home

Odd Priorities

By TChris, Section Legislation
Posted on Tue Jul 25, 2006 at 07:23:02 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

by TChris

Curing disease and disability isn't on the president's list of American values, leading to a veto of the stem cell research bill. Of the ten bills that comprise "The American Values Agenda" (crafted by House Republicans to energize a disenchanted base before the midterm elections), only one has passed: a bill that prohibits condominium and homeowner associations from restricting the display of the American flag. The president signed that bill yesterday, showing that he values the federalization of local condo rules more highly than he values your health.

< Tuesday Open Thread | False Confessions in Norfolk? >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Odd Priorities | 18 comments (18 topical)
    Re: Odd Priorities (none / 0) (#1)
    by scribe on Tue Jul 25, 2006 at 08:16:25 AM EST
    This legislation sponsored by the National Independent Flag Dealer's Association. Well, at least the Unit didn't have to fly back from vacation in Crawfish to sign this latest intrusion of the federal government into private, non-federal, non-interstate commerce affairs....

    Re: Odd Priorities (none / 0) (#2)
    by oldtree on Tue Jul 25, 2006 at 08:19:22 AM EST
    there are some ground rules that we should always remember when we read about politicos 1. they always lie. during any interview, conversation, investigation, testimony, etc.. always, period. 2. so nothing they say can be confirmed, or believed. It must be investigated for fact 3. all things done by our government are to increase profit for people willing to bet on their actions, period. Everyone in the government is corrupt, it is part of the job with the current rules and laws 4. we will not have any change unless we vote for it as states. 5. if you live in a state that does not allow voter initiatives, you best try to get out there and change that, or you will continued to have zero representation, because your reps are working for themselves and their largest contributor 6. no advertisements for election campaigns. Pure fact on TV networks, radio, print. paid for by the government, and equal for each candidate 7. elected officials must do what they said they will do, or are to be removed without delay 8. if you can create voter initiatives, may I suggest a couple? 1. paper ballots, countable and viewable online 2. voters approve any action of the state that the so called "reps" vote for in state houses, can be overridden by the voters. 3. no private money from anyone for candidates. no influence peddling at all 4. immediate review of any actions of a politician that can be stopped by the people's inquiry of course, the ones in power won't like this because they believe their job is to steal and lie, it is the job description now isn't it? there are a lot of other ones, and if we don't want to have other corrupt "tics" create laws to enslave us, we might want to consider taking our country back and making it more representative of what we the people want our government to do

    Re: Odd Priorities (none / 0) (#3)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jul 25, 2006 at 10:11:39 AM EST
    et al - You know, I can't quote the oath of office of the President, but I don't think it includes "curing disease and disability." That, or at least until now, has been left to Doctors and medical researchers. As for stem cell research, I would just note that the failure of the government to throw money at it does not prevent private industry from doing so. That private industry has not should be a fair indication of just how the claims of the Left matches up with the realistic understanding of what can be done.

    Re: Odd Priorities (none / 0) (#4)
    by oldtree on Tue Jul 25, 2006 at 10:24:09 AM EST
    must have made him money

    Re: Odd Priorities (none / 0) (#5)
    by Dadler on Tue Jul 25, 2006 at 10:32:51 AM EST
    Jim, my fellow human being, my fellow free American, I adore you, I play more Texas Hold 'Em now than I ever have, but I would ask you why we'd WANT to leave this research to the whims of the free market's funding paradigms? Or worse, based on the disconnect between public opinion and political reality, leave it to the whims of Bush's personal religious fundamentalism. The greatest power the least powerful among us have is their supposedly fair and just and equal share of the democratic pie. The resources of the American government are the single most powerful and equitable and rational means to that end here. This does not constitute all the funding, but it, we, can make the biggest difference. And do so in a manner that should benefit all; as opposed to the free-market paradigm focused on profit margins first.

    Re: Odd Priorities (none / 0) (#6)
    by Sailor on Tue Jul 25, 2006 at 12:00:40 PM EST
    That, or at least until now, has been left to Doctors and medical researchers.
    not under bush, he has his political appointments that decide science. see EPA, NASA, OSHA ... etc. Oath:
    I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.
    bush:
    "Stop throwing the Constitution in my face," Bush screamed back. "It's just a goddamned piece of paper!"
    Re: Odd Priorities (none / 0) (#7)
    by BigTex on Tue Jul 25, 2006 at 12:03:40 PM EST
    The resources of the American government are the single most powerful and equitable and rational means to that end here
    . Yes they are. And they are better spent towards researching adult stem cells, and all the marvelous treatments we have now because of them. Let private industry do all the research it wants. The research can't be stopped, it's just a matter of who will do the research. In fact, private industry will likely do a better job with the research because it won't have to adhere to as many restrictions as it would have to if following government funding. Let the money go to where it is best suited. Use the more restricted governmnet funds in the area where the groundbreaking work has already been completed, and have the infusion of cash lead to an expansion of the adult stem cells. Let private money go to stem cell research. Partisan hacks will use this to make hollow political points, but if they were actually interested in the subsnative matter at hand, rather than making noise, they would realise that the best way to go is to pour money into cures, and leave the speculation to the private sector. The potential for reward is so high with embrionic stem cells that it will have the funding it needs. Spread the pie around for the benefit of all.

    Re: Odd Priorities (none / 0) (#8)
    by Dadler on Tue Jul 25, 2006 at 12:19:14 PM EST
    Tex, What possible hollow political point can be made besides FUNDING the research? Saying, hey, I funded the research? It SHOULD be funded by the people's money, to ensure the people are the first priority in this research, not free-market interests. No amount of government restriction is MORE restrictive than keeping the people's money from making the greatest contribution to this research. Much less for the largely irrational and religiously fundamentalist reasons foisted on the entire nation by Bush with his veto.

    Re: Odd Priorities (none / 0) (#9)
    by Peaches on Tue Jul 25, 2006 at 12:20:35 PM EST
    The potential for reward is so high with embrionic stem cells that it will have the funding it needs. Spread the pie around for the benefit of all.
    Big Tex, How do you know the potentail is high? Perhaps it is. then the profit motive would be an incentive for research. How about when the incentive is not so high. Like...flu shots, or AIDES, or other STD's? How about the AVian flu? The profit motive works as an incentive for manufacturing consumer goods, but it doesn't work as well for managing our health. Cuba has a longer life expectancy than the US, last I checked, as do every developed nation relyuing upon gov't subsidized health care. Pharmacutical companies and medical research will gravitate toward wher the profits are. There is nothing wrong with that. Most of the time they gravitate to markets created by government subsidies. They also benefit from a sick society vs. a healthy society. Overall, our economy would benefit from cheap health care for everyone with an emphasis on preventitive care and healthy living habits (diet, exercise and a clean environmnet) However, this does not provide the proper incentives for medical companies and pharmacueticals that offer the panceas of free market commerce.

    Re: Odd Priorities (none / 0) (#10)
    by soccerdad on Tue Jul 25, 2006 at 12:32:09 PM EST
    they would realise that the best way to go is to pour money into cures, and leave the speculation to the private sector.
    Of course this is the direct opposite of what has been done for the last 50 years with great success for many diseases. Companies wnat to put money into sure things not speculative research. Its that darn capitalism thing dont you know. The federal government has funded practically all the break through medical science research done in this country. The companies then finish what research needs to be done (clinical trials in conjuction with the government), figure out how to administer it and get it to market. Talk about hollow partisan talking points, TEX is on board.

    Re: Odd Priorities (none / 0) (#11)
    by desertswine on Tue Jul 25, 2006 at 12:40:13 PM EST
    I think the federal govenment should look into the possibility of funding the inverstigation of stem cells as a food source. Not human stem cells, some may find it objectionable to eat human. I mean, of course, animal stem cells. They could have factory-labs that grow nothing but sirloin steaks, without the useless parts of the steer. Whole rows of frog legs; just the legs and not the heads or torsos. Or how about goose livers for lovers of pate and all without the inhumane treatment of geese. I tell ya' the possibilities are endless.

    Re: Odd Priorities (none / 0) (#13)
    by Dadler on Tue Jul 25, 2006 at 02:33:17 PM EST
    Narius, The Osama Bin Gardens complex at the corner of State and Main.

    Re: Odd Priorities (none / 0) (#14)
    by Sailor on Tue Jul 25, 2006 at 03:44:42 PM EST
    Tex, it's our money, we should be spending it to benefit us.

    Re: Odd Priorities (none / 0) (#15)
    by jen on Tue Jul 25, 2006 at 04:24:03 PM EST
    Not to worry. The research will be funded. Scientists in Europe and Asia will do the research, companies in Europe and Asia will develop products and reap the benefits. Bush didn't stop the research, just american participation.

    Re: Odd Priorities (none / 0) (#16)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jul 25, 2006 at 05:33:34 PM EST
    Dadler writes:
    why we'd WANT to leave this research to the whims of the free market's funding paradigms?
    Mostly because government funded research has not proven to be very successful. In fact, if the government is pouring money into a program, even a wrong program, other research in that subject is depressed. BTW - Nice socialist rant at the end. Sailor - We're talking research, not consensual science. Bit of a difference. SD - Let's see some links. narius - State governments are not any more efficient and/or less prone to wasteful spending than the Feds. In fact, and CA in particular, many are worse. You do remember how CA screwed up the price of electricty, don't you? As for HOA, there are many that say you cannot display a flag and/or banner for a variety of reasons, most of'em having to do with people not wanting to have their next door neighbors put poles and flags. So when someone does, and someone who wants to protest because of the war, you get problems. And the protestor always wins. So this just levels the playing field.

    Re: Odd Priorities (none / 0) (#17)
    by soccerdad on Tue Jul 25, 2006 at 05:40:27 PM EST
    Mostly because government funded research has not proven to be very successful.
    absolute complete BS unless you got links which you dont other that worldnetstupid.

    Re: Odd Priorities (none / 0) (#19)
    by Sailor on Tue Jul 25, 2006 at 07:05:26 PM EST
    Sailor - We're talking research, not consensual science. Bit of a difference.
    That statement is so bizarre, can anyone tell me why a person so obviously off their meds is allowed to comment here?

    Re: Odd Priorities (none / 0) (#20)
    by BigTex on Wed Jul 26, 2006 at 02:22:56 AM EST
    Tex, it's our money, we should be spending it to benefit us.
    Yes, we should. The question becomes is it better to fund research that is giving us advancements now (adult stem cells) or to not fund that and instead fund a speculative field that might or might not give us different advancements x years from now? Seems the wiser course of action is to pump money into adult stem cells, because they are giving us advancements right now, and leave the speculation upto the parties willing to accept the risk/reward balance of embriotic stem cells.

    Odd Priorities | 18 comments (18 topical)