You know all's right with the world, when...

Jul 19, 2006 15:27

The President of the US uses his first ever veto after to six years in office, not to prevent wasteful budget spending, or to block a terrible transportation bill, or to halt a bloated medicaid expansion bill, or to eliminate farm subsidies which are destroying third world countries, but to block scientific progress and prevent the creation of Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 14

mithikall July 19 2006, 19:42:24 UTC
Rotting bastard. The Congress Republicans backed this too, didn't they?
We can only hope they bitch slap him back into his place and override the veto.

Reply

glaurung2 July 19 2006, 19:46:33 UTC
It was about 50/50. There were many Republicans for it, most notably Orrin Hatch and Nancy Reagen. Others are against it, including the most socially conservative ones. Still, it passed the Senate, the President was the one who stopped it.

Reply

mithikall July 19 2006, 20:32:12 UTC
Well, the story says most Americans support this type of research. After reading, me too. It sounds like they want to take frozen embryo things that are -going to be destroyed anyway- and make them useful to society at large.
Bush stood with families who'd bought other couples' unwanted frozen babymakers. As if they couldn't've adopted one already living. 'Course, that's why I can't take the fundies seriously. They'll scream themselves silent over fetuses' and embryos' right to life, but don't give a damn about the kids that are already out and living.

Reply

glaurung2 July 19 2006, 20:36:17 UTC
You're absolutely correct, the vast majority of these frozen embryos are just thrown out. The truth is, there's so many of them that there's plenty for both purposes- stem cell research and adoption by other couples.

Reply


young_egotist July 19 2006, 19:43:11 UTC
Icon says it all.

Reply

glaurung2 July 19 2006, 19:47:47 UTC
Yeah, I didn't vote for Bush either, not that I think Kerry'd be any better. We'd just have different problems. I voted for Harry Brown in 2000 and didn't vote in 04.

Reply

young_egotist July 19 2006, 19:52:27 UTC
Better man than me.. I voted Nader in '00.. *wince*

Reply


2eclipse July 19 2006, 19:58:21 UTC
in general i can't stand bush. but i'm not sure if i disagree with this latest or not. really it is an issue that i am undecided about.

Reply


Unbelievable boztopia July 19 2006, 20:07:55 UTC
I knew it was coming, but still...what a disgrace. It's purely political--normally he just issues one of his wonderful executive orders saying that he'll invalidate this law and ignore it if he chooses to.

But in this case, he plays right to the screaming fundie crowd.

Fuck him. He's gone in two years and we can hopefully restore some semblance of sanity and progress to our political discourse.

I hope.

Reply


caebral July 19 2006, 20:30:48 UTC
LOL. I think its funny. See its funny cause the Republicans have control of everything and cant get anything done at all.

They are eating their young, coupled with the criticism from conservatives and neo-cons mentioned in the Washington Post this morning over foreign relation, and honestly, this is more entertaining than Scrubs.

Reply

votishal July 20 2006, 12:21:27 UTC
Yeah, but I haven't seen the Democrats actually smell the blood in the water and begin rallying together to make use of this opportunity. If they don't take back Congress in this election, it's their own damn fault.

- J -

Reply

caebral July 20 2006, 12:44:50 UTC
True enough. Though much of that, if everyone remembers has to do with local seterminatives like say district map drawing and the like.

Thoug, I have to say the Dems have been pretty weak on sticking to anything. We have no leader.

Funny we have no leader, and the Republicans hate theirs. Weird.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up