CapitolFax.com - Latest Comments in Bean mail

Re: Bean mail

NW burbs — Wed, 13 Sep 2006 03:47:53 -0000

Angie,

Do some research before you start claiming facts are "speculation"...

My points were in relation to the fact conservatives have chosen to fund what they consider priorities, but which I consider to be boondoggles (ie, debt to Red China, tax giveaways to the filthy rich, obscene war-profiteering and unquestioned fraud in no-bid contracts to administration allies like Halliburton, etc).

What don't conservatives get? I'm so tired of hearing the right-wing's greed-is-a-virtue argument. Taxes are the investment we make as a society for a better future. Are our tax monies best spent lining the pockets of Paris Hiltons and Cheney's Halliburton or is that money better spent on life-saving research that could benefit everyone? (And it's not an either adult stem cells or embryonic stem cells question. The Congressional bill funded both, and Bush vetoed it against the wishes of a majority of Americans.)

You can choose to ignore facts, but your ignorance doesn't magically turn them into "speculation."

And just how does ignoring the facts make you think you're "winning" some sort of argument?

Best go back and repeat that 300-level English class, Angie.

Untruthful James, you too can choose to ignore facts but your ignorance doesn't make them magically disappear either.... What did I overstate? Or are you again just being untruthful in your spin?

Re: Bean mail

Angie — Tue, 12 Sep 2006 20:11:56 -0000

To NW burbs:

"But what do you suggest happens to the ready-to-be-disposed-of frozen embryos? Should they be donated for research (like adult stem cells) or should they be thrown in the garbage (as they currently are)?"

I'm not the expert on this stuff, but you do have to realize that Bush, who I really do believe is a moderate conservative (his own wife and mom are both pro-choice), needs to throw out a benign bone every so often, because you just KNOW the very staunch pro-lifers aren't that happy with him.

"That is the choice. Pres. Bush, through his veto of embryonic research funding, has decided those frozen embryos have no value and should be thrown in the garbage."

That's the benign bone he threw out to make up for the fact that 8 years into his purportedly oh-so-scary presidency, Roe is still the law of the land and will be for a very lonnnnng time, as the battle to overturn a long-standing precedent means a much higher bar to leap over (and even then, it only reverts back to the states, where everyone can hash it out there).

"And your argument about public money is specious. Plenty of my tax money goes to things I donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t like:
- unneeded tax-dollar windfalls for the pharmaceutical and oil industries during times of record profits"

Embryonic stem cells raise hackles a lot more than issues about profits for oil and pharmaceuticals. Some people are very religious. I don't expect them to support this, even though taxpayer funding supports other things that no one likes. When it comes to the whole pro-life/pro-choice debate, just get federal dollars out of it all. I am pro-choice, but I often find it difficult to argue with staunchly pro-life people when they come up with the very valid argument that if their tax dollars go towards funding of abortions, then they have a say in the matter. They're right! They DO have a say in the matter. It is a very loaded issue, so at the very least, let those people opt out of supporting this.

"war profiteering and fraud/theft for the military-industrial complex like CheneyÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s pals at no-bid Halliburton"

That's pure speculation. There's no way you can back that up as fact. It doesn't even begin to counter my argument, because that's pure speculation.

"rewarding millionaires like Paris Hilton for being Ã¢â‚¬Â¦ well, just for living off interest and acting silly apparently"

In a free society, Paris can do whatever the heck she wants. What does she have to do with stem cells? See? This is why we always win debates, folks. You liberals can't even argue.

"and need I mention the record-breaking debts Republicans are racking up with Communist China? SomeoneÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s going to have to pay those bills."

I am not happy about being cozy with commies at all, but what does that have to do with stem cells here at home?

Bean will run a close race because of her pro-business views, but if you're for fiscal reform and for encouragement of policies that promote business growth around here, instead of the job-crushing, anti-business fees that were dumped on Illinois businesses under Blagojevich, then you ought to just become a Republican already. 'Tis a big tent where we have room for pro-lifers and pro-choicers alike to agree on many many issues while in disagreement on some of the most personal, religious, and moral issues (depending on your ideological leanings) such as the pro-life versus pro-choice divide.

Re: Bean mail

anon — Tue, 12 Sep 2006 16:48:54 -0000

I am

Re: Bean mail

Scoop — Tue, 12 Sep 2006 14:38:43 -0000

Thank God no one here is a medical professional.

Re: Bean mail

Truthful James — Tue, 12 Sep 2006 12:52:39 -0000

This is an overstated issue.

There is funding for embyonic stem cells. The government has chosen not to fund it except for limited lines.

There have been successes from adult stem cells and from umbilical cord stem cells.

As usual NW Burbs vastly overstates the case and has come down on the fact that there are frozen embryos excess to current requirements. Such is life.

I attended a Stanford university presentation on the necessity for using stem cells AND FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO FUND EVERY BIT OF RESEARCH. Scientists will take all they can get without any guarentee of results. They can show few major benefits even from the limited lines the government funds and all the privately funded research.

Showing that girl in a wheelchair was the height of hypocrisy.

Re: Bean mail

Pat Collins — Tue, 12 Sep 2006 08:01:23 -0000

No, McSweeney's real answer ought to be:

There are some X (think it's 500) stem cell therapies in FDA studies NOW from adult stem cells and stem cord cells.

there are NONE from embryoic cells.

Why does Bean want to take funds AWAY from promising research and give it to a risky scheme?

Re: Bean mail

Bill Baar — Tue, 12 Sep 2006 05:17:05 -0000

It is amazing to me that the righteous seem to be the keeper of the truth.

geez, put a lid on it.

Dems are demagoging science in the worst way here. It's obscene really to take an issue more complex than abortion with real concerns about harvesting embryos more then likely from poor women in the third world for the benefit of the medical industrial complex in this country.

And to try and connect people who raise questions about it with the GWOT.... that's really too much... I find myself agreeing more often than not with Democrats but find it hard to vote for them because they talk like this and pull these stunts.

It's the devil theory every time to refute serious questions on serious issues; even when we've got the pharmaceutical devils at work on their side.

Re: Bean mail

NW burbs — Tue, 12 Sep 2006 03:47:45 -0000

Angie, yes there are other options and those others are funded by the Federal government.

But what do you suggest happens to the ready-to-be-disposed-of frozen embryos? Should they be donated for research (like adult stem cells) or should they be thrown in the garbage (as they currently are)?

That is the choice. Pres. Bush, through his veto of embryonic research funding, has decided those frozen embryos have no value and should be thrown in the garbage.

And your argument about public money is specious. Plenty of my tax money goes to things I don't like:
- unneeded tax-dollar windfalls for the pharmaceutical and oil industries during times of record profits
- war profiteering and fraud/theft for the military-industrial complex like Cheney's pals at no-bid Halliburton
- rewarding millionaires like Paris Hilton for being ... well, just for living off interest and acting silly apparently
- and need I mention the record-breaking debts Republicans are racking up with Communist China? Someone's going to have to pay those bills.

...Yep, plenty of priorities that "conservatives" have with which I disagree, but those conservatives have no problem "taking" my tax money for their purposes.

At least stem cell research benefits the common good (ie, any public money spent on research would benefit the public good).

Can't say the same for the billions of taxpayer dollars Halliburton "lost" or the billions in windfalls going to America's elite wealthiest families thanks to the Paris Hilton Tax Cuts.

Re: Bean mail

Angie — Tue, 12 Sep 2006 03:14:15 -0000

I'm pro-choice, but do not have issues with asking that there be alternatives to the use of embryonic stem cells if there's another possible option, and on top of it, public monies should not be used if deeply religious people are morally and religiously opposed. At least let them keep their money.

But whoever quoted Wikipedia? Don't do that. I wrapped up a 300 level English course last year and heard a long lecture on the validity/sometimes lack thereof of Wiki. Just please use a better source. Wiki is fun to read, but should never be quoted as some type of valid source.

Re: Bean mail

Concern Citizen — Tue, 12 Sep 2006 00:45:12 -0000

It is amzing to me that the righteous seem to be the keeper of the truth. We send our children to fight and die in a land far away because of causes that are yet to be determined. When it comes to stem cell they seem to get religion. He has no right to make my choice for me. He needs to be voted out. Each of our soliers that died or harmed because of his so called values should be brought up and he held responsibile. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH

Re: Bean mail

OAD — Tue, 12 Sep 2006 00:41:01 -0000

"The Jonas Salk/polio analogy seems valid to me."

Salk was funded by private, volunteer donations.

"The organization (March of Dimes) decided to fund Salk's efforts to develop a killed virus vaccine." (Wikipedia)

If the Dems were serious about this, they would have kicked off a 'march of dimes' equivalent back in 2001 when Bush threw the kibosh on federal funding.

Apparently they'd rather have it unsolved, to use as a campaign issue.

Or perhaps it's not that promising - what else could explain the lack of urgency after 2002? Bush wins the 'trifecta', in effect shutting down the debate for 2 or more years, and their best answer is 'government funding - it's worth the wait'. New Direction indeed.

Re: Bean mail

Captain America — Mon, 11 Sep 2006 22:18:34 -0000

I don't see anything objectionable, despicable or misleading about the direct mail piece. Bean summarizes and highlights McSweeney's views on stem cell research and choice axcurately, particularly when you read the text. Bean uses his own words against him. I don't see any evidence of distortion or "out-of-context quotes. He's being hoist on his own petard.

Republicans should be held accountable for their knee-jerk opposition to scientific/medical progress. People are beoging deprived of the potential benefits of life-saving medical research. The Jonas Salk/polio analogy seems valid to me.

Personally, I think it's effective in calling attention to McSweeney's views. Voters will have no trouble deciding which set of family values that they prefer.

Re: Bean mail

OAD — Mon, 11 Sep 2006 19:53:01 -0000

You wanna cure kids in wheelchairs, you gotta break a few eggs...

Re: Bean mail

HoosierDaddy — Mon, 11 Sep 2006 19:34:14 -0000

Just like Blago gave hope to those who wanted to clean up corruption? Blago's not the topic here.

This ad will only serve to polarize the district a little more. Given the natural lean of the district, I don't think that helps the Bean.

Re: Bean mail

Slash — Mon, 11 Sep 2006 18:13:25 -0000

This is why I am supporting Blago. He funded research for this in Illinois. He knows how important hope is to people like the girl in the wheelchair.

Re: Bean mail

ElaObserver — Mon, 11 Sep 2006 17:50:30 -0000

ItÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s not effective.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but it probably is a good, smart ad. If it wasn't, all of us partyhacks wouldn't be arguing about it now.

Re: Bean mail

Bill Baar — Mon, 11 Sep 2006 17:10:08 -0000

McSweeny just needs to respond with Krauthammers response to Edwards,
This is John Edwards on Monday at a rally in Newton, Iowa: "If we do the work that we can do in this country, the work that we will do when John Kerry is president, people like Christopher Reeve are going to walk, get up out of that wheelchair and walk again."

In my 25 years in Washington, I have never seen a more loathsome display of demagoguery. Hope is good. False hope is bad. Deliberately, for personal gain, raising false hope in the catastrophically afflicted is despicable.

Where does one begin to deconstruct this outrage?

Re: Bean mail

Bill Baar — Mon, 11 Sep 2006 17:06:21 -0000

Since the people that read this blog and especially those that comment on items are obvious political junkies, I would think that the comments on this item would be more along the lines of whether an ad like this is effective or not.

It's not effective. Especially in this district. Edwards effectively sunk this tactic in the last election along with Reagan's kid at the convention.

I think people see through it.

Re: Bean mail

NW burbs — Mon, 11 Sep 2006 17:06:08 -0000

- Other sorts of cellular research have in fact received adequate Federal funding, in addition to other funding sources. Claiming that embryonic studies have not yielded the same results is like asking a boxer to tie his hands behind him and then saying he's no good in the ring.

- Yes, embryonic stem cell research is legal. Funding it is the question. Again, cutting off funds is akin to tying scientists' hands behind their backs. Same thing -- it may be legal, but if the money isn't there the work can't get done (and conservatives complain just as loudly when states fund this research -- witness the whining about California's Republican governor and Illinois' Democratic governor).

- Unused embryonic cells are washed down the drain. Conservatives would rather have those "viable" (but unwanted) embryos thrown in with the sewage than see that they dare be used to save a life. (Seems hypocritical given how many of our brave soldiers conservatives are all-too-willing to sacrifice to continue propping up a pack of lies.)

- How is this mailer, which states an unflattering truth about Mr. McSweeney (but a truth nonetheless), in any way negative? It's the truth. If you don't like it convince Mr. McSweeney to change his mind. Anyone complaining about this is just whining. Boo hoo. At least Rep. Bean is telling the truth -- unlike the conservatives who put out ABC's boring, make-believe trash last night. (Oh wait, the Trib's headline declared ABC's outright lies to be "Factual" ... liberal media my knee.)

Re: Bean mail

Wumpus — Mon, 11 Sep 2006 17:01:31 -0000

If only John Edwards were Veep, that little girl would be walking right now...

Re: Bean mail

Political Insider — Mon, 11 Sep 2006 17:00:24 -0000

Not a bad ad, but a bad race. I'm not saying that either one of the canidates wouldn't make a great congressperson, and frankly since i don't live there, I don't really care.

But that race has been a race to the bottom. Since negative ads are a great known way to lower the turn-out I have to wonder if both canidates are short-sighted (a common problem this close to the election) or if they are trying to assure that only their base gets to the polls.

Either way, it's fun to sit back and watch!

Re: Bean mail

Skeeter — Mon, 11 Sep 2006 16:52:35 -0000

It is NOT about research or destruction, unless, of course, the McSweeney is so far out in right field that he wants to ban IVF. Or perhaps he wants a law that says we must forever save those frozen fertiziled eggs.

In any case, the add is very good. The far right is not going to vote for Bean anyway, so this won't hurt her with those folks, but it sure might sway a moderate.

Re: Bean mail

doubtful — Mon, 11 Sep 2006 16:43:32 -0000

Way Northsider, don't expect them to let a little thing like reality affect their position. If they'd honestly admit the truth, that the choice is between research or destruction, their heads would explode.

As far as the ad, I think it'll play. Somewhere around 70% of the general pop is for government funding of stem cell research (not the bogus contaminated lines Bush limped support into).

I think the 8th is looking for clear distinctions between two pro-business candidates, and this is one of them.

Re: Bean mail

Ashur Odishoo — Mon, 11 Sep 2006 16:34:16 -0000

Little girls in wheelchairs is not much different than large posters of dead babies by the pro-life group.

There are two sides to this issue, but also respectable methods of selling your point should not include demagoguery.

Ashur Odishoo
Candidate
State Representative 11th District

Re: Bean mail

Way Northsider — Mon, 11 Sep 2006 16:21:31 -0000

Anonymous 2:20 - How do you feel about embryonic stem cell research where a cell is removed but the embryo remains viable? How do you feel about the fact that unused embryos are routinely discarded?