‘Science before ideology’?

June 21, 2007

I realize I should know better, but the transparent stupidity of the White House’s line on stem-cell policy was simply overwhelming yesterday.

President Bush on Wednesday issued his second veto of a measure lifting his restrictions on human embryonic stem cell experiments. The move effectively pushed the contentious scientific and ethical debate surrounding the research into the 2008 presidential campaign.

“Destroying human life in the hopes of saving human life is not ethical,” Mr. Bush said in a brief ceremony in the East Room of the White House. He called the United States “a nation founded on the principle that all human life is sacred.”

Really? “Destroying” human life is wrong? “All” human life is sacred? Even if we put aside the president’s war policy and his propensity for executing American criminals, Bush’s guiding principle can’t be protecting the sanctity of embryonic life because his policies show otherwise.

The president supports, for example, private funding of embryonic stem cell research. He also supports IVF and medical research using old stem-cell lines. It’s not just that Bush’s policy is wrong — though it is wrong — it’s that it contradicts itself.

Tony Snow’s defense was almost comical.

“The President also has never declared it against the law to engage in embryonic stem cell research — he simply thinks it involves, as do many other people, the taking of a human life.”

See? Bush hasn’t banned murder, he’s just blocked some funding for taxpayer-subsidized murder. Privately-funded murder is still fine, and entirely consistent with the president’s values and commitment to a culture of life.

I find it genuinely hard to believe how anyone, anywhere on the ideological spectrum, would find this persuasive.

Indeed, Snow was in rare form yesterday, providing a clinic on how best to lie to the White House press corps with a straight face. Consider these gems:

* “This actually is the President putting science before ideology.”

* “To the extent that there is embryonic stem cell research, it’s being done not because Bill Clinton made it possible, but because George W. Bush made it possible.” (Yes, moments after describing the research as “taking of a human life,” Snow bragged about Bush’s support for the research.)

* “I think you will find that the President’s reverence for life is shared by a majority of the American public.” (Americans disagree with Bush’s policy on stem-cell research, 3 to 1.)

All I want is some coherence. Well, that’s not quite right. All I really want is for Bush to stop blocking promising research that could offer hope to millions of suffering Americans.

But politically, what I want is for the White House to be honest. In 1998, the Clinton administration’s HHS conducted some research on needle-exchange programs. Officials found that the programs curtailed the spread of AIDS and did not lead to more drug abuse, but the administration decided not to pursue the policy anyway. They acknowledged what the research told them, but said they’d decided to go in a different direction anyway.

In contrast, the Bush administration just makes up nonsense, denies reality, and intentionally deceives. It’s rather embarrassing.

“They acknowledged what the research told them, but said they’d decided to go in a different direction anyway.”

You know, I don’t mind that at all. That is politics. Had Bush come out and honestly told the American public his views on Iraq, and told them despite all the arguments to the contrary he was going to war anyway, I could accept that, as the public then would be properly informed and would be able to consider that when voting next time. But the real problem with the GOP/conservatives is that darn near each and every action they wish to take goes against the views and beliefs of a majority of the public, so they have to lie about them all–people will forgive one or two bad decisions if they are followed by or made among 5 or 6 good decisions. Which really points to the need for and value of an active and aggressive media to investigate such things thoroughly and shine light on them so that the public is informed. Instead, we have way too many Richard Cohen’s who would prefer to keep the lights off. And keep the electorate ignorant.

  • I keep thinking that if I just try a little bit harder, I will be able to understand how these people’s minds work, but so far, it just isn’t happening.

    While I don’t understand the whole “destruction of a couple hundred cells is murder” position, I respect someone’s right to hold it. But, if it is murder, it’s murder whether the federal government funds, it, the state government funds it, or private money pays for it, right? Murder doesn’t cease to be murder just because the government isn’t sanctioning it with tax dollars, and it is insulting – as usual – to the intelligence of the American people for Bush – or the people who speak for him – to frame the rejection of federal funding in this way.

    It seems to me that a compelling argument could be made that if the government were to fully participate in funding stem-cell research, it would have more ability to influence and control the ethical application of the science, than it does when it refuses to participate at all (or only minimally, with existing – and inadequate – stem cell lines). Forcing research totally into private hands, it seems to me, is to risk experimentation and application that would venture far outside the mainstream.

    I guess it’s just asking too much to expect an honest explanation for anything from this administration.

  • I don’t know what has happened to this country. The secrecy and deceit spewing from the White House over the last 6 years has snowballed (no pun intended) into an avalanche of lies so large that absolutely nothing these people say has one iota of truth. Yet they still hold power; they still act with impunity, forcing their narrow-minded, ideological and dangerous agenda down the throats of an unwilling majority of Americans.

    We elected a new congress to stop this tailspin into the abyss, and all they seem to be able to do is issue meaningless statements and subpeonas. They talk a good game, but it’s all bark and no bite.

    Just look at Gonzalez, the highest ranking law enforcement officer in the land. Caught red handed breaking the law, he still runs the justice department. Just his very presence there makes a mockery of our laws and constitution. And nothing is being done.

    Now we have an administration trigger happy to start a war with Iran, using the same thoroughly debunked arguments they used to invade and occupy Iraq.

    And it appears they may get their wish.

    I believe wholeheartedly that in the end, it will be American citizens that will have to take matters in their own hands, I just hope that our citizenry hasn’t been brainwashed to the point of being like cattle in a herd. I know I haven’t been, and I know I am ready…

  • “Destroying human life in the hopes of saving human life is not ethical,” Mr. Bush said…

    He’s absolutely right. It is ethical to destroy human life only in the pursuit of greater profits for oil companies.

  • Even if we put aside the president’s war policy and his propensity for executing American criminals…

    For a moment, let’s not put that aside. Let’s just say that, if the argument is that the death penalty deters crime, supporters are very much saying that it’s worth killing one to save many. Ditto for “collateral damage” in the war against terrorizers.

  • It’s all a show. Snowjob and his masters aren’t talking to us, as in CB and his readers or anyone capable of a little critical thought.

    He’s creating ReThuglican Reality (TM) for Das Base and the fRight Wing Cheerleaders who will write the biographies that will go in the Deciderators Presiduncial Memorial Library.

    Not that it isn’t fun to point out what a lying douche the man is, but realizing he’s just catapulting (or projectilve barfing) the propaganda keeps me from going insane.

  • “Bush hasn’t banned murder, he’s just blocked some funding for taxpayer-subsidized murder. Privately-funded murder is still fine…”

    Government bad, private sector good. That’s their mantra.

  • Bush may not want public funding of the most promising form of stem cell research because when the amazing benefits are available he doesnt want people to think that just because they contributed to the process, they dont have to pay everything they own to receive those benefits. There is a mad, evil consistency from that perspective.

  • I wonder how Snowball would feel about spewing these lies if he knew that stem cell research could lead to a cure for his cancer. Tony, are you willing to die for your administration? Me thinks otherwise…

  • I just kept turning my head saying “but but but but…he’s not making any sense.” The whole explanation was completely non sensical. Then I thought why would he go against the majority of the American people? Is it because there is a reason to keep stem cell research privately funded? What does Bush get by vetoing this bill? Because he certainly didn’t do it because of some moral issue.
    So if all the reasons he gave for doing it were all lies, why did he do it?

  • The president supports, for example, private funding of embryonic stem cell research. — CB

    And that’s all that matters. Private, vs public.

    With public funding, those who own him won’t be able to profit as much as they feel they ought to. And, like Anne said, with private funding, the govt won’t have any control over either the experiments, or the outcomes.

    With public funding (and control), the research can be orchestrated between different labs, to minimize the costs (less duplication) and the results would benefit everyone. With private funding, those who do the research will have a total lock on everything, so that only millionaires can profit.

  • “Destroying human life in the hopes of saving human life is not ethical,” …

    Let me see if I have this correctly: The President, and presumably, any good conservative as well, believes that if the federal government provides funding for stem cell research, then pregnant women will have more incentives to get abortions…indeed some women will get abortions for the sole purpose of prividing stem cells for research.
    That is the only valid logical parsing of that quoted statement above. This doesn’t even come close to resembling valid thinking. What an idiotic statement.

    • Comments are closed.