"The Bush people have no right to speak for my father, particularly because of the position he's in now," Mr. Reagan said then. "Yes, some of the current policies are an extension of the 80's. But the overall thrust of this administration is not my father's - these people are overly reaching, overly aggressive, overly secretive and just plain corrupt. I don't trust these people."
Mr. Reagan was not quite so pointed on Friday night. "Dad was also a deeply, unabashedly religious man," he told mourners gathered at sunset at the Reagan presidential library. "But he never made the fatal mistake of so many politicians - wearing his faith on his sleeve to gain political advantage. True, after he was shot and nearly killed early in his presidency he came to believe that God had spared him in order that he might do good. But he accepted that as a responsibility, not a mandate. And there is a profound difference."
I guess this makes Ron Reagan unpatriotic American.
posted on June 15, 2004 09:08:01 AM new
It is best either to just leave the URL so everyone can read the whole story instead of just the parts that suit the poster. Now I am not critizing you but that is my opinion.
With the passing of Mr. Reagan I think it would be wise if the family would not speak to what they might think Pres Reagan would say. We know what the family thinks but since Mr. Reagan is unable to do that, how does Ron Reagan know what he would think.
Because Mrs. Reagan is active in Stem Cell does not mean that it is right. The reason she is for that is because of her husbands altzheimers disease. Would she have been that active if he hadn't happened. I think it is on the order of cloning but since I haven't read about it I don't know. Maybe somone can write about.
I am a Ronald Reagan Sr. supporter but since I don't know the political views of Ron Jr or the rest of the family I am not going to comment on this article. But I did read the whole thing. Thanks for posting it.
posted on June 15, 2004 09:57:29 AM new
Libra63: I posted this because it is a direct quote from the son of Ronald Reagan. I don't think it is out of context as it expresses Ron's beliefs clearly. I posted the URL so that anyone with the ability to cut and paste could check it out him/herself.
If the family of RR doesn't have the right to speak on matters pertaining to RR, then certainly the Bush administration has no right to cloak itself in the mantle of President Reagan.
You say, "Because Mrs. Reagan is active in Stem Cell does not mean that it is right." Nor does that mean she is wrong. It is her opinion and again she is entitled to it. Using a word such as "cloning" further obfuscates the matter. It is a buzzword that really irritates conservatives. There is nothing wrong with cloning. If you had a child who was dying because he needed a liver, would you object to a cell being removed from his body and growing him a new liver from that cell? That would be an example of cloning.
I am not and never was a supporter of Ronald Reagan. Everyone has the right to their own opinion in the America I grew up in. However, I have come to believe that in George Bush's Amerika anyone who disagrees with him is unpatriotic and a supporter of terrorism and Osama bin Laden.
posted on June 15, 2004 10:01:30 AM new
Interesting. The OP posted the part relevant to the discussion thread and cited the source. That's better than a lot of us do. But Libra63 is right; read the whole article, it concerns two of our most volatile issues. Ron Jr. chose his words well and hopefully put a damper on a disturbing trend in politics.
___________________
You know...the best way to defeat a liberal is to let them speak.
posted on June 15, 2004 10:13:10 AM new
I was hoping that Bush might reconsider his position on stem cell research... but no...that's not politically expedient for him.
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Fifty-eight senators are asking President Bush to relax federal restrictions on stem cell research, and several said Monday that the late President Reagan's Alzheimer's disease underscored a need to expand the research using human embryos.
The senators' letter to Bush was sent Friday, before Reagan died after a long struggle with Alzheimer's.
But Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, said: "This issue is especially poignant given President Reagan's passing. Embryonic stem cell research might hold the key to a cure for Alzheimer's and other terrible diseases."
Last month, Nancy Reagan appeared at a fund-raising dinner in Los Angeles to promote stem cell research.
"We would very much like to work with you to modify the current embryonic stem cell policy so that it provides this area of research the greatest opportunity to lead to the treatments and cures for which we are all hoping," the senators wrote Bush.
The letter was signed by 43 Democrats, the Senate's one independent and 14 Republicans, among them conservatives who oppose abortion. In April, 206 House members sent a similar letter to Bush.
Stem cells typically are taken from days-old human embryos and then grown in a laboratory into lines or colonies. Because the embryos are destroyed when the cells are extracted, the process is opposed by some conservatives who link it to abortion.
Executive order
Bush signed an executive order in August 2001 limiting federal research funding for stem cell research to 78 embryonic stem cell lines then in existence.
But the letter complains that only 19 of those lines are now available to researchers and those available are contaminated with mouse feeder cells which makes their use for humans uncertain.
Signers include Democratic Sens. John Kerry and Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts, Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Tom Harkin of Iowa, and Republicans Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, Orrin Hatch of Utah and Lamar Alexander of Tennessee.
"Maybe one of the small blessings that will come from (Reagan's) passing will be a greater opportunity for Nancy to work on this issue, which of course means so much to her," Hatch said. "I believe that it's going to be pretty tough for anybody not to have empathy for her feelings on this issue."
White House spokesman Ken Lisaius said Bush stood by his stem cell policy.
"The president remains committed to exploring the promise of stem cell research but at the same time continues to believe strongly that we should not cross a fundamental moral line by funding or encouraging the destruction of human embryos," Lisaius said.
"The president does not believe that life should be created for the sole purpose of destroying it. He does believe we can explore the promise and potential of stem cell research using the existing lines of stem cells."
Because stem cells develop into the various types of cells that make up the human body, scientists believe they could be grown into replacement organs and tissues to treat a wide range of diseases, including Parkinson's, diabetes, cancer and Alzheimer's.
posted on June 15, 2004 12:12:27 PM new
::With the passing of Mr. Reagan I think it would be wise if the family would not speak to what they might think Pres Reagan would say.::
He didn't Libra - read the quote. He states that he does not feel that the Bush administration should try to speak for his father and then he states his opinion on the Bush administration. He says absolutely nothing about what his father would say, think or feel.
::I think it is on the order of cloning but since I haven't read about it I don't know. Maybe somone can write about. ::
So just to clarify - you have developed an opinion on something that you admit that you know nothing about and then rather than reasearch the issue which is quite vast you would like for someone here to give you a cliff notes version? I don't mean for this to sound like I am jumping on you but THIS is EXACTLY what is wrong with our country. People are too damn lazy to seek out the materials to form their own informed opinion and so they just adopt those of others.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
[ edited by fenix03 on Jun 15, 2004 12:23 PM ]
posted on June 15, 2004 12:15:29 PM new
Helen - I know how to make a clickable link and also how to cut and paste. I have no problem with that.
The problem, whether I agreed with the OP or not is it is better to print the whole article instead of snipets. As I said I don't know what Ronnie Jr.'s political convictions are and if I did and they were/ are the same as his dads then what he said was fine with me, If he doesn't then I don't think he should have said that. I didn't post to start a heated discusion I just said that if something from an article is going to be posted then it either should be the entire statement or just the URL not parts that serve someone's agenda.
November 26, 2001 Posted: 2:30 PM EST (1930 GMT)
Bush says cloning human embryos is 'morally wrong.'
WASHINGTON (CNN) --
President Bush Monday criticized the creation of human embryos through cloning as "morally wrong" and "bad public policy," saying the procedure should not be allowed.
"We should not as a society grow life to destroy it, and that's exactly what's taking place," Bush said during a Rose Garden appearance.
Re-elect President Bush!!
White House firm on stem cells
June 15, 2004
WASHINGTON -- The
White House rejected calls Monday from Ronald Reagan's family, Sen. John Kerry and 57 other senators to relax President Bush's restrictions on stem-cell research in pursuit of potential cures for illnesses.
Bush signed an executive order in August 2001 that limited federal help to financing stem cell research on 78 embryonic stem cell lines then in existence.
''The president came up with a policy that will allow us to explore the promise of stem-cell research, and do so in a way that doesn't cross a certain moral threshold that he set,'' White House spokesman Scott McClellan said.
''And I think he articulated his reasons for arriving at that decision. And that is his position, and that remains his position.'' AP
[ edited by Linda_K on Jun 15, 2004 12:35 PM ]
posted on June 15, 2004 12:31:36 PM new
I do know that parents decide that if an older child has a disease (leukemia) and they can't find a suitable donor for that child they will have another child in hopes that the new baby will be compatible. I think it happened in California and there was a big stink about it. I for one am for that and they did have that child she was compatible with the older one and now they have two healthy children.
Getalife and that is why you posted the part of the article that suited your opinion.
Thanks fennix for calling me lazy. In a previous thread someone said that nobody calls people names. How funny was that. If you only knew my life, lazy is not part of it.
posted on June 15, 2004 12:31:38 PM new
Some here like to see the entire article and some only want to see 2 or 3 paragraphs. Whatever... if you have the link, it shouldn't be a problem to you. Just copy and paste the link. I've never heard anyone complain about that until you did.
Subscribing to the NYT is no big deal...no charge.
posted on June 15, 2004 12:47:10 PM new
Here is the entire article that Getalife was quoting from:
June 15, 2004
POLITICAL MEMO
Reaganite by Association? His Family Won't Allow It
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG
ASHINGTON, June 14 - As Republicans try to cloak President Bush in the mantle of Ronald Reagan, their biggest obstacle may be Mr. Reagan's own family.
Even before Mr. Reagan died, Nancy Reagan and her daughter, Patti Davis, made their opposition to Mr. Bush's policy on stem-cell research well known. But on Friday, at the culmination of an emotional week of mourning for the former president, his son Ron Reagan delivered a eulogy that castigated politicians who use religion "to gain political advantage," a comment that was being interpreted in Washington as a not-so-subtle slap at Mr. Bush.
The remark has provoked intense debate among Republicans about precisely what the younger Mr. Reagan meant. Some saw the reference to religion as a message to the administration on stem-cell research. Others saw it as a possible critique of the war in Iraq. Still others insist there was no deeper message at all.
But a friend of the Reagan family, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Mr. Reagan, who did not return a call seeking comment on Monday, was deeply uncomfortable with the way the Bush administration intertwined religion and politics and felt compelled to say so at the burial of his father, a ceremony watched by millions.
"I think he was making a more profound statement about style," this friend said, "and the danger of religion in politics."
First families often cause trouble for presidents. Jimmy Carter, Richard M. Nixon and Bill Clinton each had brothers who made them uncomfortable from time to time. But rarely does the family of one president step on the toes of another. The Reagans and Bushes, who have had famously strained relations throughout the years, may be an exception, as Nancy Reagan and her children guard Ronald Reagan's legacy, fending off efforts by both the right and left to trade on it for political gain.
"I think Nancy would not want that," said Barbara Kellerman, a Harvard expert on leadership who has written a book on first families. "She is not mad about the Bush family, and the last thing she intends is for W. to inherit her beloved and sanctified husband's mantle."
Ron Reagan, a television commentator who has frequently been critical of Mr. Bush, has already said as much. In 2000, he fired a shot at Mr. Bush in Philadelphia during the Republican convention, which featured a tribute to his father. "What's his accomplishment?" Mr. Reagan asked then. "That he's no longer an obnoxious drunk?"
Last year, in an interview with the online magazine Salon, Mr. Reagan renewed his critique, making clear his distaste for the Bush administration.
"The Bush people have no right to speak for my father, particularly because of the position he's in now," Mr. Reagan said then. "Yes, some of the current policies are an extension of the 80's. But the overall thrust of this administration is not my father's - these people are overly reaching, overly aggressive, overly secretive and just plain corrupt. I don't trust these people."
Mr. Reagan was not quite so pointed on Friday night. "Dad was also a deeply, unabashedly religious man," he told mourners gathered at sunset at the Reagan presidential library. "But he never made the fatal mistake of so many politicians - wearing his faith on his sleeve to gain political advantage. True, after he was shot and nearly killed early in his presidency he came to believe that God had spared him in order that he might do good. But he accepted that as a responsibility, not a mandate. And there is a profound difference."
The remarks caused jaws to drop in California and Washington. One Republican strategist, who would not be identified for fear of repercussions to his business, said he interpreted the remarks as a clear reference to stem-cell research, which Mr. Bush opposes on moral grounds because they require the destruction of human embryos.
"I thought clearly Ron Jr. was sending a message to the administration to be tolerant and understanding of this issue," the strategist said.
He said he was also struck by Mr. Bush's eulogy during the service at the National Cathedral. "I thought his speech was deliberately biographical in nature about Reagan, to try to show people that his biography is close to Bush's."
A number of Republicans are openly making that association. "Bush's name may be Bush," said Kenneth M. Duberstein, Mr. Reagan's former chief of staff, reiterating a comment he made last week, "but his heart belongs to Reagan."
But Mr. Duberstein, who is close to Nancy Reagan and guided her in her advocacy of stem-cell research while her husband was suffering from Alzheimer's disease, said that did not mean Mrs. Reagan would let the stem-cell issue subside.
"Nancy Reagan is not somebody who walks away from anything," Mr. Duberstein said. "When she takes on a cause and a belief, she is very much like her husband. I think this one is very dear to her heart."
It is also dear to her family. Ms. Davis wrote passionately about her father's illness in the online version of Newsweek, this week and last month. "A messy, horrible war that has spun out of control could very well determine the next election," Ms. Davis wrote before her father's death. "So should the miracle of stem-cell research - a miracle the Bush White House thinks it can block."
Such pronouncements could spell trouble for the president, said James A. Thurber, director of the Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies at American University. "Nancy Reagan is now an icon, related to someone that America thinks very highly of who had the disease that might be cured by stem-cell research," he said. "That's pretty powerful."
But Republicans who are promoting the idea that Mr. Bush is Mr. Reagan's political heir say the dispute over stem cells and the Reagan family's comments will not put a dent in the association.
"Ronald Reagan has to be looking down from heaven and smiling at the way the current president, generally speaking, stands and the things he's doing, even though they might well disagree on some specifics," Newt Gingrich, the former speaker of the House, said Monday. He added, "In eight days of nonstop nationwide focus, you get on the ninth day a slight hiccup."
Funeral Draws 35 Million Viewers
Just over 35 million viewers tuned in to the channels carrying the funeral of President Ronald Reagan on Friday night, the high viewing point for the coverage on the Reagan funeral events last week.
That was a big increase for the cable news networks that carried the events, though it represented a small decline compared with the entertainment programming on the broadcast channels the previous week. Among the broadcast networks, ABC had the largest audience, with 8.1 million viewers. On cable, Fox News had by far the biggest audience with about 5 million viewers.
Compared with other news events covered by all the broadcast networks, plus CNN, Fox News, MSNBC and CNBC, the funeral did not have an especially high number of viewers. The last State of the Union address, for example, was watched by 43.4 million viewers on those channels.
____________________
We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people. -- John F. Kennedy
posted on June 15, 2004 12:49:46 PM new"We should not as a society grow life to destroy it, and that's exactly what's taking place,"
Why am I not surprised that Bush has managed to combine inaccuracy and oversimplification into a single sentence.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on June 15, 2004 12:59:46 PM new
{i]Thanks fennix for calling me lazy. In a previous thread someone said that nobody calls people names. How funny was that. If you only knew my life, lazy is not part of it. [/i]
Libra - I do not need to know anything about ones life to recognize that forming an opinion on a such a crucial and vast topic, and stating that you believe the practice to be wrong while having no knowledge to base that opinion on is intellectually lazy. I was not making the statement based soley on yourself. I feel that way about everyone that does that. People that support the Patriot Act without knowing what it actually encompasses, people that form opinions on religions or ethnic groups without knowing anything about them, etc. If a person feels tat it is within their right to pass judgment, good or bad, on something, they should at least take upon them the responsibility to have an intellectual basis for that judgment.
Considering your view on the luekemia issue you mentioned above, I REALY think that you should take the time to do a little research into stem cell research. I think you just may find that you support it.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on June 15, 2004 01:00:21 PM new
Personally, I am one of those that would rather see parts of an article and then the link to it. That way I can decided whether I want to read the whole thing or not. What's the big deal, Libra? (You've been awfully crabby lately - so unlike a true Libra if that's what your sign is. I know it's mine and our thinking couldn't be more opposite.) Posting whole articles can make a thread way too long and tedious to read. You did fine, getalife.
BTW, I like your screen name. Some here could take that suggestion seriously.
posted on June 15, 2004 01:03:19 PM new
Thanks bunnicula that shows that the OP did pick out what part he liked. I could have put in what part I liked also but then when others post they either put the URL in if it is a long article or C&P the whole thing.
I do have my beliefs and they are not the same as most people here and that is fine with me. This is what makes the world. We do have freedom of speech unless your Jimmy Kimmell and get pulled off the air for what he said about Detroit.
posted on June 15, 2004 01:11:23 PM new
Libra, Good grief...getalife who started the thread, has the priviledge to select the portion to discuss. Then you have the choice to discuss it or not.
If you choose to discuss it, it's a good idea to read the article. Getalife did provide a link which you were too lazy to use.
posted on June 15, 2004 01:26:20 PM new
There you go cheryl calling me crabby. It seems like the worst comes out in here. I don't feel like I was crabby voicing my opinion. Or is that wrong. I feel I didn't say anything wrong to getalife. I don't feel I was crabby, nasty or anything. All I said was either post the whole article or just the URL. To take something out of context to help your agenda is wrong and you should know that. Read the rest of the article and you will see that favorable things were also said. Read that post by me again and you will see that I didn't say anything wrong. I also thanked him for posting it and I meant it. I didn't mean no harm in it like others took it to mean.
"What's the big deal, Libra? (You've been awfully crabby lately - so unlike a true Libra if that's what your sign is. I know it's mine and our thinking couldn't be more opposite"
Show me where I was crabby any more than the rest of you. How do you know what a true Libra is? Just what you read? I will tell you one thing. I am balanced, I get along with everyone and I have no enemies. If and when you meet me, then you can form that opinion. I sit here at my computer read and post what I think if that is crabby than maybe your right. I can read the same things into everyone elses posts also.
I agree and I said that I don't know anyting about cloning and what I do know I want no part of that.
posted on June 15, 2004 01:31:58 PM new
Helen my dear - read my post just after the OP
"I am a Ronald Reagan Sr. supporter but since I don't know the political views of Ron Jr or the rest of the family I am not going to comment on this article. But I did read the whole thing. Thanks for posting it."
Obviously you didn't read my whole post. A part of it is above these lines. I did read it and I also thanked him for posting it as I did appreciate reading it. What else could I have said?
posted on June 15, 2004 01:33:24 PM new
Getalife......GETALIFE
"The Secret Service has announced it is doubling its protection for John Kerry. You can understand why — with two positions on every issue, he has twice as many people mad at him." —Jay Leno
posted on June 15, 2004 01:40:44 PM new
Libra - Getalife posted Ron Reagans quotes in their entirety and then included a link to the source of them. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the way that it was done since the quotes were included in their entirety and not later contridicted by Reagan.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
[ edited by fenix03 on Jun 15, 2004 01:44 PM ]
Now I know you are a true Libra. I was having fun with you and you took it to heart. Geesh, I told twelve to "get happy" the other day and he took it for what it was. My point to you was, we appear to be of the same astrological sign, but at the same time our political views are so different. I just find that odd, is all. You are as convicted in your beliefs as I am and appear to be as unwavering so I guess we have more in common than I thought. I never said you weren't balanced - you have a way to go before I'd say you were "unbalanced". Although there are some here that are a bit unbalanced, ha!
posted on June 15, 2004 03:51:36 PM new
Libra - if you are interested in learning more about stem cell research, the different types of cells (there are three catagories) and their potential applications, this is a good place to start
http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/faqs.asp#whatare
Basically right now it is believed that stem cell research can not only be used to find treatments for Alzheimers and Parkinson but also in cancer treatments, lessoning rejection issues in organs transplants and even reducing the need for organ transplants by injecting infected and damaged organs with new cells capable or regenerating the damaged tissues. There is a newly launched study to also see if stem cells can be beneficial in sustaining long term remission of Lupus.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
[ edited by fenix03 on Jun 15, 2004 03:55 PM ]
posted on June 15, 2004 04:47:01 PM new
I know about Lupus as it is a depilitating disease to have. But thanks fennix for the web sites and I will go there and read them. I enjoy reading different articles.
posted on June 15, 2004 07:02:45 PM new
Libra63, my post was not meant to be part of any particular agenda. I just found it interesting that Ron Reagan said so clearly and forcefully that the Bush administration was not an extension of the Reagan administration and to further accuse Bush of using religion for political means. The stem cell research part of the article was not of a great deal of interest to me though I am wholeheartedly for it.
As for picking two paragraphs out of a fairly long article for my post, those were the ones which conveyed the information that interested me and I hoped would interest others. As to copying and pasting the entire article, linking it, or just using a paragraph or two, you are free to your own opinion. Had it been a passage from Moby Dick I doubt seriously you would be complaining because the entire book hadn't been copy pasted. When I run across threads with several long articles I generally skip them as being too time consuming.
cblev65252, the name getalife came about because I seemed to put in too much time reading the threads at AuctionWatch in order to get a handle on Ebay, and I thought, "Steve you need to get a life."
posted on June 15, 2004 08:36:34 PM new
Thanks for your explination, but, when I come across an article that I feel is to long I do not take quotes from it I just post the URL.
posted on June 16, 2004 12:44:36 PM new
Bush Responds to Ron Reagan's Religion and Politics Criticism
By Melanie Hunter
CNSNews.com Deputy Managing Editor
June 15, 2004
(CNSNews.com) - "I've always said I think it's very important for someone not to try to take the speck out of someone else's eye when they may have a log in their own," President Bush said Tuesday in response to recent criticism by former President Ronald Reagan's son that politicians not wear their religious faith on their sleeve.
During his father's burial at the Reagan Presidential Library, Ron Reagan described the former president as "a deeply, unabashedly religious man," but said his father "never made the fatal mistake of so many politicians - wearing his faith on his sleeve to gain political advantage."
Some took those comments as a criticism of Bush, who limited embryonic stem cell research to the existing stem cell lines. Former First Lady Nancy Reagan has been vocal over the years in her support for stem cell research, especially during Reagan's struggle with Alzheimer's disease.
"True, after he was shot and nearly killed early in his presidency he came to believe that God had spared him in order that he might do good. But he accepted that as a responsibility, not a mandate. And there is a profound difference," Ron Reagan said of his father.
On Tuesday during a press conference with Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai, Bush stressed the need for religious people to run for political office, but said he's "very mindful about saying, 'Oh, vote for me. I'm more religious than my neighbor.'
"And I think it's important for people of religion to serve. I think it's very important for people who are serving to make sure there's a separation of church and state," Bush added.
"The Secret Service has announced it is doubling its protection for John Kerry. You can understand why — with two positions on every issue, he has twice as many people mad at him." —Jay Leno
