Iowa's Gov Vilsack and "the Human Cloning party"
Today's Weekly Standard has a good essay by Wesley J. Smith on The Democrats' New Litmus Test, Tom Vilsack is running for president--and toward human cloning.
Smith writes about Vilsak's flip on the issue in his State of the State address and how it's become a litmus test issue for the Democrats.
Not exactly an Illinois story but this has been popular on Illinoize, and I like Iowa anyways.
Smith concludes, WE HAVE SEEN this kind of enforced political lockstep before in the Democrat party. While there are many pro-life Democrats at the local and state levels, to make it on the national stage, Democrats must become pro-choice.
Time will tell whether becoming known as "the Human Cloning party," will help or hurt the Democrats. But there seems little doubt that advocacy by its most prominent members on behalf of cloning as a medical treatment to date has been rife with factual falsehoods and reckless hype. Remember when Ron Reagan told the Democratic National Convention that cloning would permit each of us to each have a "self repair kit" waiting for use at our local hospitals? And when Senator John Edwards outrageously claimed in 2004 that a vote for John Kerry would allow paralyzed people to get out of their wheelchairs and walk? Vilsack's lies are merely the latest addition to this sorry list.
16 comments:
Lord, still with the human cloning...I guess, in the words of George Costanza, "it's not a lie, if YOU believe it."
Kudos for filling in for Jill. I wonder how DC was...and well, I'll be a monkey's uncle (pun intended). Another rally for life, and dadgummit, George Dubya's in Kansas dodging questions about gay cowboys. Well, that makes it 6/6 on those rallies he couldn't make it to.
Gosh. If I didn't know better, I'd swear he didn't want to be photographed or filmed with them.
anon 11:57 re: Bush dodging question on gays.
Remember the Bush Kerry debate when they were both asked if homosexuality was a choice or just part of ones nature?
And Bush responed I don't know and Kerry went on ad nauseum about Cheny's daughter being a lesbian.
That spoke volumes to everyone as to who had the greatest respect for human dignity.
It was turning point in the campaign for many.
I didn't say dodging gays - I said dodging questions about gay cowboys. Watch his nervous response to the question about Brokeback Mountain. When he got to "I haven't seen it." he ought to have stopped.
And that part was tongue in cheek -- the point of the post was he was, for the sixth year in the six years of his presidency, skipping the rally for life, literally phoning it in.
Incidentally, I cringed and yelled at the TV when Kerry brought up Mary Cheney. It WAS stupid. Kerry was a HORRIBLE candidate.
How completely ridiculous. Gov. Vilsack does not support human cloning and you know it. I find it fascinating that anti-abortion people claim to be moral but are more than willing to lie through their teeth when they think they can make points.
The word "clone" does not necessarily mean "human clone." If you do not know that, then you really should read up on the subject.
Further, the alleged "litmus test" is ridiculous. There is absolutely zero chance that the Republican Party will nominate a pro-choice candidate for President. On the other hand, the Democrats have a Pro-Life Senate Leader.
I guess when you have to run on the Republican record in 2006, you need to create issues, even if it means telling lies to do it.
Ad nauseum about Cheney's daughter? Were you watching the same debate I was? Kerry just mentioned Cheney's daughter (if you had watched the VP debate a few nights before, Cheney had talked about her himself) to highlight that gay people are our sons, daughters, brothers, and sisters, not some evildoers like the James Dobson wing of the Republican party would have you believe. Your disingenousness makes everything else you say really hard to believe.
skeeter: I don't think a pro-choice Rudi Guiliani out of the question at the top of a GOP ticket.
I can't imagine Harry Reid or any pro-Life Democrat at the top of the ticket.
anon 5:37: Here's Kerry's response at the debate. It's goofy and makes no sense. All we really know is Cheney's daughter is a Lesbian which doesn't seem to have much to do with anything.
Kerry comes out against Same Sex marriage after all is said too.
KERRY: We're all God's children, Bob. And I think if you were to talk to Dick Cheney's daughter, who is a lesbian, she would tell you that she's being who she was, she's being who she was born as.
I think if you talk to anybody, it's not choice. I've met people who struggled with this for years, people who were in a marriage because they were living a sort of convention, and they struggled with it.
And I've met wives who are supportive of their husbands or vice versa when they finally sort of broke out and allowed themselves to live who they were, who they felt God had made them.
I think we have to respect that.
The president and I share the belief that marriage is between a man and a woman. I believe that. I believe marriage is between a man and a woman.
But I also believe that because we are the United States of America, we're a country with a great, unbelievable Constitution, with rights that we afford people, that you can't discriminate in the workplace. You can't discriminate in the rights that you afford people.
You can't disallow someone the right to visit their partner in a hospital. You have to allow people to transfer property, which is why I'm for partnership rights and so forth.
Now, with respect to DOMA and the marriage laws, the states have always been able to manage those laws. And they're proving today, every state, that they can manage them adequately.
The whole transcript is here. Bush often sounds like he has a mouth full of marbles put his clarity and Kerry's lack of it is striking. It's more then debaters skill (Bush lacks it). It goes to the core an voters saw it, and I think will see it again if Democrats can't get their acts together.
Bill Baar said...
"skeeter: I don't think a pro-choice Rudi Guiliani out of the question at the top of a GOP ticket.
I can't imagine Harry Reid or any pro-Life Democrat at the top of the ticket."
Let me get this right:
1. According to Baar, Democrats are the Litmus Test Party;
2. According to Baar, Republicans are the No Litmus Test Party;
3. The highest ranking pro-life Democrat is the Senate Minority Leader;
4. The highest ranking pro-choice Republican is a former NY City mayor.
That's great. I thought Baar was trying to write about politics. Turns out he's doing a humor column. I didn't get the joke at first, but now that I see it I nearly laughed so hard that I fell off my chair. You are one funny guy Bill.
Giuliani is a contender for the ticket. I like the guy. So does Tom Roeser.
That says something about the Republican's tent.
Not a joke. Try being a pro-life Democrat. Look at Glenn Poshard and how he fared in Illinois. The Dems (myself included at the time) jumped ship for George Ryan.
...so the joke was on us I'm afraid.
You are a hoot, Bill.
To refresh your recollection:
Highest ranking pro-life Democrat: Senate Minority Leader.
Highest ranking pro-choice Republican: Former NY City Mayor.
There is absolutely nobody within the GOP Congressional leadership who is pro-choice. Zero. If there any pro-choice GOP govs, I would be shocked. Meanwhile, the most powerful Democrat is pro-life.
Thanks for the good laugh though. I appreciate it.
Skeeter:
NYC population 8 million
NV population 1.9 million
NYC 12 Reps
NV 3 Reps
Lets wait and see how Giuliani does in the Republican Primaries.
Here's what HedgeHog is showing as of Sep,
1. Rudy Giuliani 26%
2. John McCain 23%
3. Condoleezza Rice 18%
4. Newt Gingrich 7%
5. Mitt Romney 3%
6. Bill Frist 2%
7. George Allen 2%
Enlighten us all.
You have claimed that the Democrats are the party of the litmus test. Is that correct?
You have claimed that the Republicans are the party of the open ideas, and that they are not bound by an litmus test. Is that correct?
If so, please tell us all who you believe is currently the highest ranking pro-choice Republican in office?
Really, Bill. Give this one up. Certain battles can be won. You can't win this one. When you make that sort of argument, you lose all credibility on other issues.
National polls favor Giuliani because people know him. But do you REALLY think Republican caucus-goers in IA are going with him? NH Primary voters? South Carolina?
That nomination has George Allen written all over it.
Oh and Rudy was a big gun control advocate - though recent reports indicate he's finding religion on that. Kind of, you know, being for something before being against it.
He isn't going to be the GOP nominee.
Republicans for Choice listed these folks,
Republicans for Choice, PAC would like to thank the eight Republican members of the US Senate who chose to buck the President and vote their conscience. Their vote to allow doctors overseas who receive UNFPA Funds to decide whether to discuss the sensitive issue of abortion with their patients took real courage.
Those Senator's are:
Senator Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island
Senator Susan Collins of Maine
Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska
Senator Gordon Smith of Oregon**
Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine
Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania
Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska**
Senator John Warner of Virginia**
It's more open Party then the Democrats.
And tell Arlen Specter he's small potatoes by the way.
Here's Roeser writing on Giuliani back in Sept 2005,
Fortunately, I am not alone in my high regard for Giuliani. The most recent Pew poll, which maps the political landscape, has Giuliani topping all contenders across a broad swath of public opinion. He rates highest among enterprisers, those who want to promote business (90 percent); social conservatives (75 percent); pro-government conservatives (69 percent); the "upbeats" who view the future positively (69 percent); taking with him a majority of the disaffected people who have felt depressed about the country's future (53 percent); doing nicely with disadvantaged Democrats (37 percent), and falling just short of a majority with liberals (47 percent). He has done this without the visible trappings of a campaign.
Like I say, it's more thoughtful and open party then the Democrats.
Ted Stevens as pro-choice?
John Warner?
Do you really think either of them would embrace a "pro-choice" label?
Isn't it a fact that the Republican leadership nearly forced Senator Specter to give up his committee chairmanship due to his views?
What do you think the Christian Right that got Bush elected with do with a real pro-choice candidate? Do you believe for one second that the people who thought Alan Keyes was the best choice would allow a pro-choice candidate?
Do you care at all about your credibility?
Give this one up. You sound like a cheap hack.
Republicans for Choice thanked Stevens.
Guiliani is leading. That's a fact. Whether it's a forecast; who knows.
But I too am dedicated to returning intellectual curiosity and intellectual honesty to the world of politics and believe my posts reflect that.
Post a Comment