Bloodthirsty Liberal

Remember when the question of when life begins was above Obama’s pay grade?

Well, he did get a promotion:

The previous Administration allowed the National Institutes of Health to fund human embryonic stem cell research on cell lines created before an arbitrary date, August 9, 2001, but prohibited research on cell lines created after that date. The Executive Order signed by President Obama today lifts this restriction, which has no basis in science and was not required by any law.

Boy, he sure did get smart on January 20th! Now, he knows all about the “science” of “life”.

But he wasn’t done disparaging the policies (which he inherited!) of his predecessor:

“Rather than furthering discovery, our government has forced what I believe is a false choice between sound science and moral values,” Obama said. “In this case, I believe the two are not inconsistent. As a person of faith, I believe we are called to care for each other and work to ease human suffering. I believe we have been given the capacity and will to pursue this research and the humanity and conscience to do so responsibly.”

Obama warned against overstating the eventual benefits of the research. But he said his administration “will vigorously support scientists who pursue this research,” taking a slap at his predecessor in the process.

Again with the answers!

I’m not saying he’s wrong—I know people passionately on either side of the issue, and I’m kind of on both sides myself.

But he’s so dismissive of the man who previously held the pay grade. How is he so sure? To what other subjects will he bring that certainty, dare I say arrogance?

As James Taranto of Best of the Web Today wrote:

The characterization of the stem-cell restrictions as a bow to “ideology” over science is inaccurate. The objections to the use of embryonic stem cells–agree with them or not–are ethical, not ideological, in character.

Exactly. Obama feels he’s been elevated to some sort of Biblical judge of ethical behavior. We invest the President with the power to make decisions—but who thinks he (or she, some day) holds such moral authority to know (as Obama seems to) right from wrong?

I’ll return to this in future rants against the president—but just start listening for how often he says something is “unacceptable”, or those who believe such-and-such are not welcome.

We elected him (well, I didn’t), so he’s our president, but I wish he did a better job of acting like our president instead of our saviour.

I would have picked Hezbollah for that sobriquet—Party of God isn’t too far from Party of Death when one of your tenets is to love death the way Christians and Jews love life.

But no, the Party of Death is a little closer to home (via Hot Air):

Vatican officials seldom single out political leaders who differ with the Church on issues like abortion rights or embryonic stem cell research. But now that the Vatican’s highest court is led by an American, the former St. Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke, we can expect things to get more explicit in Vatican City — at least when when it comes to U.S. politics.

Burke, who was named prefect of the Vatican’s Supreme Court of the Apostolic Signature in June, told the Italian Catholic newspaper Avvenire that the U.S. Democratic Party risked “transforming itself definitively into a party of death for its decisions on bioethical issues.” He then attacked two of the party’s most high profile Catholics — vice presidential candidate Joe Biden and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi — for misrepresenting Church teaching on abortion.

He said Biden and Pelosi, “while presenting themselves as good Catholics, have presented Church doctrine on abortion in a false and tendentious way.”

You know another mark of my political transformation away from liberalism? I admire people who take stands, even if I don’t always agree with the stands. (Hitler: rat bastard, but you knew what he believed.)

Maybe abortion is about a women’s right to choose, and maybe stem cell research is about curing disease. But at the very least you have to acknowledge the other side—especially when it’s espoused by your spiritual leaders.

So Joe Biden (D-Slime) thinks Sarah Palin could use some schoolin’ on children with disabilities, huh?

John McCain’s campaign hit back hard at Joe Biden Tuesday after the Democratic VP candidate appeared to suggest Republicans who do not support stem cell research — like GOP VP candidate Sarah Palin — are lacking in their support of children with disabilities.

“Barack Obama’s running mate sunk to a new low today launching an offensive debate over who cares more about special needs children,” McCain-Palin spokesman Ben Porritt said. “Playing politics with this issue is disturbing and indicative of a desperate campaign.”

…

Biden did not mention Palin — the mother of a baby with Down syndrome, and someone who has said she will be a “friend and advocate in the White House” to parents of children with disabilities — but seemed to direct a question to her.

“I hear all this talk about how the Republicans are going to work in dealing with parents who have both the joy…and the difficulty of raising a child who has a developmental disability, who were born with a birth defect,” he said. “Well, guess what folks? If you care about it, why don’t you support stem cell research?”

I am less troubled by stem cell research than some—and am hopeful that it will become an obsolete process very soon (it seems sooner every day, from what I read).

But I wouldn’t taunt a card carrying member of the NRA who is also mother of a Down Syndrome baby if I were Biden. His thin scalp would make a terrific hood ornament for her GMC Denali.