Technical difficulties? Yes, technically, it is difficult when one's views are out of line with the vast majority of voters.

Classic.

How about Kudos to a leader who states his own opinions, and doesn't sway in the wind to every poll that's taken? If you disagree with him and are a one-issue voter, vote against him. I'd rather have a man of principle who state's his opinions and sticks to them, then someone who changes every time he hears a new opinion poll.

Embryonic stems cells don't cure anything, adult stem cells do.

Hello? Hello? Anybody there?

I'm glad he finally took a clear stance on something. I swear the man is a mess of ambiguity laced with conservatism. I have a feeling that in Maryland that view will go over like a lead balloon.

I think we should start growing babies and harvesting their organs for spare parts.

It is nice that he stated his position. I hope that he continues. As I see it, he looks like a normal Republican on all issues so far.

Wow. For a guy who insists at every other turn that he's an independent kind of republican, it's interesting he links himself so closely with the president on this issue. But of course, that independent talk is just talk, he's lock-step with Bush and the rest of the borrow-and-spend republican leadership that for more than half a decade have taken this country down the wrong path.

Stem cell research might not drive many people to the polls on its own, but it's just another knock against him. It's rare these days to get 75% of the people to agree on any issue, but on this one that's the case, and Michael Steele will feel it at the polls in November.

Thank you "DR Rufus" for your undoubtedly qualified medical opinion.
Steele has accepted the standard Republican ignorance, lies and hypocrisy on this issue ....along with their cash.
That should make it VERY clear to Maryland voters in whose pocket this lightweight is.

Another Bush clone. Hopefully the folks in Maryland will be smart enough to reject this smooth talker.

he has a problem w/ stem cell research because it destroys the embryo ..... and throwing away unused embryos doesn't?

What a joke. A candidate for the UNITED STATES SENATE intentionally dodging this question like this is some kind of game. Embryonic stem cell research is something the overwhelming majority of Marylanders support, and we need to know where this Republican candidate stands on the issue. Now we know, well sort of. He opposes embryonic stem cell research. If he's elected he'll join the ultra-conservative wing of the Republican caucus in the Senate, rather than the moderate "bridge-building" wing he claims he would be a part of.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: This guy is absolutely pitiful.

Ok DR jmsbh, cite a single treatment that uses embryonic stem cells.

Hello, hello? Anyone there? Anybody? Bueller?

I think it's funny that the rabid lefties on this board just assume that Steele's non-answer of the question the first time around clearly MUST be due to him ducking the question (yet he answered it eventually), as opposed to a technical glitch. There's absolutely no doubt in their mind.

I wonder if the moveon.org/dailykos types give equal-opportunity to Hillary's discovery of law firm records, illegal gathering of FBI records, and other flubs on the Dem side. No, those were just honest mistakes, technical glitches, etc.

i'll give you a use for embryonic stem cell - parkensons disease.

Rufus's comment was correct. Adult stem cell research and therapy has already resulted in numerous, real-life treatments for patients. People with spinal cord injuries have walked because of them; people with Parkinsons Disease have had their symptoms relieved; heart patients have been given a new lease on life. And the list goes on, and on... Embryonic stem cell research has treated or cured no one. No one. And yet people continue to insist that embryonic stem cell research shows more promise than adult. You can keep saying that, but the results will continue to prove you wrong.

it's interesting that jd's accusation about the "lefties" on this board assuming the worst when it could have been an innocent technical glitch. jd, would you have asssumed the same thing if it had been hillary clinton being asked the question? rememer this is a guy who has not really talked in specifics so when a specific question gets asked & there is no answer what would you have thought?

Embryonic stem cell research hasn't cured anything yet, but that is why we are advocating funding RESEARCH into it. Why? Why do we say that embryonic is more promising than adult? Because doctors and scientists say so. Oh yeah, the experts.

Now if we want blowhard talking head rhetoric, we can come to any of us on this board. But when we have a question about scientific discovery, we go to the scientists, not Joe Shmoe from the message board.

Now, we all appreciate life, but we all understand that there are all these embryos that will never (not could never but WILL NEVER) be born and will be discarded inevitably. As conservatives are quick to quote "the Constitution isn't a suicide pact" and neither is my faith. God gave us these abilities to probe how His world works to exercise our dominion and care for it. And He gave us the heart to faithfully try to help people with these abilities with the least destruction as possible. And soon to be destroyed embryos is probably as little as you possibly go.

Quark:

#1) I like your bar on Star Trek, and at the LV Hilton
#2) I like to think I give her the benefit of the doubt on some things, e.g. she didn't put one in Vince Foster's ear at Ft marcy, etc.

RCD:

Here's the issue; at what point do you assume that these are people being grown for spare parts? (See my joke earlier in the comments, which nobody took me up on) Do we really want to have an incentive for this? Even if you don't believe that life begins at conception (and if so, then when does it?), then you must admit that a good portion of America does believe that. And since they believe that (and harvesting the stem cells from the embryos would be killing them), can we justify Federal Gov spending into this field? After all, there's no law against doing this research, and any private organization (or State, see Calif) could jump into the void.... Why does the Federal Gov need to fund something so controversial?

JD, you obviously have not been keeping on top of this issue. In addition to the bill vetoed by Bush, two other bills on this issue were passed through. One of which prohibits "fetal farms" or creating embryos specifically for experimentation. So your first point is moot. Secondly, despite what you claim a good portion of Americans think life begins at conception 75% of Americans are in favor of stem-cell research. Ask someone who is suffering from a spinal injury or has to face dying with horrible indignity why this research is important.

Is stem cell research really something on which voters will base their votes? Sure, it's important, but so are education, crime, traffic congestion, taxes, and so forth. Forget this distraction and choose the candidate that is going to do the most to solve the problems that we encounter every day, instead of basing decisions on something that will most likely have no effect on your life for many years, if ever.

What I love is all these moralists (e.g., Dubya, Steele, etc.) who believe the destruction of stem cells is murder, yet their response to "murder" is to cut off federal money.

Ooooh, way to take a hard stand there for innocent life guys. This fraud argument against stem cell research is nothing more than political expediency at its finest. If its murder, then by God get out there and start passing some laws with teeth. Otherwise, put a sock in it and talk about this veto for what it is...a wishy washy stand intended to keep the rabid pro-lifers mollified while not completely turning off the 75% of Americans who want this research to move forward.

I've concluded that Steele is gambling that his position will help generate more donations from out-of-state ring-wing individuals and organizations that are currently funding his campaign. He mistakenly believes that a large war chest will help him overcome taking hugely unpopular positons in Maryland. Steele's position on federal funding for stem cell research will hurt his chances in wooing moderate Maryland voters this fall. He will find it extremely difficult to claim to be a moderate Republican or someone who legislates from the center when he has taken a far-right position on stem cells.

I've got a question. Just what are the positions of Cardin and Mfume...on anything? They won't be able to tie their shoelaces without comparing notes with Mikulski. At least Steele will use his own judgement rather than soliciting approvals from the office next door.

If embryonic stem cell research held a fraction of the promise that certain folks THINK it has, the private funding for the research would be pouring in. The reason that it isn't is because the facts say that this won't work.

This is why they push for public funding, the private sector isn't stupid enough to throw money down this rat hole so the taxpayer gets the bill.

Rufus is correct on adult stem cell versus embryonic stem cell research. Most scientists involved in the actual day to day research have found the embryonic stem cells far too unstable to work with. Google the controversy and you will see that the confusion is intended to cloud this salient point.