The Great Stem Cell Lie

Wasn't it Herr Joseph Goebels who said you should tell whoppers in a big way and you might get away with it? Maybe those are not exactly his words. History, unfortunately, bears out the advice of Hitler's propoganda master. In fact, so do current events.

This past weekend, Laurie Reilly, with whom I have one degree of separation via Topaz, but that is another story, chatted with U Albany's boss Kermit Hall on WGY out of Albany, NY. I had previously reported on President Hall for the Tech Valley Times, so I knew he was a solid citizen, being a lawyer and all, albeit from Yale.

The talk beaming out from WGY skimmed onto President Bush and, as Mr. Hall recounted, Bush's anti-stem cell research position; I am not certain, but Mr. Hall may have used the 'b' word - banned. The conversation moved right along past this consensus opinion.

The proposition that Mr. Bush is against stem cell research flies in the face of recorded history, but is exactly what our major media has reported since 2004 with very subtle wiggle words quietly in place. You will see these tricks, below.

Laurie Reilly, see photo, has a family and works hard to make a living. She is fully attuned to the tech world, as much as anyone can be who also has a life [and who knows Topaz.] President Hall is a lawyer who went over to the dark side - university administration, but he is razor sharp and tuned in. The high-level discussion the two had, yes it was WGY, provides a perfect example of the power of Goebel's axiom.

A huge lie was told last election cycle to undercut Bush and, surprise, the newspapers and other media ran with it without a second of research. We poor citizens have less time than reporters to do homework, so the constantly shrinking number of us foolishly who still rely on the paradigm set by the likes of the New York Times are perfect marks for the con artists. Some people actually call the NYT a paper of record. Weird.

So, you are thinking, He is saying Bush is not against stem cell research?

Interference in your brain is screaming: fight or flight, fight or flight!

Please, read on. I am not making this stuff up and you really should not be basing your arguments and votes on manipulated intelligence.

Not only is Bush not against stem cell research, under his direct orders his administration found a way to fund stem cell research for the first time. By doing so, he specifically overturned President Clinton's ban.

Yes, mull that over. Clinton - no; Bush - yes. One more time - you probably have it exactly ass-backward. Clinton - no; Bush - yes.

Here is the history -

Way back in the 1990's, I am going to guess 1996 because no one pays me to do research so I am relying on aging neurons, Congress passed enabling legislation for stem cell research. Congress listed precise and specific limitations, mostly having to do with not cloning humans, then killing them for the cells. Hardly a position held only by crazed fundamentalists.

Jump ahead...President Bush, just elected, in 2001 orders his staff to find a legal way to fund stem cells. They come back and say it can be done, but there are limits, per Congress' instructions. President Bush orders the funding to begin within the parameters set by law. Simply put, funding from the Federal government was only permitted where stem cells used in research were from 'lines' already in existence. Hence, no cloning-killing was going to be 'funded.'

Often lost in the 2004 lie is that the President and Congress never banned stem-cell funding. That's right bio-fans, there IS NO BAN on stem cell research.

The hysteria about banning started, as I can see it, from the academic institutions that freaked out because there was a whole new canal of free money to suck up, but the canal had a lock system in place. How dare those red-neck religious fanatics not give us more free money? With this pissy-fit in place, the leftist politicians jumped out in front, as they do daily, of a new issue - Bush is a crazed, red-neck, religious fanatic who wants to stop science. Just ask Goebels and President Hall if the BS worked.

Look, this is all documented in the very media that hates Bush:

The Boston Globe: Bush Administration Announced "First Federal Grant For Embryonic Stem Cell Research." "The Bush administration announced yesterday that the first federal grants for embryonic stem cell research could be issued nextJanuary, breathing life into a sluggish but highly promising field of medicine now dominated by a few private companies." (Raja Mishra And Anthony Shadid, "Stem Cell Grants Could Begin In Jan.," The Boston Globe, 8/11/01) ",1]

The media covered the story correctly, in general, even the LA/NY Times and USA Today. Now, doesn't this all seem straight foward? I thought so to. Now, watch the magic the the big lie can work on a dumbed-down society.

August 8, 2004 - John Kerry's response to President Bush's Radio message:

KERRY: "Three years ago, the President enacted a far-reaching ban on stem cell research, shutting down some of the most promising work to prevent, treat and cure Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, diabetes, AIDS and so many other life-threatening diseases."

First, one little aside. The senator has to know that the President does not 'enact' anything. This use of the term is not, I hope, a slip by a senator who didn't pay attention in civic's class; well, actually that may not be true considering the famous Boston article comparing the academic careers of Kerry and Bush. The incorrect term was used to inflame the great undecided, those who are undecided because they did not pay attention in civic's class and, besides American Idol is on. Recall, the mission of this blog is to undo some of the damage done by double-plus-pol-speak.

Alright. So, now we see the Senator is running on the position that the President is against stem cell research. OK, we now know that position was somewhere between stupid and a lie; Kerry was in the Senate when the enabling legislation was passed. If you pay me, I will go see if he voted for it.

In a free nation, you would think, this error or lie could be corrected by going to the press and pointing out what is in the record. This is what the administration did.

Think the media corrected the misconception?

Day after Kerry's unsupportable charge -

He gets support - clearly a planned event. Though it does not appear so in my copy, the lie is bold faced:

ABC, TV's worst of worst: "It Was Exactly Three Years Ago Today That President Bush Restricted Research Using Embryonic Cells."

VARGAS: "Turning to the campaign trail today. Many believe such research could hold a cure for diseases like Alzheimer's and Parkinson's. It was exactly three years ago today that President Bush restricted research using embryonic cells. The Democrats are hitting him hard on that all this week. Here's ABC's John Cochran." (ABC's "World News Tonight," 8/9/04) ",1]

NBC wants to get in the big lie. These folks are well coordinated, aren't they?

NBC: "Embryonic Stem Cell Research, Which The President Opposes." [Incredible, no?]

BROKAW: "The White House says there was no discussion of their disagreement over embryonic stem cell research, which the President opposes and Mrs. Reagan very publicly supports. The White House says Mrs. Reagan did express her full support of the President's campaign for reelection as President." (NBC's "Nightly News," 8/12/04)

Can you see why people on the right get so furious? How do you combat the unfree press? Suddenly, the story is how the nice Mrs Reagan, formerly the Yoko Ono of Washington, whose husband was beloved and died of a disease that stem cell researchy could address, was still supporting the dolt. Isn't she sweet?

The AP pulls out the big guns - some poll. But wait, Ron actually clarified that the use of the wor 'ban' was incorrect:

The Associated Press: "What The President Has Done Is Limit The Research."With polls showing overwhelming support for stem cell research, Kerry has promised to give scientists more freedom. He has used the word ban to describeBush's actions when what the president has done is limit the research." (Ron Fournier, "First Lady Bashes Kerry Stem Cell Stance," The Associated Press, 8/9/04)

The limitation, of course, is set by Congress of which Kerry was a member - he banned the use, if anyone did. So, either you are now concerned or amused by how clever Kerry was, depending upon your view of Faustus.

Washington Post: "President Bush's Decision To Limit Federal Embryonic Stem Cell Research." "Seizing an issue with overwhelming bipartisan support, the Kerry campaign is marking the third anniversary of President Bush's decision to limit federal embryonic stem cell research with a series of high-profile events this week that call into question the administration's commitment to science and breakthrough medicine." (Ceci Connolly, "Kerry Takes On Issue Of Embryo Research,"\nThe Washington Post, 8/8/04)

Wow, now Bush wants to kill us all and hates science.

New York Times: Laura Bush Defends "The Limits Her Husband Had Imposed On Embryonic Stem Cell Research." "Venturing forcefully into one of the more contentious issues of the campaign, Laura Bush on Monday defended the limits her husband had imposed on embryonic stem cell research and criticized those who suggested that the research\ncould lead quickly to cures for Alzheimer's and other diseases. …Mrs. Bush spoke on the third anniversary of President Bush's decision to limit federal financing
[DOESN'T ALL THIS LANGUAGE SOUND SUSPICOUSLY LIKE ABOVE? NAH COULDN'T BE COORDINATED...]

for embryonic stem cell research to the 78 stem cell lines in existence at the time and as the issue moved to the\nforefront of the campaign." (Randy Kennedy, "First Lady Defends Limits On Stem Cell Research," The New York Times, 8/10/04) ",1]

The New York Times, a paper of record, is making it hard for future historians by publishing contradictory accounts of history just four years apart. One more example of journalistic alzheimer's deisease, as this is overkill by now.

Los Angeles Times: "President Bush's Ban On Embryonic Stem Cell Research." "Democratic presidential nominee John F. Kerry vowed Saturday that he would lift President Bush's ban on embryonic stem cell research, declaring that 'here in America, we don't sacrifice science for ideology." (Lisa Getter, "Kerry Decries Stem Cell Limits, Promises Funding," Los Angeles Times, 8/8/04) \

Nah, one more. Recall, the accurate piece above from the Boston Globe? Well, here is a fart from bean town that took four year to escape. Now, you would think an editor actually remembered prior articles.

Boston Globe Editorial: "The Ban On Federal Funding Of Stem Cell Research." "On Monday night, Hillary Clinton received one of her loudest cheers at the Democratic National Convention when she called for an end to the ban on federal funding of stem cell research."

Sorry, for the overkill, but I think it is sometimes necessary to make a point to the disbeliever that this stuff goes on. Sure, you may rail against a radio talk [entertainment] show, but can't imagine propoganda is shoved at us by 'journalists.' A major reason you may miss it is that you want to hear what is being said.

Tom Stoppard made the point in R and G Are Dead, the audience is prepared to believe only what it accepts --- or was it the other way around? Or, does it matter which way?

If I made a point, please keep that point in mind every time you read or listen to the news. History is not written by the victors, it is edited.