Wednesday, August 04, 2004

Verities and Balderdash

Not only is that a title of a Harry Chapin album, but it's apropos for a posting that covers a lot of ground:
  • Many people were seemingly pleased to hear Mrs. Nancy Reagan speak out on behalf of stem cell research.  Many people saw it as a direct attack on the Bush Administration, and that was fairly accurate.   Then there was the eulogy and the DNC speech by Mr. Ron Reagan, Jr. and again many saw the Bush Administration as the target of the Ragan family grief.   And again, they were right. 

    But this week we learn that Mrs. Reagan has come out and endorsed the re-election of President Bush.   I imagine this has put the Left into a quandary.

    Stem Cell research is an important area that should not be ignored.   While the debate goes on exactly how many possible cures could come about from stem cell research, it is clear that the possibilities of ANY single cure ought to make the research valid.   Few people, outside of the extreme right-to-life supporters, want a halt on research.   In fact, despite popular rhetoric, even President Bush endorses the research. ... to a point.

    In his August 2001 speech on the topic, President Bush did not say he wanted an end to stem cell research;  he merely made it clear he did not want federal funding for the purposes of destroying human embryos.   Note: this did prohibit using human embryos, in any way, even if the research destroyed them.  It merely meant federal funding could not be used to destroy them.  This is a far cry from saying the President doesn't support stem cell research.  This position is well within the norms of many European countries (and I've heard by some lately that we're supposed act like our Allies do).  And just as there are fund raising for MS, Diabetes, Cancer, Heart Disease, and on and on, there can be private fund raising for stem cell research -- with no federal holds on where that money is spent. 

    Once again, the rhetoric against President Bush doesn't add up.

    Few people have more respect than I have for the memory of President Reagan, and all of the benefits of his administration.  And as much as I dislike going against his family, I can't help but think the position taken by President Bush is the same as President Reagan would have taken. 
  • Quoting the infamous Governor (Dr.) Howard Dean, as quoted in the Boston Globe:
"If this information was three years old, and if this Al Qaeda operative, the most recent capture, was on July 13, that means that this administration knew about this at least three weeks ago, that the information was three years old, that they could have chosen any date they wanted to reveal this to the public," Dean said on MSNBC. "Isn't it unusual they might choose two days after the Democratic National Convention, when John Kerry was in the middle of his bounce?"
The first question I must ask is, quite simply:  WHAT BOUNCE??   

That much said ... Once again, President Bush is damned if he does, damned if he doesn't.  If DHS released this information on July 14 (or any day through the DNC), the charge from Dr. Dean would have been 'they did this in the middle of the convention on purpose!'   If an attack happened before the information was released, 'why did they wait?'  The fact is, Dr. Dean and the Left can't say anything if it is not a slam at the Bush Administration.
  • I start my new position on Monday.   On the first day will be the routine HR paperwork and orientation.  The second day is an orientation at a local military base that I will, presumably, do a fair amount of work.   I am looking forward to getting back to work:  a 5 week vacation is more than I've wanted, and it's time to get back to work.   In 1996 I was laid off from a tech job the week before Thanksgiving.  I was mostly idle through February, as I was working weekends in those years at a local hospital in their IT department.   So this month has been the longest I've been 'without work' and I am ready to go.   I realize there are others who have been out of work for far longer than I, and to some extent I feel for them.   But I knew well that I would have taken any job, at any rate, at any position, if I did not get this offer by this week.   For me, to have a hole in a resume' would have been more costly than it would have been to accept a 'lesser' position.    As I said more than a month ago I would never sit at home and complain, so long as there was honest work to be done, no matter what the position.
  • My GMail issues seem to have be resolved; I'll get to all who have written this week.  Thanks for your encouragement and patience!
 

Sphere: Related Content
DiggIt!Add to del.icio.usAdd to Technorati FavesFacebook