The issue is federal funding. Why? Because there's no other source for the money! Why do they want the money if the research is going to lead nowhere? It doesn't matter. They want the money. Everybody needs a living. Hey, if you could live off the federal government with grants instead of working, would you do that? Why don't these researchers go out, if they're so brainy, why don't they borrow the money? If it's so promising, do what everybody else does: go borrow money. But no, there's in assumption the government must pay for it. "Why this is health! Why, this is medicine! The government must pay for this."
Well, no, the government shouldn't, especially if it's a black hole. Its' the same thing here with global warming. It's all about funding, and the people who want funding from the governments that believe this thing will write reports saying human beings are the sole cause, the primary cause, whatever, of global warming. There are others who, on the basis of their own research, say, "No, you can't prove it yet," and so the clowns that are running around trying to get government money from all over the world then turn what they're doing around, they say, "Ah, these people are being funded by Big Oil, these people being are being funded by people that pollute and want to keep polluting so that they don't have to be held accountable for the global warming."
The bottom line is there's no consensus in science on this, and there's nothing in science that says embryonic stem cells show promise. So what we have here is the politicization of medicine. This is the sad and shocking thing. We used to approach the cure for diseases in a truly bipartisan way, but now we don't. Now we've got Democrats and their allies with commercials all over saying certain Republicans are against curing this disease that you have or your friends have or other Americans have. They don't want people to get better, and so what we have, Democrats lying to sick people in this country, creating false hope (which is truly cruel) that this line of research will lead to something substantive, when it won't.
Even the people who say it might, say we need 15 to 20 years. Where have we heard that? In 1994 I heard we need 20 years to prove global warming, but we can't afford to wait because if we're wrong, it will be too late to stop it. Well, it's 20 years, and they still say, "We need more time. We can't afford to wait." Others are saying it's too late. They're all over the ballpark. Others are saying, "We can't fix global warming." Well, if we can't fix it, how the hell could we have caused it? It's just simple logic. If we're the reasons for it, and it's happening, then we ought to be able to stop what we're doing. But no, no, no, the problem's gone so far, the earth is now more powerful than we are.
It wasn't 20 years ago we had the power to totally destroy the climate on this planet, but we don't anymore because it's gotten so bad, we've so destroyed it, there's nothing we can do to fix it. That's what some of them say. They're all over the ballpark. But this is all about funding. Now, they've already politicized science, and let there be no mistake. We've talked about this. There's a presumption just like there is with law enforcement, they never lie, they never falsely accuse. They never go after the wrong guy. Why would they? They're the good guys. They're the guys with white hats. They're trying to spare us and save us from all the evil that's out there.
"Science? Why, these are these guys in white coats and the lab coats, and they're out there trying to cure disease and so forth. They wouldn't lie!" Yes, they will. They will lie for money; they will mislead for money. They politicize the arts; they politicize the English language. The liberals have politicized everything, and I just have to laugh when I listen to the liberals talk about how partisan conservatives are and how divisive Republicans and conservatives are. How the hell more divisive can you be than to run ads on television accusing Republicans of not wanting to cure people who have terminal diseases?
How much more divisive can it be than when it's a flat-out lie. When their spokesman hasn't even read the constitutional amendment in Missouri on which they're based, how in the world are you supposed to trust anything? That amendment, in fact, everybody gets caught up talking about it as a stem cell amendment because they very cleverly titled it stem cell research and whatever it is. It's a pro-cloning amendment, and the embryonic stem cell people say, "We're not killing embryos, we're cloning them! We're cloning embryos, and we're not going to kill any embryos. This is not an abortion issue."
They're doing everything they can to obfuscate what they really want to do, but it's nothing more than your typical liberal money grab. All money is theirs, as long as they can get somebody to get into your back pocket and take it out of your back pocket and hand it over to them, and that's what global warming is all about, that's what embryonic stem cell research is all about, and we see this massive new green tax increase being proposed for the UK, sit tight, folks. With the right people in Washington, it'll happen here.
2007-02-03
01:47:32
·
7 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics