NYT editorial, "Bush's Stem Cell Diversion": "smaller than the period at the end of this sentence"

[DeepModem Mom]

Mr. Bush’s Stem Cell Diversion
Published: June 21, 2007

The executive order on stem cells issued by President Bush yesterday seeks to reorient research in new directions that may or may not pay off. But make no mistake, it is no substitute for the bill expanding embryonic stem cell research that Mr. Bush vetoed at the same time because it would involve the destruction of microscopic entities — smaller than the period at the end of this sentence — that the president deems a nascent form of life.

Both the Senate and the House, which passed the embryonic stem cell bill by comfortable but not veto-proof margins, need to summon the strength to override Mr. Bush’s veto, so that important research into possible cures for Parkinson’s, diabetes and other serious ailments can move ahead.

Mr. Bush knows that most Americans support embryonic stem cell research — while his political base does not — so yesterday he sought to at least blunt their dismay by touting new scientific studies focused on deriving potent stem cells from amniotic fluid, placentas and the skin of laboratory mice. Some of the alternative work is indeed promising. But almost all scientists in the field consider embryonic stem cell research the most promising. It is foolish to crimp that research by withholding federal funds to placate a minority of religious and social conservatives, including Mr. Bush, who deem the work unethical....

***

The bill vetoed by Mr. Bush would have provided more research opportunities: greatly expanding the number of traditional embryonic stem cell lines that can be used in federally financed research by tapping into the thousands of surplus embryos that would otherwise be discarded at fertility clinics. If Mr. Bush cannot see the sense in such an approach, members of Congress need to tell him that they — and the American people — do.

The Senate, which has the best shot at overriding the veto, will vote first, in hopes that a victory there will inspire the House to follow. Americans will need to keep a close eye on which legislators favor the most promising stem cell research and which try to impede scientific progress.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/21/opinion/21thu1.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

[blondeatlast]

1. The Senate is a hair's breadth away from enough votes to override.

A successful Senate override with an election year staring them down, could motivate the House to do the same (the House vote was 40 votes shy of veto-proof, IIRC.

This might be the issue to show that bastard Bush that the people really do still have the power.

It would be so sweet to see even just the Senate override the veto, even if it fails in the House.

[DeepModem Mom]

2. Of many heartless, senseless acts of the Bush administration...

the depriving of the potential benefits of stem cell research to suffering people is surely one of the most heartless, and senseless.

[blondeatlast]

3. I've been insulin-dependent for 40 years. I've been promised a "cure'

is just around the corner my whole life.

The research is very unlikely to help me, but if it can spare another generation from what I went through... (sigh)

As I said yesterday: "You loved me when I was a blastocyst, George. What happened?"

I hate that miserable, stupid, immoral little man. :mad:

[DeepModem Mom]

5. With good reason, blondeatlast.

Thanks for relating your real-life experience with this issue.

[Solly Mack]

4. protecting a dot - a period - from the man who said Iraq... "just a comma" in the history books

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/04/AR2006100401707.html

[DeepModem Mom]

6. Interesting observation, Solly Mack! nt

[Norquist Nemesis]

7. Congress should pull a Luntz and rename the bill

"Blastocyst Stem Cell Research"

There is a reason why it is embryonIC. Namely, because they aren't embryos!

[Kokonoe]

8. Good catch Norquist Nemesis

or the human life preservation act.

[blondeatlast]

9. Exactly. nt

[ProfessorGAC]

11. How About "Debilitating Illness Research Bill"?

Now who could be against researching a cure for a debilitating illness?
GAC

[indepat]

10. How can 'pukes be so pro-life when they condemn so many to die, be it

by our sophisticated systems of weaponry or muzzling medical and other scientific research? Hypocrisy, mendacity, duplicity and outright lies, that's how. Is their an honest soul that does not see the dichotomy of 'puke hypocrisy?

[rasputin1952]

12. Because many of them have no concept of science, life or ...

essentially anything else. All the GOP worries about are issues that can somehow be so divisive that they can try to go to people for visceral reaction.

The last congress spent more time on flag burning and denying gays rights, than anything else. When you toss in some phony "patriotism" ans some relgion, they look like they know what they are talking about.

To cut to the quick, all they have to sell is FEAR, and that market has dropped considerably.

[DeepModem Mom]

13. Yep. This is political, to hold on to the base. Nothing more, nothing less. nt

[Warren DeMontague]

14. Because it's not about "life". They consider women who take the birth control pill to be criminals.

They're fucking nuts.