The Cybercast News Service was launched on June 16, 1998 as a news source for individuals, news organizations and broadcasters who put a higher premium on balance than spin and seek news that’s ignored or under-reported as a result of media bias by omission.

Study after study by the Media Research Center, the parent organization of CNSNews.com, clearly demonstrate a liberal bias in many news outlets – bias by commission and bias by omission – that results in a frequent double-standard in editorial decisions on what constitutes "news."

Isn't that code for "in Limbaugh we trust"?

----

It's sad that we've reached a point where 'government service' is a dirty word... If we're the greatest country on earth, maybe we can have the greatest government.

Lewis Black

Sounds like an argument for

Submitted by wcolin on Sat, 03/14/2009 - 12:34pm.

Sounds like an argument for giving the chief executive line item veto power.

I agree totally. I'll be

Submitted by Suzi LeVeaux on Sat, 03/14/2009 - 12:59pm.

I agree totally.

I'll be interested to see if this gets any media attention, and what will be done about it.

Which holds the power of law? This or the signing statement?

Is this true guys? Did he

Submitted by NoMcSame on Sat, 03/14/2009 - 1:00pm.

Is this true guys? Did he really reverse his executive order on stem cell research?

I don't think it's as much

Submitted by Suzi LeVeaux on Sat, 03/14/2009 - 1:15pm.

I don't think it's as much that he reversed it, as that there was something buried in the Omnibus that contradicts it. We will have to wait and see how this plays out.

Well, he shouldn't have

Submitted by NoMcSame on Sat, 03/14/2009 - 1:26pm.

Well, he shouldn't have signed the bill then. This is NOT the change I voted for. I mean, how ridiculous does it look for Obama to stage a grand signing ceremony and proclaim the return of principled science and research and then (two days later) sign something else that virtually undoes what he did? I'm just too disgusted to comment further. Talk about a typical politician. I feel almost betrayed as he is the first candidate I was ever truly passionate about enough to canvass for. What a waste.

Calm down, NoMc! ;-)

Submitted by Suzi LeVeaux on Sat, 03/14/2009 - 2:24pm.

Calm down, NoMc! ;-)

This piece of legislation is a yearly thing, which funds the federal government, and had already been delayed for six months or so, leaving the government to operate under a temporary spending law. President Obama signed it a day before the temporary spending law was due to expire. Would it have been better for him to not sign it and have the government shut down for the remainder fo the fiscal year? Hardly!!

There are many things in there that the President disagrees with, but as he as often said, this is a piece of business from the previous year that needed to be finished up so we could move forward. He couldn't veto the whole omnibus bill just because of one thing, no matter what is was. Stem cell research is important to Obama, and he will do what is necessary to make sure the funding is put in place.

I hope you don't give up on your family and friends this easily! ;-)

McSame, shouldn't you

Submitted by Indforobama on Sat, 03/14/2009 - 1:53pm.

McSame, shouldn't you research it first before you start flipping out....

That is not a lot of confidence in your President.

I will not throw the first punch but I wil certainly throw the last.....President Barack Obama.

Good grief, No McSame! I

Submitted by Central TX Mom on Sat, 03/14/2009 - 3:05pm.

Good grief, No McSame! I find that it helps not to go straight to Panictown and first so some research.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sciencenow/dispatches/050413.html

"But the research needed years of federal support in order to flourish—and the Dickey-Wicker Amendment stood squarely in the way.

Or did it? In January of 1999, Harriet Rabb, the top lawyer at the Department of Health and Human Services, released a legal opinion that would set the course for Clinton Administration policy. Federal funds, obviously, could not be used to derive stem cell lines (because derivation involves embryo destruction). However, she concluded that because human embryonic stem cells "are not a human embryo within the statutory definition," the Dickey-Wicker Amendment does not apply to them. The NIH was therefore free to give federal funding to experiments involving the cells themselves (what Republican Senator Sam Brownback, of Kansas, called a bit of "legal sophistry.")

The NIH, with input from the National Bioethics Advisory Commission and others, went on to develop guidelines outlining the types of human embryonic stem cell research that would be eligible for federal funding. These Clinton Administration guidelines, published in August of 2000, forbid the use of federal funds to destroy human embryos to derive stem cells (because of the Dickey-Wicker Amendment), but permitted research with stem cells that other, privately funded scientists had already derived from spare embryos slated for destruction at fertility clinics. "

Blah, blah, blah. Then Bush restrictions on, and now Obama lifted the restrictions.

The CNS article says, "Unless Congress passes and President Obama signs new legislation to repeal Dickey-Wicker, it will now be the law of the land at least through September 30, when this fiscal year ends."

But that shouldn't matter because of the decision above.

I'm not worried about this.

well if nothing else

Submitted by BlakeyV on Sat, 03/14/2009 - 3:23pm.

well if nothing else Dickey Wicker sounds good

Blakey....I practiced my

Submitted by Suzi LeVeaux on Sat, 03/14/2009 - 3:32pm.

Blakey....I practiced my alphabet a while ago, but came up empty.

Alright Suzi, but try it

Submitted by BlakeyV on Sat, 03/14/2009 - 7:40pm.

Alright Suzi, but try it again this evening from now till 10-10:30...Pat, sorry you came just as my pc disconnected and I went right back but you were gone.

Fair enough guys =). Maybe

Submitted by NoMcSame on Sat, 03/14/2009 - 6:42pm.

Fair enough guys =). Maybe I over-reacted a little. I'm just very passionate about science and the promise it holds to help people especially in this field of study. I've also been made very cynical by the Bush years when it comes to politicians and campaign promises, doing what's right for the country, etc. Anyway, CTM, could you maybe explain to me in laymen's terms why Dickey-Wicker won't impede Obama's executive order to federally fund stem cell research? I just got kind of lost in the legal mumbo-jumbo above =).

So, is the bottom line

Submitted by NoMcSame on Sat, 03/14/2009 - 10:26pm.

So, is the bottom line basically, that Dickey-Wicker won't impede federal funds for embryonic stem cell research? Are there any , congressmen working to remove that amendment?

NoMc, that piece of

Submitted by Suzi LeVeaux on Sat, 03/14/2009 - 10:58pm.

NoMc, that piece of legislation expires in September, I think it is, and the new Federal spending bill will go into effect at that time. My guess is that Dickey-Wicker won't be included.

Your President

Poll

Follow RFO:

Subscribe to General RFO Newsletter

Future of the GOP

Your President

Login / Register

Poll

Follow RFO:

Subscribe to General RFO Newsletter

Future of the GOP