President Bush vetoed an Embryonic Stem Cell bill that would have allowed for federal funding for stem cell research. This is yet another example of President Bush working with the Democratically controlled Congress, and listening to the majority of the people.
In vetoing the bill, President Bush said "If this legislation became law, it would compel American taxpayers ... to support the deliberate destruction of human embryos. I made it clear to Congress and the American people that I will not allow our nation to cross this moral line."
I'd be more impressed with the president's convictions, except while he has "made it clear" that he won't allow the destruction of embryos that will never become people, he has no compunction about killing actual people (never granted clemency to individuals on death row in Texas, not to mention the hundreds of thousand of dead Iraqis and 3000+ dead American servicemembers), and taking the lives away from people he considers evil, simply for looking like a terrorist.
I think vetoing this bill was irresponsible of a president who has shown a complete inability to listen to anyone except those who will tell him what he wants to hear and who does not understand that the government is his on loan. If the people spoke out loudly in opposition to research that has the potential to save millions of lives and Congress passed the bill anyway, then I could understand his stance. In this particular instance, though, he's voting his sense of morality on 300 million people. I don't like this use of a presidential veto, but I think it's unsurprising that this president doesn't know how to use a veto.
5 comments:
Just wondering if you're taking the 300 million as the population or as the number of people who are reportedly in favor of embryonic stem cell research. Because the latter -- it seems awfully high. Or maybe it's just my achin' brain...
That would be the population of the country.
I'm not saying everyone supports it; that would be a falsehood. However, I do suggest that the president is imposing his sense of morality on all those 300 million people, and not considering other factors.
I was just clarifying (My brain is functioning now that I'm not in so much pain).
I think any leader imposes their morality -- it's the nature of leadership in a sense. Congress does it whenever they pass legislation, which is essentially nothing more than a legalized endorsement of one form of morality, and not always in the interest or with the blessing of their contituency. I don't see Bush doing anything different than those individuals or any of his predecessors or, really, getting any more flack than any others have gotten.
I believe that I have to agree with you Steve. Bush has surrounded himself with yes man because that is the easiest path for him to follow. He is the Water Boy President for special interests and like water he will find the laziest way to the sea.
This President does not have the ability to even remotely resemble a great Statesman like President Lincoln. Lincoln was a President with so much confidence in his convictions that he loaded his political cabinets with political opponents. In doing so he earned a grateful nations respect.
I appreciate your concurrence, Papamoka, but I believe Jae has a valid point - that the President's predecessors have done the same thing, as has Congress.
I think politics in general has become agenda-driven. It's not about serving the people; it's about serving interests, self-serving, or using a position of power to promote one's sense of morality, or to force that sense on others.
Thank you both for your opinions.
Now I have to get back to studying for the bar.
Post a Comment