Debate: Should Bill Clinton speak at President Reagan's Funeral.

[Galahad]

Originally posted by wvrevy
1 - Thank you. Didn't realize that we had a psychic present that could predict the future of scientific research

2 - Nobody was aborting babies to do stem cell research. It's a myth. Period. There were no lives being destroyed by it.

3 - And ? I'm sure that is quite a comfort to the families of those afflicted with this disease. I would rather be dead than to become what that disease turns people into. Most times, you'll hear people say that "his death came as a relief"...think there might be a reason for that ?

Sigh.

1) Nor are you psychic. There are a number of ways to do stem cell research. Further, the policy in question only limits government funded research. Privately funded research is not illegal.

2) Didn't say anything about abortions. If one believes with conviction that all embryos are human lives then it doesn't matter whether they were aborted or "left over".

3) Again.....sigh.......

 

[jrydberg]

Eeyore1954, condolences on the loss of your dad. Nothing political about that.

 

[ThreeCircles]

Originally posted by dmadman43
Where has he been wrong?

Ah... This explains so much.

 

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by ThreeCircles
Noooooo! Nooooo! Nothing in this country can be non-partisan! Nothing!

I think it's quite ironic that those who praise Reagan to the nth degree are the same individuals who would deny Clinton the right to speak. Hmmm, that's not political play, huh?

And to those who say that Nancy should decide, sure, for the private side of the events, I have no problem with that. But, if we're talking the STATE event, nope, it should be non-partisan and Nancy should not have the only voice in the way it is run.

I think it's also ironic that w is going to speak at the funeral of Reagan. Given w's strong opposition to furthering stem-cell research I would say that it's next to a slap in the face to have him speak.

Dude, do some research on a state funerals before you speak and make yourself look ill-informed.

We know why Clinton may be upset. He's missing out on an opportunity to have his mug in front of the camera. The protocol of a state funeral still dictates that the family decides who is invited and who speaks and the details of the ceremony. Sheesh! This is not a political event for any party to get visibilty.

 

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by ThreeCircles
Ah... This explains so much.

So, the answer to my question is....what? Never? Always? Sometimes? You're the one that questioned the source. I was wanting to know what you were basing your opinion on.

Wait! I'm sorry! I guess this was another "personal attack", huh?

 

[Galahad]

I think it's also ironic that w is going to speak at the funeral of Reagan. Given w's strong opposition to furthering stem-cell research I would say that it's next to a slap in the face to have him speak.

No amount of stem cell research at the level of knowledge we had in the early 90's would have spared President Reagan anything.

 

[Briar Rose 7457]

true, but Nancy Reagan is very much in favor of stem cell research so that no one lese has to go through what they did.

 

[Galahad]

Originally posted by Briar Rose 7457
true, but Nancy Reagan is very much in favor of stem cell research so that no one lese has to go through what they did.

Fine, but how does that make it offensive for President Bush to speak? Talk about politicizing a funeral.....

 

[Keli]

For Heaven's Sake!!! It's a funeral!!! The family decides who will be there, who will speak, exactly how the service will go. It's not about politics, no matter who wants to make it so.

A very good man has passed away and I for one am mourning his loss. I can't get past that fact and all the political issues surrounding his funeral are just too petty for words.

 

[Briar Rose 7457]

frankly, I think the issue will be more prominent if Nancy speaks at the convention -- and that could be trouble.

 

[Galahad]

Originally posted by Briar Rose 7457
frankly, I think the issue will be more prominent if Nancy speaks at the convention -- and that could be trouble.

I doubt it will be trouble. President Bush has moderated his position on a number of issues for his political opposition. I wouldn't be at all surprised if he moderated for a political ally.

 

[ThreeCircles]

Originally posted by Galahad
No amount of stem cell research at the level of knowledge we had in the early 90's would have spared President Reagan anything.

Last time I checked we were no longer in the 90's. Wait, yes, that's right, it's 2004 today.

We're talking about advancements that will be hampered by the personal beliefs of w. Less federal dollars flowing into that research means less research.

Nancy seems opposed to w's stance. 58 Senators seem to oppose the stance.

The scientific community opposes the stance.

But, oh wait, Galahad of the Dis has shared his omnipotent and ever-flowing knowledge (surpassed only by the knowledge of his fellow Diser, dmadman43, of course!) on all things. Of course limiting federal dollars won't impede research into the disease! Silly us!

 

[Galahad]

Last time I checked we were no longer in the 90's. Wait, yes, that's right, it's 2004 today.

Research and what is done as a result take time. For any stem cell research to have benefited President Reagan, it would have to have been done 10 or 12 years ago....maybe more.

You're right that there is a lot of opposition to the President's position and I think that's why it may very will be changed or overridden.

But, oh wait, Galahad of the Dis has shared his omnipotent and ever-flowing knowledge

What is THAT all about?

 

[peachgirl]

Originally posted by DawnCt1
I don't NEED an excuse to slam Clinton

Tell me something I don't know.

but in keeping with the recent surge of Bush bashing that I have seen here

Aren't you the OP of this thread???? Isn't it a little difficult to complain about bashing when you started it?

I won't copy the rest of the sleazy comments. Is it possible for you to get past President Clinton? He's not President anymore, get over it.

 

[AirForceRocks]

But, if we're talking the STATE event, nope, it should be non-partisan and Nancy should not have the only voice in the way it is run.

The misunderstandings of the news media aside, the STATE part of the funeral will take place in the Capitol rotunda either this evening or tomorrow. There will be speakers from the House and Senate saying a few words. The religious ceremony taking place at the National Cathedral tomorrow is not part of the "State" part of the ceremonies.

And the idea that anyone besides the family should have a say in who speaks at the religious ceremony is ludicrous. I don't see anything partisan about it - the current President, the Vice-President that served under President Reagan and two of his closest foreign allies are speaking at the funeral. Had a Democrat been in the White House right now, I have no doubt that he would have been speaking at the funeral as well, just as President Clinton spoke at President Nixon's funeral 10 years ago.

 

[DawnCt1]

Originally posted by peachgirl
Tell me something I don't know.




Aren't you the OP of this thread???? Isn't it a little difficult to complain about bashing when you started it?

I won't copy the rest of the sleazy comments. Is it possible for you to get past President Clinton? He's not President anymore, get over it.

I believe I posted news and commented on it. Isn't that what a debate is about?
As the saying goes: "Will he please go away so we can miss him".

 

[ThreeCircles]

Originally posted by Galahad
Research and what is done as a result take time. For any stem cell research to have benefited President Reagan, it would have to have been done 10 or 12 years ago....maybe more.

You're right that there is a lot of opposition to the President's position and I think that's why it may very will be changed or overridden.



What is THAT all about?

For one, I don't recall ever stating that anything was going to benefit Reagan. I believe that was you.

I stated that it's ironic that w is going to be speaking at Reagan's funeral given his stance on funding stem cell research. And, just for some additional info, stem cell research iis not only being conducted for advancements in this area but in numerous others as well. Cancer being one of them.

 

[minniepumpernickel]

I haven't kept well informed on this issue. I would think that if Pres. Clinton did speak at the funeral, he would only say good things.

When someone so important dies, isn't that what everyone does?

I personally wander why so many people have gone to see the casket? I kind of feel that sometimes privacy is better for the family. I guess it's hard to keep these things private, though.

 

[peachgirl]

3) People do not die of Alzheimers. They die of other causes while having Alzheimers.

A distinction without a difference.

In many cases, families of those in the later stages of Alzheimer's choose not to treat their loved one for what is a completely curable illness. If it weren't for the fact that the person had Alzheimer's, they would be treated and most likely recover. So, yes, they die because they had Alzheimer's.

A choice, btw, Bush would totally disagree with. To "let" someone die goes against all he believes in regarding right to life.

I believe I posted news

No, you posted trash. Nothing new there.

 

[Galahad]

For one, I don't recall ever stating that anything was going to benefit Reagan. I believe that was you.

Yes it was. I don't see how President Bush's speaking could be a "slap in the face" to the Reagans unless his opposition to publicly funded embryonic stem cell research contributed in some way to President and Mrs. Reagan's suffering.