Bush a lame duck

[strandinthewind]

Specter: Senate stem cell override likely



WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Sen. Arlen Specter said Sunday he believes the Senate has enough votes to override a threatened presidential veto of legislation easing restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.

Fellow Republican Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas, however, vowed to keep the bill from reaching the Senate floor. Both appeared on ABC's "This Week."

"I've been taught a lot of lessons from the Democrats lately, so I've got some ideas on how one can get this done," Brownback said. "And I think it's important that we move forward."

The bill would allow researchers to use some 400,000 embryos that were created for in vitro fertilization and would likely otherwise be discarded.

President Bush opposes that and held a news conference last week to promote adopting the embryos, which he called "snowflake babies."

The House passed the bill last week with 50 Republicans -- short of a veto-proof vote. The Senate is slated to take up the measure this week.

Specter, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said 58 senators signed a letter to Bush recently asking him to drop his opposition.

"And there are 20 more in the wings who didn't want to put their names on the letter, who I think would vote to override a veto," said the Pennsylvania Republican.

Specter also predicted that if a march on Washington in favor of the bill were to be held, it would "turn a lot of people in the Congress who will look to see what their constituents are demanding."

The two Republicans differed sharply on their views of the status of frozen embryos.

Brownback, also a member of the Judiciary Committee, questioned "what it does to the culture of life" when government approves performing research on the embryos, which he considers "young human life."

Specter shot back, asking what it does "to the culture of life when you let people die because there are medical research tools which could keep them alive?"

"I hate to personalize this, but when I look back on 1970, and President Nixon declared war on cancer, if that war had been adequately funded like the rest of our wars, I might not have Hodgkin's lymphoma cancer today," Specter said.

Specter said he and Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, set up the program for adopting the embryos last year and it has resulted in 100 adoptions.

"If we could create 400,000 snowflakes, if we could have all of these embryos adopted, I would be the first one not to use them to save somebody else's life, if it could create a newborn child," Specter said.

Brownback suggested limiting the number of in vitro fertilizations allowed and pushed the use of adult stem cells or umbilical cord blood cells -- which many scientists say are useful but not as useful as the more flexible embryonic stem cells.

He also argued repeatedly during the ABC program that embryos are "the youngest of human life" and at one point asked Specter and host George Stephanopoulos when their lives began.

Specter replied that he was "a lot more concerned, at this point, about when my life is going to end," to which Brownback responded that he prays for the Pennsylvanian and asked again when life starts.

"It certainly doesn't start in a laboratory dish," Specter replied. "This potential for life on these embryonic stem cells cannot begin to occur unless it's implanted back in a woman. We know for sure, life does not start in a laboratory dish."

Brownback was not persuaded, however, saying that the embryos are "sacred" and "should be treated as such."


Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/05/29/stem.cells/index.html

[strandinthewind]

First, the humiliating lack of public and political support for the SS "reforms," which effectively are dead in the water.

Second, the compromise without consulting the WH by the seven R Senators on W's judicial nominees.

Third, the R controlled and pro life Senate allegedly has the votes to override W's veto.

That is some strong medicine for W and Rove, who are not used to losing.

So, is this just a lame duck thing? Or is it in fact the R's moving a little toward the middle from the far far right?

[strandinthewind]

another article of many a google search will reveal:

Thursday, May 12, 2005

Analysis

Lame-duck image follows Bush

The president encounters growing trouble pushing his agenda even among members of his own party.

By Tom Raum / Associated Press


Gerald Herbert / Associated Press

President Bush toasts guests at a Cinco de Mayo celebration at the White House. Bush's poll numbers have declined into the mid-40 percent range.


Comment on this story
Send this story to a friend
Get Home Delivery


WASHINGTON -- He can't just blame the Democrats. Some lawmakers in President Bush's own party are giving him an increasingly hard time over everything from Social Security to a free-trade pact for Central America to his plan to ease immigration laws. It may be an early lame-duck warning for his presidency.

Bush returned from a celebratory trip to Europe to a domestic agenda badly in need of his quick attention. And one of his chores is to shore up GOP support where possible.

"The president stays in regular contact with members of Congress, congressional leaders, about how to move forward on our shared priorities," White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Wednesday.

But some of those priorities are fraught with disagreement, and others are not as shared as the White House might like.

The Senate is racing toward a constitutional confrontation over a proposal by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist to force a rules change on filibusters to clear the way for votes on Bush's judicial nominations. The move is a top priority for most party conservatives. But the upending of a long-standing Senate tradition is not viewed enthusiastically by all Republicans.

Also, the Senate is moving toward approval of a giant highway bill that exceeds the spending ceiling set by the White House, possibly setting the stage for Bush's first veto.

Misgivings by four Republicans on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee triggered a three-week postponement of a vote on the nomination of John Bolton to be U.N. ambassador.

Momentum seemed to be growing behind Bolton on the eve of an expected committee vote today, but only after fierce lobbying by the president's team of fellow Republicans.

Meanwhile, partisan acrimony has gotten so strong that Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada recently called Bush "a loser." "Maybe it was a poor choice of words," Reid later said. "But I want everyone within the sound of my voice to know how displeased I am with what this White House is doing to our country."

Bush's poll numbers have declined into the mid-40 percent range. And the situation in Iraq remains difficult. A string of suicide bombings struck several Iraqi cities Wednesday, killing more than 60 people and wounding more than 100.

Bush's troubles in moving his major proposals through Congress are aggravated by having to do a difficult dance: angling for support from Republican moderates and reaching out to Democrats on initiatives like Social Security without driving away members of his conservative base.

"These are big issues that aren't easy to achieve in the second term. These are tough votes for members of Congress facing re-election," said Sarah Binder, a political science professor at George Washington University. "The easy things from a Republican perspective have already been done," Binder said.

These include recently passed bankruptcy overhaul, legislation limiting class-action lawsuits, a budget resolution that roughly tracks Bush's spending priorities and an $82 billion measure for Iraq and Afghanistan.

In more troublesome areas, Bush modified his Social Security overhaul plan after a 60-day cross-country blitz failed to build support.

But his new proposal to adjust benefits to keep the program solvent opened him to fresh criticism from Democrats that he was targeting the middle-class. And it drew cool responses from conservative senators.

Bush's proposal for a free-trade pact with six Central American and Caribbean nations is drawing opposition from nearly all Democrats -- and from some Republican lawmakers from textile and sugar-producing states.

Usually second-term presidents don't become lame ducks -- losing influence as attention turns to possible successors -- until after midterm elections, still a year and a half away. But for Bush, "he's flirting with it, if he's not there yet," said University of Texas political scientist Bruce Buchanan.

Republican consultant Scott Reed, who has close ties with the White House, dismisses talk about a lame-duck Bush presidency. But, Reed said, "It appears the president will need to spend some of his well earned political capital to move his agenda."

http://www.detnews.com/2005/politics/0505/12/A05-179146.htm

[irishgrl]

I always KNEW Bush was lame. the fact that he's a quacker too is the icing on the cake :blob2: :blob1: :blob2: :blob1:

[Sugar]

He's old.

He'd bald.

And he just doesn't give a crap anymore.


Sen. Arlen Specter

:lol:

Seriously, though, give 'em hell, Arlen... :thumbsup:

[strandinthewind]

He's old.

He'd bald.

And he just doesn't give a crap anymore.


Sen. Arlen Specter

:lol:

Seriously, though, give 'em hell, Arlen... :thumbsup:


Lord Child - did you see him on Meet the Press :eek: He just fired back with a devil may care a la Gandalf uttering "Be Silent! Keep your forked tongue behind your teeth! I did not come through fire and death to bandy crooked words with a witless worm!" It was refreshing actually :laugh:

I think this all indicates W is losing power and with the very ill Renquist expected to retire in June, that does not bode well for W and any far right judicial nominee. The D's may settle on replacing a conservative with a conservative if W makes O'Conner, essentially a centrist, the Chief Justice. This is going to an interesting saga to say the least.

[SuzeQuze]

I always KNEW Bush was lame. the fact that he's a quacker too is the icing on the cake :blob2: :blob1: :blob2: :blob1:

A "loser" :laugh:. Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada recently called Bush "a loser."

[dissention]

A "loser" :laugh:. Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada recently called Bush "a loser."

I'm far from a fan of Reid, but I love that. :laugh:

[strandinthewind]

I'm far from a fan of Reid, but I love that. :laugh:


In a way I do not. I think words and actions like that, though true, are beneath a Senator. I think sticking to facts in arguments is better than personal insults. I think they strengthen W in the long run actually. I think it is okay for citizens to do it, but I think Senators and all politicians should be above it. But, I think chivalry is dead and that is sad. Again, if you want to fill your church, preach hate - and that mostly just disgusts me.

[gldstwmn]

I'm far from a fan of Reid, but I love that. :laugh:

I have a photograph of those very words being broadcast on the huge ticker in Times Square. I really need to upload it.

[SuzeQuze]

In a way I do not. I think words and actions like that, though true, are beneath a Senator. I think sticking to facts in arguments is better than personal insults. I think they strengthen W in the long run actually. I think it is okay for citizens to do it, but I think Senators and all politicians should be above it. But, I think chivalry is dead and that is sad. Again, if you want to fill your church, preach hate - and that mostly just disgusts me.

Dude, you are taking this far too seriously! And the senator admitted his choice of words was poor, I just thought it was funny! I do agree that name calling is counterproductive and tactless. I'm very guilty of indulging in it which I am not proud of! But sometimes, it's just funny. Like when Jon Stewart called Tucker Carlson a d*ck on national television. :laugh: Poor choice of words? Yes. Funny? Hell yes.

[Sugar]

Lord Child - did you see him on Meet the Press :eek: He just fired back with a devil may care a la Gandalf uttering "Be Silent! Keep your forked tongue behind your teeth! I did not come through fire and death to bandy crooked words with a witless worm!" It was refreshing actually :laugh: .

I did not, but would have liked to! Since W got another four years, this, indeed, seems to be Specter's position.


I think this all indicates W is losing power and with the very ill Renquist expected to retire in June, that does not bode well for W and any far right judicial nominee. The D's may settle on replacing a conservative with a conservative if W makes O'Conner, essentially a centrist, the Chief Justice. This is going to an interesting saga to say the least.

Again, I don't think it's hard to figure out where Specter is on this. They got him to back off on the rhetoric, but I don't think Specter's done, especially since he IS chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee! I suspect Specter feels he's been around too long to have to put up with the flavor of the month anymore! :lol: After all, at 73 (?) he's got a legacy to think about too.

It will be interesting.

[strandinthewind]

Dude, you are taking this far too seriously! And the senator admitted his choice of words was poor, I just thought it was funny! I do agree that name calling is counterproductive and tactless. I'm very guilty of indulging in it which I am not proud of! But sometimes, it's just funny. Like when Jon Stewart called Tucker Carlson a d*ck on national television. :laugh: Poor choice of words? Yes. Funny? Hell yes.


Well,I think privater citizens like Tucker and JS can do it all they want. I just think that whole "oops I made a mistake and used a poor choice of words" is bull****. he knew exactly what he was doing as they all do. I just think that if the name calling were taken out of the picture, people could and would see the facts more clearly - forgive me for wanting that.

[dissention]

I just think that if the name calling were taken out of the picture, people could and would see the facts more clearly

Bless your heart. You expect a lot. :laugh:

[strandinthewind]

Bless your heart. You expect a lot. :laugh:


I know - but so do you and you know it - it seems I recall a certain debate about Collin Powell . . . :cool:

[dissention]

I know - but so do you and you know it - it seems I recall a certain debate about Collin Powell . . . :cool:

Colin Powell is a wet fart of a human turd. He's got the testicles of a flea and the backbone of a jellyfish. Powell Doctrine, my ass.

[irishgrl]

did Cheney ever admit HIS lack of taste for his foul mouth? Im just asking....

[strandinthewind]

did Cheney ever admit HIS lack of taste for his foul mouth? Im just asking....

He has refused to apologize for any of it. But, that does not make it right for anyone else to do it :shrug: