Sunday, July 23, 2006

Bush is a F&%*ing Moron, Proof #20,193

Harsh title? Yes.

Tim Russert just got to the crux of the issue on stem cells. Josh Bolton stammered and stuttered around, but the completely absurd illogic is clear: destroy the embryos, don't use them. Bolton tried to duck and dodge, shuck and jive, but Russert nailed him [more, his stupid boss] to the wall. If Bush doesn't oppose the process of IVF, which creates hundreds of thousands of excess embryos, yet calls the use of these embryos in research "murder" [via Tony Snow], then there is a clear disconnect in the Prez's already-fuzzy little brain.

Bolton was also asked whether he agreed with Karl Rove's statement that adult stem cells contained "far more promise" than embryonic stem cells, a statement which Russert pointed out had zero scientific support. Bolton once again stuttered and stammered, saying, "I'm no scientist," to which Tim quickly replied, "neither is Rove".

Bolton goes on to point out that adult stem cells have already shown promise...without seeming to be able to comprehend that an unfunded area of research will never be able to prove its promise. Universities, where the most crucial fundamental research is carried out, receive very very little private funding. If federal funds are not made available, and NIH and NSF grants are not devised for stem cell therapy research, then millions of people will continue to suffer and die, needlessly. Why? Because of our prez's "moral fiber". The same sort of fiber that I saw in a toilet once -- pure shit. "Blastocyst-Americans" apparently garner more votes for our prez than those dying of ALS and diabetes.

Bolton also fell back onto the "snowflake children" that Bush used as a prop in his PR event on the veto. Isn't that heartmoving, to see those kids, and think, "yeah, we can't kill them!"...? Problem here is that there was absolutely no potential of that happening.

Considering the fact that one of the two bills that passed outlaw "fetal farming" (what a joke) and ensured that no embryo which would otherwise be adopted would be used, there is absolutely no logical ground for this dolt to stand on:
SEC. 498D. HUMAN EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH.
`(a) In General- Notwithstanding any other provision of law (including any regulation or guidance), the Secretary shall conduct and support research that utilizes human embryonic stem cells in accordance with this section (regardless of the date on which the stem cells were derived from a human embryo).
`(b) Ethical Requirements- Human embryonic stem cells shall be eligible for use in any research conducted or supported by the Secretary if the cells meet each of the following:
`(1) The stem cells were derived from human embryos that have been donated from in vitro fertilization clinics, were created for the purposes of fertility treatment, and were in excess of the clinical need of the individuals seeking such treatment.
`(2) Prior to the consideration of embryo donation and through consultation with the individuals seeking fertility treatment, it was determined that the embryos would never be implanted in a woman and would otherwise be discarded.
`(3) The individuals seeking fertility treatment donated the embryos with written informed consent and without receiving any financial or other inducements to make the donation.
`(c) Guidelines- Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this section, the Secretary, in consultation with the Director of NIH, shall issue final guidelines to carry out this section.
`(d) Reporting Requirements- The Secretary shall annually prepare and submit to the appropriate committees of the Congress a report describing the activities carried out under this section during the preceding fiscal year, and including a description of whether and to what extent research under subsection (a) has been conducted in accordance with this section.'.
Passed the House of Representatives May 24, 2005.

According to sub-section 2 here, the only potential embryos to be used are explicitly not those which may be "adopted" and implanted -- thus no "snowflake babies" will be murdered.

What he has done is prevent millions of people from receiving life-saving research, and send hundreds of thousands of embryos to a trash can, because he is a stupid ass with no moral principles at all. What moral principles guide a moron into sending potentially life-saving research into the trash can? Yes, I'm as mad as hell.

Bush just walked into a burning hospital, and there was one Alzheimer's patient on one side, and a million fertilized embryos on the other side, and he only had time to save one...what did he do?

...the f&%*ing idiot just turned his back on both, and walked out, whistling to himself and patting his own "morally-princpled" back, leaving both to die, based on his "ethics".
________________
Technorati tags: , , ,