If, during the press conference last night, you heard President Obama address the stem cell question, and you are a sane person, you heard this:
QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. President.
In your remarks on stem-cell research earlier this month, you talked about a majority consensus in determining whether or not this is the right thing to do, to federally fund embryonic stem-cell research. I’m just wondering, though, how much you personally wrestled with the morality or ethics of federally funding this kind of research, especially given the fact that science so far has shown a lot of progress with adult stem cells but not a lot with embryonic?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Okay. No, I — I think it’s a — I think it’s a legitimate question.
I — I wrestle with these issues every day. As I mentioned to — I think in an interview a couple of days ago, by the time an issue reaches my desk, it’s a hard issue. If it was an easy issue, somebody else would have solved it and it wouldn’t have reached me.
Look, I believe that it is very important for us to have strong moral guidelines, ethical guidelines, when it comes to stem-cell research or anything that touches on, you know, the issues of possible cloning or issues related to, you know, the human life sciences.
I think those issues are all critical, and I’ve said so before. I wrestle with it on stem cell; I wrestle with it on issues like abortion.
I think that the guidelines that we provided meet that ethical test. What we have said is that for embryos that are typically about to be discarded, for us to be able to use those in order to find cures for Parkinson’s or for Alzheimer’s or for, you know, all sorts of other debilitating diseases, juvenile diabetes, that — that it is the right thing to do. And that’s not just my opinion. That is the opinion of a number of people who are also against abortion.
Now, I am glad to see progress is being made in adult stem cells. And if the science determines that we can completely avoid a set of ethical questions or political disputes, then that’s great. I have — I have no investment in causing controversy. I’m happy to avoid it if that’s where the science leads us.
But what I don’t want to do is predetermine this based on a very rigid ideological approach. And that’s what I think is reflected in the executive order that I signed.
If you are an insane crazy person, or Andy McCarthy (sorry to be redundant), and the election of not only a Democrat, but a socialist muslim black man who most likely isn’t even American (has Andy seen the birth certificate yet? Why not? What are you hiding, President Obama!) has you increasingly unhinged, you heard something completely different, and it involved infanticide, ACORN, and thuggish attempts to… call a radio station:
Obama does this a lot — instinctively, and in response to questions or comments directed to him that contain any hint of criticism. He has been so immune from media scrutiny, and his supporters have been so thuggish in shouting down critics (recall, for example, the efforts to stop Stanley Kurtz’s appearance on Milt Rosenberg’s radio show in Chicago), that a disturbing presumption has taken hold — at least in Obama’s own mind. Namely, questions that imply even mild dissent from or disfavor of Obama are not legitimate unless he personally decides they are within the ambit of proper inquiry. The questioner has to get over the legitimacy hurdle before he or she gets an answer — so better be careful about your topic and your tone.
This is of a piece with his ACORN days, when the community-organizer was not above resort to what those extortionists glibly call “direct action.” Obama can appear civil, gracious and, as he insists, “pragmatic,” but the prospect of intimidation is always in the air. This is not a pretty picture after only two months, and it doesn’t get better from here.
These people have really lost touch with reality.