Democrat scientists were shocked and dismayed by the finding that elephants are self-aware.
Researchers at the Yerkes National Primate Research h Center at Emory University and Wildlife Conservation Society in New York carried out a study and found indications that female elephants examine their own reflections in a mirror and not mistake them for another elephant.
Meanwhile in a less reported experiment, when Bud the Jack Ass was shown his reflection in a mirror he failed to notice the large X on his forehead, instead screaming “Oh my God, I’m a Democrat!” and running headlong over a nearby cliff.
Elephants found to recognize themselves in front of mirror
House Majority Leader “Shoeless” John Boehner’s message to GOP voters on ABC’s “This Week” Sunday: Don’t Bother.
We can’t look at these big problems we have and think we’re going to solve them in a very short period of time. Until people truly understand the magnitude of the problem we’re facing with the large entitlement programs, trying to talk about options for fixing them is premature.’
People have been talking about options for fixing entitlements, and especially Social Security. In the case of Social Security the talk, and specifically talk about ideas for reform that include partial privatization, goes back for literally decades. Some variation on the idea has been endorsed by people as diverse as former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan, Nobel prize winning economist Gary Becker and former President Bill Clinton.
Americans elected a GOP majority Congress and a GOP President, with the first popular majority of any President in over a decade, in 2004 and that GOP Congress hasn’t done much more than talk about anything in the nearly two years it’s had.
Now Shoeless John promises that as far as the President’s agenda goes, reelecting the Republican Congress will accomplish…nothing. What a way to motivate your friends. Are these guys seriously trying to throw the election? Say it ain’t so, John.
I’m leaning heavily against The Stem Cell Initiative, though I do believe stem cell research should be allowed as it is now under Missouri law. At this point, I will either leave the question blank or vote “no”. Here are the specific pros and cons, as I see them:
- It specifies what currently appears to be a reasonable limit on how late in development stem cells can be harvested.
- It prohibits fertilizing eggs solely for harvesting stem cells. (But there is a huge caveat on this “pro”.)
- It requires documentation of informed consent by donors.
- It’s entirely too long. This is a Constitutional Amendment, not a statutory initiative. The state constitution should set general parameters for legislation, it should concern itself with setting the limits of government power. The initiative runs to 2,155 words. By comparison the entire US Constitution including the signatures and Amendments runs to 7,631.
- It’s not necessary. There is no legislation on the books prohibiting stem cell research in Missouri and there is little impetus toward such legislation.
- By setting the limit on how late in development stem cells can be harvested in the Constitution, it eliminates flexibility in changing this by statute if changes become necessary.
- Though it prohibits fertilizing eggs “solely for the purpose of stem cell research”, it specifically allows producing stem cells “solely for the purpose of stem cell research” by means of somatic cell nuclear transfer (therapeutic cloning).
- The initiative which is presented as progressive support of scientific research succumbs to Luddite horror film fantasies with its prohibition on reproductive cloning or attempting the reproductive cloning of human beings.
- It writes the free market out of the acquisition of eggs and embryos, opening the way to either a political market governed by pull, a black market with its artificially inflated prices or both. Since the prohibition on sale is only covered by the civil enforcement mechanism, the prospect of a black market seems even more likely.
- It creates a new state bureaucracy to certify any stem cell researchers in the state; a restriction which does not currently exist
- The requirement for informed consent, one of the best parts of the proposal, is only covered by the civil enforcement mechanism.
- The civil enforcement mechanism may only be enforced by the Attorney General, currently the notoriously anti-life politician Jay Nixon, and provides civil penalties for certain violations of $50,000 per violation which would accrue to the state government.
- Creates a registration and reporting requirement for research institutions, burdening them with government red tape they don’t currently face.
- The definitions are purposely misleading in an attempt to gain the Luddite vote. The definitions require implantation in a uterus to constitute cloning, while specifically defining the use of embryos produced through somatic cell nuclear transfer (commonly called….”cloning”) as acceptable for production of stem cells.
Some sections of this proposal might be desirable as statute law. The total package is some of the worst legislative sausage ever made. The language is so misleading that it is either purposefully misleading or written by idiots. Whether it’s the work of liars or the work of idiots, it shouldn’t be enshrined in the state Constitution.
stem cells,Missouri Amendment Two,Stem Cell Initiative
So, apparently jihadi apologists at the New York Times are comparing the current upswing in violence by the enemy in Iraq with the Tet Offensive launched by the Vietcong and the NVA in 1968. The news media is absolutely ecstatic that George Bush has “admitted” a parallel to Vietnam in this situation.
Mr Bush was asked in television interview whether he agreed with an opinion by New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman that the current violence in Iraq was “the jihadist equivalent of the Tet offensive”.
The useful idiots and fellow travelers might want to rethink their jubilation. The US Army won the series of battles following the Tet Offensive handily, killing over 10,000 NVA and Vietcong in a matter of weeks. Despite the seemingly large number of US casualties, that parallel seems sound, (especially with The Lancet reporting a 20:1 ratio of Iraqi and jihadist to allied deaths). Communist fellow travelers and useful idiots at home used TV and the images of war to sap public confidence at home after Tet. Now jihadi fellow travelers and useful idiots at home have the audacity to make this comparison and the foolishness to act jubilant when George Bush confirms it.
By comparing the current offensive to Tet, the jihadi apologists are confirming two things that many of us have been saying all along. First, that the US military is winning on the battlefield. Second, that no matter how bravely and well our military performs, the jihadi fellow travelers and useful idiots can sink the effort right here at home. Neither parallel to Tet is one I’d want to be drawing if I were a media apologist for the jihadis.
Scotsman.com News – International – Bush admits Iraq violence echoes Vietnam during Tet