President Bush issued his first veto and he vetoed a bill that would expand "stem cell" research.
It is amazing to me that he has signed so many terrible bills into law in the last five and a half years and when he finally decides to veto a bill he chooses this one.
As a fiscal conservative there are so many bills he should have vetoed in the last few years including:
No Child Left Behind
Prescription Drugs for Seniors
A massive aid package for New Orleans that is way to large
Huge budgets full of THOUSANDS of wasteful projects and earmarks...
President Bush proved to me again that he is NOT a fiscal conservative (he is a social conservative). President Bush is another large Government Republican.
I have recently heard a lot of right wing talk show hosts accusing the Democratic party of pandering to the anti-war portion of their political base of supporters. I agree with those on the right wing on that issue.
That being said, Bush is pandering to the social conservative portion of his political base. He is doing the exact same thing The Democratic Party is doing with their anti-war base.
Both Party's are pandering...
If you think President Bush did the right thing by vetoing this bill please let us know why you agree with his veto in the comment section...
I am really interested in knowing what the local right wing thinks including Tim Zank, Andrew Kaduk, AWB, and William Larsen.
Mike Sylvester
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Contributors
Search This Blog
Pages
Offices on the Ballot - Allen County 2024
OFFICES ON THE 2024 BALLOT ALLEN COUNTY INDIANA FEDERAL President of the United States United States Representative Dist...
Blog Archive
-
▼
2006
(416)
-
▼
July
(33)
- Guard the borders Blogburst July 31st, 2006
- Another reason The Republicans need to be removed ...
- Misconceptions about the Federal Minimum Wage
- Press Release from Mike Kole
- New Sentinel printed a letter to the editor I subm...
- My mother's cats
- Our Government
- My opinion of Israel and the current conflict
- Are you a fiscal conservative?
- President Bush and his first veto
- Libertarians at Large television show
- Guard the borders Blogburst, July 17th, 2006
- A poll I hope you will take
- Next meeting of The Libertarian party of Allen County
- National Libertarian membership Pledge
- Tina Taviano
- Scott Wise announces his Campaign for Indiana's 3r...
- Information about The Libertarian Reform Caucus
- ABC has ANOTHER story illustrating what is wrong w...
- Libertarian National Platform
- Allen County GOP and Indiana Election Law
- Coming soon, my interview with Tina Taviano
- Another reason NOT to vote for any Republicans or ...
- Debbie and Mike disagreeing...
- Results from the 2D Quiz over the last couple of d...
- My mother
- Please help me with Dr. Milsted's Quiz
- Press Release from Libertarian Reform Caucus
- Independence Day and The Portland LP Convention
- 2006 Libertarian National Convention, Mike Sylvest...
- More Sports Welfare
- Convention Update
- LP Convention Blogging
-
▼
July
(33)
-
Several people have asked me what I think will happen in the next few months. I am going to give you my opinion on how I think things will g...
-
I went to the Northwest Area Partnership Meeting tonight. This is a group that consists of many neighborhood association officers/ Quite a ...
-
In the comment section of an earlier post Sam Talarico commented that he was surprised that the News-Sentinel published my analysis of the r...
Labels
- 2008
- 2014 Elections
- 2016 Election
- 3rd District Congress
- 6th District Congress
- Abuse of Powers
- Administration
- Administration of the Blog
- After Dark Night Club
- AKA William
- Allen County Election Board
- Allen County Libertarian Party Bylaws 2020
- Andrew Horning
- Angry White Boy
- Annual Convention
- Annual Yard Sale
- April Fool's
- bailout
- ballot
- Barack Hussein Obama
- Barack Hussien Obama
- Benjamin Franklin
- Bill of Rights Day
- Bob Barr
- Borders
- Born Again American
- Candidates
- Chris Spangle
- Citilink
- City County Building
- Civic
- Commissioners
- Community
- Congress
- Congressional Pay
- Consultants
- corporate welfare
- County Government
- Courts
- Crime
- Dan Drexler
- David Roach
- death
- Debates
- Democrats
- Donald Trump
- Doug Horner
- Drinking
- Early Voting
- Economics
- economy
- education
- Elections
- Entreprenural Initiatives
- Enviroment
- Equality
- ethanol
- Events
- Excercise
- F6
- farm Animals
- Federal
- Federal Government
- Feedback
- Flag
- Flood
- Food and Beverage Taxes
- Foreign policy
- Forms
- Fort Wayne
- Fort Wayne City Council
- fort wayne mayor
- Fort Wayne Police Department
- Fox News
- fraud
- Fuel Efficeincy
- Fundraiser
- Gary Johnson
- Geoff Paddock
- George Mason
- GLBT
- Glenn Beck
- GOP
- government
- Government Waste
- Grassroots Inititives
- Green Links
- Haiti
- Harrison Square
- Health Care Reform
- Heartland Communities
- Honey
- HRC FW
- Humor
- immigration
- Income
- Income Taxes
- Indiana
- Indiana House District 83
- IPFW
- Jack Evans
- James Madison
- Jdimytai Damour
- John Schick
- John Sidney McCain
- Joseph Biden
- Journal Gazette
- K P Nfr
- Kevin Leininger
- Kody Tinnel
- LaPorte County LP
- legacy fund
- libertarian
- Libertarian Party
- Libertarian Party of Indiana
- Libertarians AT Large
- Links
- Local
- LPIN
- LPIN Officers
- Mark Skousen
- Memorial Coliseum
- Military
- Minimum Wage
- Modest Proposal
- MrTacoJosh
- Music
- My HUD House
- Nanny State
- National Debt
- New Blog
- New Design
- News Sentinel
- Next Business Meeting
- occupy movement
- Oprah
- OUTright Libertarians
- OWS
- passenger rail
- Penn Jillette
- Phil Marx
- Pictures
- Planning
- Political Parties
- Politics
- Pot Holes
- Powers Hamburgers
- predictions
- Presidential Nominations
- Press
- QR Codes
- Queer Cincinnati
- Questions
- Radio
- Random Facts
- Real ID
- Robert Fuller
- RSVP
- Sandbags
- Sarah Palin
- Save Maumee
- Scott Wise
- Secretary of State
- Senate
- Sicko by Michael Moore
- Social
- space
- spending
- State Convention
- State Of Indiana
- State of Michigan
- Stephen Moore
- stimulus
- Street Dept.
- Student Body President
- Supreme Court
- Tax Protest
- taxes
- terrorism
- The Paradox of Affluence In Politics
- The Second Coming
- Thomas Jefferson
- Three Rivers
- TinCaps
- tom henry
- Top Libertarian Blogs
- tragedy
- transportation
- Updates
- US HISTORY
- Veterans Day
- video
- Voter Centers
- Voter Registration
- Wal*Mart
- welfare
- Wesley In Austin
- Why Libertarian
- William Butler Yeats
- William Larsen
Sitemeter
Followers
About Commenting
Keep it clean and relevant to the post. If you have a question that isn't related to a recent post, email me at enders.robert@gmail.com . You can also email me if you want to make an anonymous comment.
DISCLAIMER
Per the by-laws of the Libertarian Party of Allen County, the Chair is the official spokesperson of LPAC in all public and media matters.
Posts and contributions expressed on this forum, while being libertarian in thought and intent, no official statement of LPAC should be derived or assumed unless specifically stated as such from the Chair, or another Officer of the Party acting in his or her place, and such statements are always subject to review.
Posts and contributions expressed on this forum, while being libertarian in thought and intent, no official statement of LPAC should be derived or assumed unless specifically stated as such from the Chair, or another Officer of the Party acting in his or her place, and such statements are always subject to review.
7 comments:
I'd be happy to weigh-in, and my opinion shouldn't surprise anyone who reads my stuff.
My opinion? Good veto.
Why? We already don't have the money for much of what the government promises, so why should we lift a prohibition on the government funding something else?
I don't care if doctors, labs, researchers or whoever want to poke, prod, dissect, test, taste or stack frozen embryos on the heads of one another, but the government has about as much business funding the venture as they have in paying farmers not to grow anything on portions of their land (yeah, I hate government-initiated agricultural price fixing as well).
What many folks don't realize is that when the government funds research for medical purposes, it is just a big fat subsidy for big fat business in disguise. You see, when a breakthrough is finally made in disease prevention by virtue of government sponsored research, the person or group who makes the discovery holds exclusive rights to the distribution of the cure/procedure/drug or whatever it is....NOT the American people. These doctors/groups will likely turn around and SELL their research data to the highest bidder or bidders, who will then take it to MARKET. All this does in reality is allows a couple of people to get rich on the taxpayers' tab.
Anyone who cannot see this as the inevitable course of events stemming from government subsidized research is either blind or just not cynical enough to understand America's version of faux-capitalism.
Major players in the fields of pharmacal medical R&D are foaming at the mouth to get their hands on government money for this crap because there is absolutely NO guarantee that the research will yield any positive results, so they don't wish to invest their shareholders' or their personal money on such an expensive gamble.
My opinion? Don't let those bastards make any money on the backs of the taxpayers...they are already double dipping by taking government money to develop drugs and then selling it at a very high markup back to the taxpayers at the pharmacy counters and hospitals of our nation.
I probably just made enemies of every diabetic on the planet (including several closely related to me), but if this research is as valuable as everyone seems to think it is, someone will privately fund it...it only makes sense.
...Just for the record, I do feel that this should have been but one in a long line of vetos for W. He has signed his name to more legislative flotsam and jetsam than I care to think about. I'll bet I could hand him a power of attorney form and he'd sign that over to me...
So yes, in this case he made the right decision, but for the wrong reason. That's not very comforting to me.
The Kadukster beat me to it! I simply don't feel it's governments place to FUND such research, much for the same reasons Andrew pointed out.
One would think that with all the hysteria, the Bush Administration was trying to ban stem cell research. That certainly has been the implication by the press and the liberal pundits.
All W did was deny the govt the opportunity to waste my tax dollars. Let the private sector
fund it.
Mike I agree with you on a couple of things. I too wish he had veto'd
all the other ridiculous spending bills and yes you are right, he is not a fiscal conservative. I also agree that both sides pander, as they have since the beginning of recorded time. I don't condone it, I simply tolerate it as the choices are limited.
I don't agree with a lot of the things W has done and it would be preposterous to think anyone would agree all the time with anyone.
I add up the pros and the cons and even with all his faults, his pros far outweigh his cons....
Oh, and thanks for the "right wing" monaker!
There is what is called "hard science", scientific research and experimentation that has no immediate practical or commercial value. A good example of this is astronomy. Nobody who observes stars through telescopes has any reasonable expectation of ever traveling to one in person. But even this type of science has value in that it combats mysticism. Its important to know that the sun is a big ball of hydrogen and helium and not Ra riding his flaming chariot across the sky.
That being said, I think scientific research should be privately funded. Hard science can still be funded by voluntary contributions.
Tim Zank wrote:
"I add up the pros and the cons and even with all his faults, his pros far outweigh his cons...."
Hey Tim, first of all, let me say the way you worded this is great, "con" is a perfect word for a lot of what he's done. But I digress.
The real reason I'm writing is to ask if you will post your list of pros and cons so we can see how you made your decision about Bush.
I'm just curious.
I agree with the veto. Bush should have vetoed the Rx Drug Bill along with many others. He should stand the line on spending and veto those bills that don't add up. Representatives add so much pork to bills, it has to stop and now is as good a time as any. Would the country go into default if he vetoed a major appropriations bill or increasing the debt limit, no!
If he vetoed increasing the debt limit, all it would do is force some hard choices no one wants to make. The tax revenues coming in could pay the interest on the debt, but all that other spending, Medicare Rx Drugs, aid to foreign countries, Education, the bridge to no where and more would finally be looked at.
Sylvia Smith asked me a similar question and when I answered I would not vote for increasing the debt if elected, I got the distinct impression from her tone and follow up questions she thought that I was wrong.
Many have been layed off from a job. they have had to make the tough choice of what to spend their limited funds on. The government should do the same.
Debbie, Sorry I didn't respond sooner...been a tad hectic this week...at any rate...heres my short list.
Pros:
911 (Strong Leadership)
Judicial Appts.(conservative)
Tax Cuts (increased investment)
Economy (up)
Unemployment (down)
Iraq (the big picture in the mideast is, we have to be there, forever)
Cons:
Immigration (his heart's in the right place but we can't do it his way)
New Orleans (caved in to perceived public sentiment..sent way too much money to way too many stupid people)
Huge deficits (I can appreciate leveraged financing but these deficits make me nervous.)
Of course you can blast holes in my list as I could yours, as there are two sides of the coin.
I genuinely like the guy, and I think he gets short shrifted because he isn't articulate.
Post a Comment