That's pretty bad when it can be said that Bush comes across as a better speaker than someone else. What kind of stupid nonsense has to come out of someone's mouth when it can be said that Bush has a better way with words.
From Nancy Pelosi, who should know better, for heaven's sakes:
“Science
is a gift of God to all of us and science has taken us to a place that
is biblical in its power to cure,” said Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Democrat
of California, arguing for the bill’s passage. “And that is the
embryonic stem cell research.”
One: This is a gratuitous
insult to all thinking persons. Science is a process of inquiry that
has enabled us to understand something about the nature of physical
reality in a detailed fashion. It has taken centuries of hard,
meticulous, and often backbreaking work to acquire this knowledge; the
history of science is filled with failure, frustration, and
fragmentary, provisional understandings. The relatively rare
breakthroughs - Newton's laws, Darwin's natural selection, Einstein's
theory of relativity - are achieved only through enormous effort, not
miracles. This is no gift from God but a quintessentially human
endeavor.
Secondly, the kind of pandering, meaningless bullshit Pelosi mouthed will convince no one.
...
Pelosi's breathtakingly stupid comment merely indicates how far
behind, still, Democrats are in developing a modern political rhetoric
for their values and ideas. Here, for example, is a sentence from
Bush's statement opposing the stem cell bill:
Recent scientific developments have reinforced my conviction that stem cell science can progress in ethical ways.
The
following discussion is not about the quality of the actual ideas, but
their presentation; of course, any 1/4 way normal person - even Nancy
Reagan - supports stem cell research. Nevertheless, Bush's statement is
quite sophisticated.*
Note the implicit, casual,
natural-sounding assumption of the moral high ground, neatly embedded
in the second half of the sentence. Note the assumption, further, that
stem cell research inherently contains an ethical dimension. It is
taken as axiomatic that this research has a moral component rather than
being morally neutral like, say, the development of a more efficient
tcp/ip would be.** And note the further assumption of a duality -
either morally pursued or immorally pursued with no middle ground...(link Hullabaloo)
Recent Comments