Ok, I think I've had it with Bush
 

That's it. It's over.
While I know tax cuts are the right thing to do, going into iraq was the right thing to do, spot on with the axis of evil, listening in on terrorist calls, etc., etc.
He lost me with this stemcell thing. You don't use your Veto ever before, not to slash the bloated budget, not to cut pork, no, you use it to stop something that has wide ranging support.
Even if most cures will NOT come from embriotic stemcell research, you only stir yourself to use your veto now?
I call idiot.:disgust

Bout time ya came around to our side :winkwink:

:1orglaugh

Yea.

It's absolutely horrible how his moral beliefs are more important than the hopes of the majority of Americans.

It's got to be base-appeal.

The thing is also, that although his veto could be overridden, they don't plan to do it. I dont quite get why there can be some consensus on sending it up to the president, but none when it comes to overriding his veto. I mean if it's right, it's right.

He def will go down as one of the worst President's in history

Get in line .....

I agree with 12Clicks in reference to this stupid veto bullshit. I must write this date down, for future reflection.

Just goes to prove how much the 'thumpers' have influence on the government decisions.

In theory, what he's saying is the possibility of saving life is immoral, but killing people worldwide for 'peace' and 'protecting' lives, is.

I seriously, hope americans realize how a country can go to shit in a matter of 8 years when they vote the next time around.

More likely, it's to stimulate private-sector research, WHERE IT BELONGS. Do you want the morons in the government having oversight for where the funding goes? Republicans will make it illegal to do ANY stem cell research, public OR private, and Democrats will rob from the program's funding to feed some illegal immigrant with 20 kids.

Too many people are confusing a veto on the FUNDING with a veto on the PROCESS. Stem cell research is legal. Companies do it all the time. These companies are commerical entities, trying to turn a buck. This is what we WANT. What's the last thing the GOVERNMENT cured? Polio? Nearly every major breakthrough has come from the PRIVATE sector.

Funding it at the government level is a huge mistake. If you want to find money for medical initiatives like this, why not cut bullshit porkbarrel projects like John Kerry's and Ted Kennedy's Big Dig ($10 BILLION over budget, and five YEARS late -- so far). $24 Billion (yeah, with a "B") for 6,376 "pet" projects (read: unnecessary shit that is intended to garner votes) was approved at the end of 2005, giving billions of YOUR money to Republicans and Democrats to get votes back home.

Bush did stem cell research a huge favor, but spin it any way you want, I guess. Ask Clinton's "war on drugs" how effective throwing money at a problem is. $30 Billion/year, and 70% of the people who post here still light one up every Friday, like clockwork.

Sorry for the perspective at such an early hour, but the barely educated ranting here has gotten so out of control, that even as a registered Democrat, I'm embarrassed by it.

Bush is, without question, one of the worst Presidents in history.

.... except for all the others.

Clinton? Don't make Nancy Reagan mad.

ok.. who hacked into 12clicks account?

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh

was also wondering...

That's "Just Say No." Clinton was the War on Drugs guy, to the tune of $30 Billion/year. Drugs shipments to the U.S. since then are trending upwards, amusingly.

It is officially snowing in hell..bring a parka!

im curious too :)

im curious too :)

If that's the case, they emulated his style almost exactly. I have a program that analyzes a number of things, from frequency of phrases and punctuation, to linebreaks, capitalization, and spelling errors.

This posts matches his previous posts almost perfectly. I have a high level of confidence that this post was indeed made by him.

:upsidedow

I'm still not on your side, pansy.:winkwink:
and in response to edgeprod, I'd say that spending the money on stemcell research *would* spur private research as well. Any discoveries paid for by the government could easily be expanded by the private sector.

I guess my point is, as a conservative, there are many many things that I think he should have used his veto power on. To have this be it, is disturbing.

.............. nm

the man walks up behind world leaders and rub their shoulders uninvited

he sloches in his chair at G8 and leans back like a rapper while he talk to heads of state with a mouth full of food

he can barely complete a sentence

hes pretty much clueless on everything thats going on around him

I hate to say it but religion and sheep elected bush

we better hope this never happens again I dont think america can afford to have a president this dumb for at least 40 years:2 cents:

Actually, they don't have enough votes to override the veto.

and for the person who posted that he vetoed this to stimulate private sector research

wrong...

the bible thumpers are against stem cell research period and some lines are actualy illegal. If the private sector does find even a fraction of the resources the fed has to get this thing going the thumpers will kill it with bush before it has legs

I want to agree. I really do. I can't think of a single example where government involvment in healthcare or health-related research in a modern era has benefitted the populous. All it results in is higher taxes.

If there's viability in stem cells, let private industry explore, then exploit, that viability. Profit drives innovation in a free market. There IS no better system, and try as my party might to derail it and bring us into the dark ages of Communism, I hope it's here to stay.

You ok hun? I think I just had a mild heart attack reading the title.

You're clueless, at least when it comes to scientific research.

Apart from the fact that you are simply wrong (many research departments of universities with public funding produce extremely valuable results), you seem to be completely unaware of the difference in research carried out by private companies and research carried out by institutions with public funding, such as (many) universities. In short: companies generally only spend money on research which has a fair chance of having a direct application. Researchers in public institutions, on the other hand, also do fundamental research, that is, research aimed simply at gaining basic knowledge, with no immediately visible application. Obviously, applications or derivatives of this research often only emerge later on, as science progresses.

Just think how great it would be if you had a new program coming out soon, with this popular new viewpoint. ;)

LMAO

Sadly, we don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to talking about sheep. All most of us Democrats can muster is regurgitating some tired argument (usually a flawed one) spouted from CNN. Baaaah.

It's not likely we can AVOID more stupid. Hillary. Kerry might fuck us and run again. There's always Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and other "leaders" willing to step in, too.

Believe me, there's no shortage of stupid on its WAY to us. Bush was the tip of the iceberg, and history is going to remember him in much the same way it remembers other strong presidents who were "idiots" in their time -- as leaders swimming in a sea of idiots, rather than the other way around. If he were a lame duck, he'd just pander to all the stupid flowing freely in the country. Everyone would love him, though. It's fashionable to bash him now, but it'll be ancient history later on, just like it's starting to me lame to look back and say shit about Reagan.

If you bothered to do the research, you'd know that private companies have a budget in excess of the paltry amount the government is likely to provide. The money comes without strings, and for the purpose of turning a profit, not wasting it to get another cash-cow grant.

But I can see how "deep" your research is by the line "and for the person who posted that he vetoed this to stimulate private sector research."

seriously thought about explaining all this to him lol

but decided it would be a waste of time judging from his post lmao

uhh--- while the private sector has the funds the US gov has more access to the brain power

never mind


no point :thumbsup

Every grant we got, we spent half the time filling out paperwork, and half the time setting up for the next grant. That's part of the reason I don't work in that field anymore.

As to how "clueless" I am about it, I guess you'd have to have lived it to know the process .. but you can spout off on an adult webmaster board all you want, without the burden of truth.

You said "companies generally only spend money on research which has a fair chance of having a direct application." If it doesn't have a direct application, why research that line? You don't think that all breakthroughs have had idle time in the lab? Why do you think it's so expensive to produce them? We wouldn't have rubber tires right now if not for mistakes in the lab, and research taking on other directions in the pursuit of a profit.

Well, at least he admits when is is wrong:2 cents: :thumbsup

Agreed, 100%.

Yeah, the government is brilliant.

No one smart works for private industry.

Pick a point, and stay on it.

I was thinking that too.
That message is a little kumbaya for him

Use it -- or don't. It's free, so it makes not one bit of difference. It makes me enough money for the functionality it has, giving it to other webmasters is benevolence.

And since you bring it up -- without me defending truth in this thread, would you even have KNOWN about it?

Score.

He should be applauded for thinking for himself, and just slinging insults at people who have different opinions than he does.

It takes a big man to admit he's got a change of heart, and he should be saluted for having the courage.

It's not like he's going over to sheep-mode, and parroting the same old trash, hoping to win a popularity contest.