Dr. FlipFlop
One of the themes of Mr. Bush's 2004 election campaign was that Mr. Kerry constantly changed his position on issues, that he 'flip-flopped.' The phrase inevitably brought his supporters to their feet, cheering wildly.
It appears that Mr. Kerry is not the only Senator with a mixed record in that respect. The Washington Post suggests that Senate Majority Leader Bill First also is capable of shifting his position:
On July 18, 2001, Sen. Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) stood on the Senate floor urging his colleagues to buck conservative orthodoxy and support federally funded research on embryonic stem cells. As the Senate's only physician, Frist made headlines -- and gave momentum to the controversial science -- with his endorsement.
Here are some of the things he had to say just weeks before President Bush issued his directive banning federal funding for all but a handful of stem cell research programs:
Drawing comparisons to his experience as a transplant surgeon, Frist stressed that the stem cells are taken only from "spare" embryos "that would otherwise be discarded."
"It is critically important that we understand, and in our moral and ethical framework ensure, that this tissue otherwise would not be used," he said. "It is similar to the fact that when I do a heart transplant, that heart otherwise would not be used for anything useful."
On the question of whether the days-old blastocyst is a life, Frist said: "There is a continuum from a sperm and an egg, to a blastocyst, to a fetus, to a child, to an adolescent, to an adult."
He acknowledged that other types of stem cells appear to offer some therapeutic benefits but said they were insufficient.
"It appears clear that research using adult stem cells does not hold the same potential for medical advances as does the use of the more versatile embryonic stem cells," he said.
Then the President gave his speech justifying the restrictions, and Frist fell in line. What changed his mind? A couple of reasons for the flip-flop are given in the article:
"If he wants the Republican nomination, he may be worried that coming out for embryonic stem cell research funding would make conservatives angry, especially if it involves disagreeing with President Bush," said Harvard political scientist Michael J. Sandel. If stem cell legislation becomes Bush's first veto, "it would be a symbolic issue in the Republican primaries."
Or, maybe we should be more charitable:
"He became [Senate Majority] Leader," said Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), one of the leading advocates of a broad research policy. "He has a little different responsibility now with respect to the party approach."
And then there's always this:
When Frist generally accepted Bush's position, Wright praised the senator's change of heart, saying he had an "opportunity to be reeducated."
And politicians wonder why the American electorate have become cynical.
It appears that Mr. Kerry is not the only Senator with a mixed record in that respect. The Washington Post suggests that Senate Majority Leader Bill First also is capable of shifting his position:
On July 18, 2001, Sen. Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) stood on the Senate floor urging his colleagues to buck conservative orthodoxy and support federally funded research on embryonic stem cells. As the Senate's only physician, Frist made headlines -- and gave momentum to the controversial science -- with his endorsement.
Here are some of the things he had to say just weeks before President Bush issued his directive banning federal funding for all but a handful of stem cell research programs:
Drawing comparisons to his experience as a transplant surgeon, Frist stressed that the stem cells are taken only from "spare" embryos "that would otherwise be discarded."
"It is critically important that we understand, and in our moral and ethical framework ensure, that this tissue otherwise would not be used," he said. "It is similar to the fact that when I do a heart transplant, that heart otherwise would not be used for anything useful."
On the question of whether the days-old blastocyst is a life, Frist said: "There is a continuum from a sperm and an egg, to a blastocyst, to a fetus, to a child, to an adolescent, to an adult."
He acknowledged that other types of stem cells appear to offer some therapeutic benefits but said they were insufficient.
"It appears clear that research using adult stem cells does not hold the same potential for medical advances as does the use of the more versatile embryonic stem cells," he said.
Then the President gave his speech justifying the restrictions, and Frist fell in line. What changed his mind? A couple of reasons for the flip-flop are given in the article:
"If he wants the Republican nomination, he may be worried that coming out for embryonic stem cell research funding would make conservatives angry, especially if it involves disagreeing with President Bush," said Harvard political scientist Michael J. Sandel. If stem cell legislation becomes Bush's first veto, "it would be a symbolic issue in the Republican primaries."
Or, maybe we should be more charitable:
"He became [Senate Majority] Leader," said Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), one of the leading advocates of a broad research policy. "He has a little different responsibility now with respect to the party approach."
And then there's always this:
When Frist generally accepted Bush's position, Wright praised the senator's change of heart, saying he had an "opportunity to be reeducated."
And politicians wonder why the American electorate have become cynical.
posted by Diane at 6:32 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home