Stem Cell Research Ban Lifted

I think that we can get past the argument that embryonic stem cells are no different than skin cells that die by the billions every single day. The only difference is that stem cells from and embryo have been donated and can actually have the potential to become a cure or a path to a cure for many horrible diseases. Skin cells just fill up your mattress and add twenty or more pounds to the weight of it over 15 or more years. That is a gross fact but it is what it is.

President Obama lifted the ban on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research as promised which is very different from private funding and research. People in opposition to this ban being lifted will tell you that it is the sanctity of life but it really isn’t when you think about it. An embryo can not survive outside the body of the potential mother without intervention from medical science. Once they are donated for any purpose the potential source of life degrades over time and millions are destroyed past the milk carton expiration date so to speak.

Former President Reagan died from complications from Alzheimer’s disease and it doesn’t surprise me that his courageous wife is thankful for President Obama’s action today in lifting the stem cell ban enacted under holier than thou George W. Bush. Nancy Reagan is one of the best spokespeople for research in any capacity when it comes to any form of stem cell research. She has seen first hand what this research could have the potential to cure.

Nancy Reagan praises Obama
By CRAIG GORDON 3/9/09 12:17 PM EDT Updated: 3/9/09 5:19 PM EDT

Under fire from congressional Republicans for lifting restrictions on stem cell research, President Barack Obama got a powerful endorsement for his move Monday from Nancy Reagan, the former president’s wife.

“I’m very grateful that President Obama has lifted the restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research,” she wrote in a statement released shortly after Obama reversed the Bush administration limits. “These new rules will now make it possible for scientists to move forward. I urge researchers to make use of the opportunities that are available to them and to do all they can to fulfill the promise that stem cell research offers." - Politico

I lost my mother to heart disease when she was just 61 years old, my father died of Alzheimer’s disease when he was 73. Both of these people that I loved very much could have had a few more years with us if a solution or cure for heart disease and dementia based disorders could be found. What about the kids that are dying all the time from every debilitating disease that takes them to young from loving parents? What potential could those children have had in our worlds future? That is a question nobody can answer.

Science and the advancement of mankind is judged on success and failure and it should always be that way. We can look into the possibilities of embryonic stem cell research and see if it does have the potential to save lives and base continued research on the results of said science. If it fails, then it fails. There is a reason why we have an electric power system based on Edison’s inventions rather than that of Tesla. One was successful and the other failed. All stem cell research needs the chance to be proven right or wrong and let the result be the end of the discussion. We have separation of church and state built into our form of government but now we need a distinct separation of church and science when it comes to medical research that can prolong the life of the worlds citizens.

Thank you former First Lady Nancy Reagan for your strong support of stem cell research.

Papamoka

Thank you Memeorandum for the tip...

Today's Ugly, Lazy Politics

Hello Papamoka Readers! It's Ash Wednesday, the beginning of Lent, and a good time to give up something. Let's purify the soul. If you start with the seven deadly sins as a guide, perhaps we Democrats should let go of some pride. President Obama is causing an overload lately. Let's give it a shot.

Let's see, how about Republicans? I have a suggestion for our Republican friends. How about giving up sloth? Sloth is one of the sins articulated so well by medieval theologian Thomas Aquinas.

Think about it, it's the perfect sin to describe today's modern American Republican. Yes, SLOTH!

According to the Catholic Church, sloth is the "sluggishness of the mind which neglects ... sloth is evil in its effect, if it so oppresses." Wow, I don't know about you, but for me that is the nail that hits the proverbial Republican head. It's PERFECT!

The Church was referring to the idea that life requires work, and that work leads to salvation. You can interpret "work" any way you wish, but before I'm inundated with Republicans accusing Democrats of lacking a work ethic due to their desire for government leadership, allow me to say the work I find lacking involves Republican laziness related to FACT FINDING! Besides, I totally disagree with you Republicans that Democrats are lazy. American workers are the most productive on earth.

As many of you know I audit many of their news sources, and let me tell you their leaders, radio talk shows and various psychotic FOX "News" programs have been swamped lately with even more propaganda than usual. I call them the propaganda "elitists," to borrow a word the Republicans like to use on us. Well, the elitists are out-of-control and off the scale!

I've referred to Recovery.gov as a fact checker numerous times, and I am shocked by the amount of Republican BS that's being repeated ad nausea in some kind of retarded GOP-to-media-to-constituent daisy chain, or merry-go-round when they talk to each other. They are out of control and they don't even realize it most of the time. To be blunt, it seems like some kind of sick sociological experiment, to discover just how wrong politics, parties and their constituents can get when guided by unprincipled, desperate people.

The last few weeks have been the worst ever tainted by their lies, which has spurred them to be the least cooperative opposition during a crisis in American history. Their unwillingness to acknowledge the will of the American people after the last election is striking. They seem determined to stick to their broken ideas and stunted schemes. Their leaders have been despicable, doing whatever they can to stop a true economic recovery for their own political purposes. Their only concern is the next election and power, not the American people.

You see, there is only one set of facts. We Americans can debate them all we want - as to whether we feel they will help or hurt - but the fact remains there's still only one set of them.

I have a few questions for those Republicans who love to think they're politically smart these days, but in reality parrot the hyperbole of a few fanatic media dogs. Do you ever listen to yourselves? Do you ever think how absurd you sound when you try to debate politics using today's corrupt and discredited Republican resources? Do you ever get tired of ignoring factual responses, while resting on a crutch of media ignorance? Do you ever LISTEN?

Why don't you look up just a few key facts, which just might encourage you to cut President Obama and the Democrats a little slack? Try these first:

Why don't more Republicans make an effort to learn about how Republican presidents and congressional leaders ran up WELL OVER 90% of today's post World War II government debt, which now tops off near $11 trillion? George W. Bush himself ran up over a TRILLION in the past fiscal year alone. If it's true, which it is, doesn't it stand to reason that Democrats should be allowed an opportunity to spend government money based on their own needs and policies? It's only fair.

Why don't more Republicans make an effort to learn about what generates actual wealth in a nation? Republican leaders, the media, and my Republican friends keep talking about how World War II spending was the real reason why America pulled itself out of the depression. They like to say that Roosevelt's policies helped the poor, but in reality they prolonged the depression. That is a LIE!

Economists know that war spending does very little to create the economic conditions for domestic growth, since most of the money is wasted on products and services that are ultimately destroyed. Economies grow based on investments that are both renewable and long-lasting. Infrastructure investment, education investment, and good government policies are what most economists and academics credit with pulling America out of the depression. The fact is Roosevelt is responsible for those conditions. The Republican talking points to the contrary are deceitful, disingenuous and ignorant.

Why don't more Republicans make an effort to learn about why tax cuts are not enough to spur an economy, especially one mired deep in a recession or a depression? Most economists believe tax cuts spur an economy, which is why President Obama included $288 billion in tax cuts in the stimulus, HOWEVER, most economists ALSO believe that government spending and smart policies can play a vital role in stimulating an economy in crisis. The Republican talking points that criticize government efforts have no basis in reality. They are LIES! It is a fact: government has helped in the past and it can help again. The Republicans are playing politics!

Why don't more Republicans make an effort to learn about how they themselves used the same tools of government intervention in the past to help the economy? There are many examples throughout history when Republican administrations and congressional delegations used government to help fix the economy. I'm not going to name them all, but suffice to say that Ronald Reagan (Savings & Loan Crisis - $160.1 billion, about $124.6 billion of which was directly paid for by the U.S. taxpayer) and George W. Bush (federal bailouts and guarantees totalling over $5 TRILLION) were the two most recent examples. Feel free to list your own. They used LOTS of government money to tweak the economy. If Republicans wish to be fair, they'll allow us the same tool box. Unfortunately, I suspect fairness means little to them.

Why didn't more Republicans worry about creating debt when they were in power? Don't they see their own hypocrisy and double-standard today? I guess not.

Why didn't more Republicans care about smart regulations and enforcement when they were in power? Why are they fighting it now? Don't they acknowledge the role their leaders played at creating this crisis? Why doesn't it matter to them? Why don't they question their leaders' competence more?

Why do Republicans keep saying the Democrats were responsible for our problems because they controlled congress during the last two Bush years? Are they stupid? Think about the time scale! Are they even aware how their party filibustered every significant piece of reform legislation over those two years?

Why do Republicans always believe - without question - that Democrats spend while Republicans save? The exact OPPOSITE IS TRUE! The Republicans have consistently outspent the Democrats while in power, and by their love of tax cuts are guilty of lowering their own taxes at the expense of future generations. IT'S A FACT!

Do Republicans understand how BIG the deficit could get if we don't stimulate the economy, and HOW LONG the recession/depression could last? There are plenty of historic examples where governments did nothing, and nothing happened. Republicans love to use the Japanese stimulus packages of the nineties and their subsequent slow growth as arguments for nonintervention, but they always fail to mention that Japan's economy is driven by exports, and how stimulating that market is difficult. I say get all the facts, or don't bother.

The Republicans like to call us Democrats socialists. The facts suggest otherwise. Republicans lie to their constituents, create myths about who they are, and lie about what they did moments after doing it. They are the CON ARTIST party. A good example is their passion for the "FREE MARKET." Sure they love it, when it benefits them. Republicans are famous for PRIVATIZING THE PROFITS and SOCIALIZING THE RISK. Democrats simply acknowledge that government has a role to play. We tell the truth. We do not try to con the American people.

The list of questions goes on an on. I might even add a few over the next few days. Feel free to suggest your own. The bottom line is that most Republicans are ignoring the facts these days, while believing lies from multiple, illegitimate sources. It's time for Republicans to step up, smell the coffee, unhook the old ball and chain, and free themselves of whatever is causing them to be so brain dead these days.

I have had numerous debates with Republican friends and family recently, and they all seem to be parroting the same lies. It's getting very tiring and annoying. As I said on this blog, modern American political discourse is being steered by political and media elites, who are often LYING! I'm begging average Americans, especially Republicans, to do their research, read more, and discover what really happened in the past, and what is really happening today.

PLEASE DON'T TRUST TODAY'S POLITICAL AND MEDIA ELITE! Get up, get active, and get better informed!

Michael Boh
Papamoka's Left Coast Contributor
from Our Rants & Raves Blog

BUSH ADMINISTRATION HELPS ROLL UP "WELCOME BACK" MAT FOR RETURNING VETERANS

BY MICHAEL LINN JONES



Back in the 1980's comedian Richard Belzer had a routine poking fun at President Reagan. Sarcastically referring to Reagan as "the most sensitive man in America," Belzer would voice words that his target never used. It was comedy, the warping of reality to get a laugh.

In one segment, he remarks on unwed mothers, welfare recipients....and veterans. I cannot recall the exact wording, but it was something like, "Unemployed vets.....just keep on marching fellas." It indicated either an insensitivity to veterans in trouble or suffering from a tin ear when it comes to recognizing a simple decency. It was, perhaps, unfair. But comedy is unfair, even if making a point; that point being....what do "we" owe veterans?

So here we are two decades later. In Belzer's America, Ronald Reagan was addressing Vietnam veterans. However, unlike that time, we have a full-blown conflict on our hands. The president who started it is still in the White House. He's the decider. He's the man in charge. Et cetera & ad nauseum.

And, of course, he CARES about veterans. So why am I seeing a story like this from AP's Hope Yen: RETURNING TO WORK A PROBLEM FOR RESERVISTS?

WASHINGTON - Strained by extended tours in Iraq, growing numbers of military reservists say the government is providing little help to soldiers who are denied their old jobs when they return home, Defense Department data shows.

The Pentagon survey of reservists in 2005-2006, obtained by The Associated Press, details increasing discontent among returning troops in protecting their legal rights after taking leave from work to fight for their country.

It found that 44 percent of the reservists polled said they were dissatisfied with how the Labor Department handled their complaint of employment discrimination based on their military status, up from 27 percent from 2004.

SNIP,

"Most of the government investigators are too willing to accept the employer's explanation for a worker's dismissal," said Sam Wright, a former Labor Department attorney who helped write the 1994 discrimination law protecting reservists.

"Some of it is indifference, some of them don't understand the laws involved," Wright said. "But the investigators establish for themselves this impossibly hard standard to win a case. As a result, reservists lose out."

Under the law, military personnel are protected from job discrimination based on their service and are generally entitled to a five-year cumulative leave with rights to their old jobs upon their return. Reservists typically file a complaint first with a Pentagon office, the Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve (ESGR), which seeks to resolve the dispute informally.

If that effort fails, a person typically can go to the Labor Department to pursue a formal complaint and possible litigation by the Justice Department.

A report by the American Bar Association as early as 2004 noted problems in which the government was "not seen as an aggressive advocate for the returning veteran." A presidential task force chaired by former Veterans Affairs Secretary Jim Nicholson earlier this year found that agencies could do a better job of educating troops and veterans. The report did not address government enforcement of the law.

I know what the explanation is for this: watch the film "Airplane!" and wait for the segment where two political pundits are discussing what to do about the passengers stuck on a crippled airliner that might not make it. One commenter says, "They bought their tickets; they knew the risks....I say LET 'EM crash!"

Of course it will not be spoken thusly in public, but many companies will mouth patriotism. Many will flap their yaps about "supporting the troops" which has become as damaged a cliche as the "war on drugs" or the "war on terror." No one can adequately define them because.....well, they just aren't there to be defined.

I look upon the Iraq/Afghanistan conflicts as a national football game. We're all for cheering the guys and gals out on the field. But if dead, injured, or finished with their duty the powerful step over them to keep sending replacement players into the fray.

It's shameful, but then "shame" is a word to describe a condition or attitude that requires contrition. And there is the rub: many have no ability to be contrite about anything. Serving your country is all fine and dandy, but geez louise....don't think for a moment that doing so is going to interfere with COMMERCE.

If there is a federal law that requires employers to take back returning veterans then it should be obeyed. It's a damned shame we even NEED such a law in the first place, but sometimes the legislature recognizes that the excesses of greed and expediency interfere with national security, whatever about common decency.

And that law needs enforcement by the executive. It requires the chief executive of the nation to step on a few toes to ensure that these returning reservists are granted the full extent of that law. But President Bush himself has declared the "haves" and "have-mores" as his base. If this story gets the attention it deserves, like Katrina and Walter Reed, expect photo ops of the president solemnly declaring that he will do something. Yeah. Sure. Almost seven years in office and NOW he might find a problem?

I hark back to the first year of the Kennedy administration. The major steel companies had announced that they were raising the prices of their products. Not because of any inflationary pressure; no, they just wanted more money. The executives were invited to the White House. During a break of the jaw-boning session, Kennedy was seen to exit the conference room in a state of deep anger.

Turning to an aide he said, "My father was right; they're all just sons of bitches." He was referring to the attitude of men whose greed was impaired neither by decency or the thought of the common good.

Anybody who turns their back on a returning soldier/airman/sailor/marine is a son of a bitch, too.

And so are those who allow them to get away with it. What a lousy way to approach Veterans' Day.
***********************
Cross-posted at Michael Linn Jones.com