View Full Version : Bush Sucks

07-20-2006, 02:25 AM
Ok... so it's not relevant to anything on this site... but it IS news.

Bush uses veto on stem cell bill

US President George W Bush has vetoed a controversial bill which would have lifted a ban on federal funding for new embryonic stem cell research.

It was the first time in his presidency that Mr Bush refused to sign into law a bill approved by Congress.

"It crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect, so I vetoed it," he said on Wednesday.

Polls suggest most Americans back the research, which scientists hope will lead to cures for serious illnesses.

Supporters of the research say the technique offers hope for people suffering degenerative diseases such as Alzheimer's and Parkinson's, and for diabetes.

The House of Representatives later failed to achieve the necessary two-thirds vote needed to overturn Mr Bush's veto.

In waiting until the fifth year of his presidency to veto any legislation, Mr Bush became the first president to complete four years in office without a veto since John Quincy Adams in the 1820s.

This... is bullshit...

07-20-2006, 02:38 AM
He didn't ban research, though. What he did was veto a bill that would have allowed federal funding for more stem cell research. A private company could still do research with stem cells as long as they don't get federal money.

He still sucks, though.

As an aside, what sort of ads do you suppose "Bush Sucks" will get when Goooooogle visits the site next?

07-20-2006, 05:46 PM
That's true, and I know that's what the bill was for. It's just that it's one more way Bush is channeling as much money into his war as he can. Although I'm sure for him it's more about morals than money.

and what kind of ads do you think Bush Sucks will get?

The Captain
07-29-2006, 08:51 PM
I personally can understand this, Bush isnt funding the research, but he's not banning it. I could understand being indignant about this if he banned it, but he's allowing it to happen, just not using the countrys resources to do it. He's already put quite alot of money into the "war" in Iraq and to fund a research as huge as this would need to be would spread our money too thin. As soon as the "war" is over then we can put our money to better causes, but funding two different and both vastly expensive causes at the same time would be rather idiotic.

The Captain
07-29-2006, 09:00 PM
Oh and, google ad's = really acurate!