mexico? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 I figured that, no bad feeling directed your way man, I was just adding to your post with my thoughts.. Btw how's the chevy and new mexico? 727001[/snapback] wow- you have a good memory! lol Its running real well- had to get the 4wd fixed, but service plans are a great thing. New Mexico has been more than I ever expected Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromagnum Posted July 23, 2006 Author Share Posted July 23, 2006 Did you hear Tony Snows response to Helen Thomas today. Too funny. 725605[/snapback] I looked for that video to post here, couldn't get the link to work.. Watch this, this is one of our senators http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbgwOATtZgk# Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts