Borrowing a line from the Karl Rove playbook, Conrad Burns defended his vote against federal funding of embryonic stem cell research:
Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., voted against it. He said he has "no problem" that such research continues in the private sector, but does not believe that taxpayer money should be used for it.He voted for the other bills because he’s "big advocate" of research using other methods such as adult stem cells and umbilical cords, he added. "That’s where we’re making our greatest advances," he said.
That might be a defensible position, if it were true. However, as we so often see in the world of Rovian distortions, truth doesn’t matter. All that matters is making the claim–because the media certainly won’t challenge it. ThinkProgress reports today that Karl Rove made almost exactly the same claim in the Denver Post last week:
Recent studies, he (Rove) said, show that researchers "have far more promise from adult stem cells than from embryonic stem cells."
Odd, isn’t it, how close the Burns and Rover statements are, especially since they are both patently false. When asked, a White House spokesperson could not name one researcher who shared the position that Rove and Burns have taken. It just isn’t true.
So, Senator Burns voted against allowing federal funding of research that offers potential cures for serious, debilitating diseases and might even prevent premature deaths because he believed a Karl Rove talking point? Or was it because he wanted to fire up the troops in the rabid, anti-choice movement?
Either way, he lied to explain his vote, and his decision (in what will be a very close vote to overturn Bush’s people) will cost lives.
Last 5 posts by Pogie
- The Independent Record Making the Most of Limited Resources - January 4th, 2009
- President Bush Offers Another Parting Gift For Montana: Subdivisions in our Forests - January 3rd, 2009
- Coal Bed Methane Moves Forward? - January 2nd, 2009
- Our Most Popular Posts of 2008 - January 1st, 2009
- Best of the Montana Blogosphere, 2008 - January 1st, 2009
{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }
Jason 07.19.06 at 12:54 pm
If embryonic stem cell research is the salvation of humanity then private companies should be willing to fund the research because they’ll make billions of dollars later on. (Maybe Buffett and Gates would be willing to step in?)
Pogie 07.19.06 at 12:58 pm
Wouldn’t that argument apply to all research, then? Why in the world do we have researchers at the NIH? Why does the federal government provide grant and other assistance to a huge number of scientific programs?
Unless you are willing to abandon all of that, your argument is just a distraction.
Even Orrin Hatch, as pro-life as they come, has said that this veto will slow research by as much as a year.
Jason 07.19.06 at 1:11 pm
Since I’m a Libertarian, I can say, Yes abandon all federally funded scientific research. It’s not the federal government’s job to fund it. There is not Constitutional mandate for such.
Shane M 07.19.06 at 1:43 pm
Jason,
Even big drug companies use government funding for research. Oil copanies get tax subsidies to research alternate fuel.
The whole idea of the word ‘research’ is that you are not sure what you will turn up It is a gamble that most compaies are not willing to take.
abandon all federally funded scientific research
Wait until someone you love has Alzeimers or you are paralyzed in a wheelchair. Would that change your opinion?
Jason 07.19.06 at 9:36 pm
NO.