John Edward's comments over the top.

[DawnCt1]

While listening to Fox News last evening with Brit Hume, a stump speech by John Edwards, eulogizing Chris Reeves effectively said that "if John Kerry is elected president, people like Chris Reeves will walk again". I have been looking for the link but sorry, I can't find one. Charles Krauthhammer described this as incredibly ill informed and cruel. He should know. He is a physician and he is a guadroplegic. One wonders if Edwards thinks he is talking to a jury that he is trying to convince. Perhaps a little reality would be useful.

 

[crazyforgoofy]

Originally posted by DawnCt1
While listening to Fox News last evening with Brit Hume, a stump speech by John Edwards, eulogizing Chris Reeves effectively said that "if John Kerry is elected president, people like Chris Reeves will walk again".

Did he "effectively" say it or did he actually say it? And if he "effectively" said it then why did you put it in quotes? Link please!

 

[Patch'sD]

Heard the same, Edwards did say that. I am now waiting for a new comercial about that Miracle Party the Democrat's

 

[Crankyshank]

link to exact quote, please

 

[DawnCt1]

Originally posted by Crankyshank
link to exact quote, please

It was his speech aired last evening on the Brit Hume's News program. You are welcomed to look for it. I wrote "effectively" because if the quote wasn't exact it was darned close.

 

[JoeThaNo1Stunna]

Halleijuah! Praise be to almighty John Edwards! The next Benny Hinn!

 

[bumcat]

Halleijuah! Praise be to almighty John Edwards! The next Benny Hinn!



________________________________________________

 

[Miss Jasmine]

Yeah I saw it, too, and those were the exact words. I think my mouth hit the floor on that one.

 

[denisenh]

I looked for a link to FOX's article as well. I found this article interesting (from Aug 2004)

Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) yesterday offered the most detailed description yet of how a Kerry administration would support the promising young field of embryonic stem cell research, while 780 miles away first lady Laura Bush defended on ethical grounds her husband's more restrictive research policy.

The dueling comments came on the third anniversary of President Bush's televised address to the nation announcing a funding policy for the controversial research, which relies on human embryos as a source of cells.

The much-debated but still experimental field of study has become an unanticipated wedge issue in this fall's election, one of few such issues available to the candidates as they vie for this year's small slice of undecided voters. Edwards's running mate on the Democratic ticket, Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.), mentioned the topic in most speeches he gave during a whistle-stop train tour across the Midwest and Southwest last week. And he devoted a large chunk of the Democrats' weekly radio address Saturday to it, saying that science should not be sacrificed for ideology.

"We're going to lift the ban on stem cell research," Kerry said. "We're going to listen to our scientists and stand up for science. We're going to say yes to knowledge, yes to discovery and yes to a new era of hope for all Americans."

In Langhorne, Pa., Laura Bush suggested that research supporters had exaggerated the cells' potential while underrating the moral implications of the work.

"I hope that stem cell research will yield cures," she told the Pennsylvania Medical Society. But "we don't even know that stem cell research will provide cures for anything -- much less that it's very close" to providing such cures, she added.

In a conference call with reporters from Chicago yesterday, Edwards called Aug. 9 "a sad anniversary." It was on that date in 2001 that Bush announced his "ban" on federal funding for the research, the Democratic vice presidential nominee said.

In fact, Bush agreed on that date to allow, for the first time, the use of federal funds for studies of human embryonic stem cells, which reside inside five-day-old embryos and have the biological potential to turn into every kind of replacement tissue a body could need. But he limited support to research on colonies from embryos already destroyed by that date.

That compromise ensured that federal money would not be used to destroy human embryos -- a limit demanded by the social and religious conservatives who comprise Bush's base of support. But in doing so, the policy also kept scientists from using federal grants to study any of the newer and in many cases more promising colonies of embryonic stem cells that have been cultivated in recent years.

The system of "strict ethical regulations" described by Edwards closely resembles the framework that the Clinton administration devised in its final two years but never put into effect.

Scientists would be able to use federal funds to isolate and study stem cells from fertility clinic embryos no longer wanted by parents -- embryos, Edwards said, "that would otherwise be discarded or frozen indefinitely." Consent would be required of the parents. And proposed experiments would have to pass muster with an ethics committee at the academic or research institution where the work would be done.

Edwards also reiterated the Democratic ticket's support for "therapeutic" cloning, which involves the creation of cloned human embryos as a source of stem cells. He rejected the notion that embryo cloning was synonymous with human cloning, which he said he and Kerry oppose. Edwards promised an increase in funding for embryonic stem cell research to at least four times the $25 million spent by the federal government in fiscal 2003.

"To not do all we can for our loved ones would be a tragedy," Edwards said. "Our loved ones are waiting, and we're losing time."

At least 128 new self-replenishing colonies of human embryonic stem cells have been created since Aug. 9, 2001, according to Harvard Medical School stem cell researcher George Q. Daley. Among them are 17 colonies grown at Harvard with private funds -- colonies that are said to be more easily maintained than the Bush-approved cells; nearly 50 new colonies grown in Chicago, including 10 bearing the genetic signatures of diseases that scientists want to study; and several new colonies created in Singapore that, in contrast to all 21 Bush-approved colonies, have never been contaminated with mouse tumor cells. They help keep the cells alive but might transmit viruses that could make a patient sicker.

Fitzgerald reported from Chicago.



© 2004 The Washington Post Company
Correction to This Article
Clarification: Although the Bush administration has said that as many as 78 stem cell lines were eligible for federal research funding, far fewer of them were subsequently determined to be actually available for such research. Some of the unavailable stem cell lines were deemed not sufficiently healthy, or research on them was restricted by their creators. Currently, according to the National Institutes of Health, 21 stem cell colonies are both eligible for federal funding and available for research, although all have been contaminated with mouse tumor cells.
Edwards, First Lady at Odds on Stem Cells
Democrat Backs Lifting Research Restrictions
By Rick Weiss and Mary Fitzgerald
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, August 10, 2004; Page A11

 

[julia & nicks mom]

here is a link:

http://www.illinoisleader.com/letters/lettersview.asp?c=20197

Yesterday John Edwards said, "When John Kerry is the president people like Christopher Reeve are going to walk again!" implying that Christopher Reeve could have been helped by embryonic stem cell research.

 

[denisenh]

That "Article" looks more like an editorial.
Here it is:

Reeve passing doesn't change facts on stem cell debate

Tuesday, October 12, 2004

Yesterday John Edwards said, "When John Kerry is the president people like Christopher Reeve are going to walk again!" implying that Christopher Reeve could have been helped by embryonic stem cell research.


Embryonic stem cell research has not helped one single person or contributed to the relief of any ailment; to imply such a thing misses the point of how a civilized culture should respond to a human person who appears permanently crippled.


All who have seen Christopher Reeve battle his injuries could see he was an invaluable man filled with hope for his own future. When he would hear of someone like him that suffers from a similar malady, he would call them and cultivate hope for an enjoyable life despite being so limited.


To sacrifice a human embryo for the sake of some medicinal profit is to insult us all, especially Christopher Reeve, who, like a human embryo, has limitations on their existence. Both are unique and irreplaceable and should never be purposefully destroyed for the profit of others.


Joseph Kocan
Warrenville

 

[Miss Jasmine]

Yes that was an editorial, but I watched the Brit Hume thing last night and that is what Edwards said. I have found it one other place, but I know you libs won't accept the Drudge Report.

 

[Galahad]

I just heard the entire section of his speech played on ABC radio news. It is precisely what he said....not a distortion or taking "out of context".

 

[DisneyMomx7]

What about all those frozen embryos that are going to be destroyed anyway? If you are against stem cell research using those embryos shouldn't you also be against invitro fertilization since ultimately so many embryos are destroyed?

If we aren't able to do the research how will we ever know if they could have helped fight the many diseases that we face?

 

[LoraJ]

This is no more over the top than Bush promising a safer world.

 

[CEDmom]

How do you know that stem cell research won't lead to a cure for paralysis and various degenerative diseases? He didn't say while John Kerry is president people like Christopher Reeves will walk, he said if he's elected (at some point in the future) people like him will walk again. Christopher Reeves was a big supporter of stem cell research and believed himself that it would result in his walking again. Medical research can take years before a breakthough. Just because there's no indication that a cure is eminent doesn't mean it won't happen. Let me go find a few remarks made by Chaney that I find inappropriate (won't be too hard) and start a thread about them.

 

[Galahad]

Originally posted by LoraJ
This is no more over the top than Bush promising a safer world.

Sure it is. The equivalent would be if Bush said "If I am re-elected, there will be no more terrorists attacks". Something he, nor anybody else is claiming. Using the death of this fine man as an election gimmick is a bit low. But Counselor Edwards has made a career out of making outrageous medical claims (so to speak) so this shouldn't be too surprising.

 

[julia & nicks mom]

Does it really matter that it is an editorial - it is still quoted by a journalist in an article - I would assume since the whole Dan Rather scandal that making stuff up isn't so PC! And there are several posters here who verifying hearing the comments.

So - I would say for debate purposes it is a true quote -

How do you all feel about this?

 

[suzannen]

Sorry, I don't see it as over the top. Christopher Reeves and a lot like him, have felt real promise and hope in stem cell research. But, if the opportunity is not allowed to be pursued as fully as it should be, then we'll never know. But, meanwhile, no one here can say 100% that it wouldn't or couldn't happen.

 

[denisenh]

Originally posted by Galahad
Sure it is. The equivalent would be if Bush said "If I am re-elected, there will be no more terrorists attacks". Something he, nor anybody else is claiming. Using the death of this fine man as an election gimmick is a bit low. But Counselor Edwards has made a career out of making outrageous medical claims (so to speak) so this shouldn't be too surprising.

Does it still count if Cheney says it? He is an anybody.

“It’s absolutely essential that eight weeks from today, on Nov. 2, we make the right choice, because if we make the wrong choice then the danger is that we’ll get hit again and we’ll be hit in a way that will be devastating from the standpoint of the United States,” Cheney told supporters at a town-hall meeting Tuesday.