The Good in President Bush, I would like to know... Options

[Alpha240]

I've read many debates regarding George Bush and John Kerry. Unlike Bush, Kerry never had a chance to prove himself as a president and show the American people how he could help this country and its people. George Bush had almost 4 years now to make a difference, and in my opinion any difference he made was make our country worse than it was before. I just don't understand why people like Bush. I really don't. I've heard unrational reasons, such as "He is a Christian" and "He is a strong leader", but I have not heard any REAL reasons on why Bush is a good person/president. So pleeease... someone tell me why so many people out there like Bush.

I would like non war related reasons, because i am against the war and therefore I will disagree with almost any reason given regarding the war.
For example: if you say you like Bush because he caught Saddam Hussein, my reply would be that he had no probable cause to go after Hussein. Even if he saw him as a threat, Bush had no proof or real intelligence to have reasons to bomb Suddam's country and capture him. I also don't believe in pre-emptive attacks. I think they are extremely hypocritical and destructive.

So if anyone has any input on how Bush improved our economy, environment, societal problems, scientific and technological advances, or anything along those lines please let me know.

[Alpha240]

Harvesting stem cells DO destroy the embryo, and the ones that come from fertility labs supply most of the cells. Believe it or not, A LOT of people freeze their embryos for whatever reason, such as their husbands going to war, or them wanting to wait on having a baby... These cells are more than enough to research on right now. Other cells are taken from the body, like I said the bone marrow has stem cells but these cells will only produce blood cells and more bone marrow cells.

Basically, people who are pro-life generally want to stop stem cell research since it destroys an embryo. Therefore, they support Bush's decision.

Pro-choice people tend to advocate stem cell research, and are against what Bush is doing. I guess they don't seem to think it's taking away a life since the embryo is just a few cells.

Bush is in the "wrong" because he is only allowing research on 60 stem cell lines, and THAT'S IT. Once those are used up, there would be no more research on embryonic stem cells. He also cut funding for embryonic stem cell research, but increased funding for research of stem cells taken from an adult, umbilical cords, placenta, and animals. Atleast he increased funding for that, but it's the embryonic stem cells that are most promising to finding breakthrough therapies and cures to many disease.

Reproductive cloning is basically removing the genetic information from an embryo, and inserting new DNA from another individual into that embryo. Therefore, making a new being that is genetically identical to the DNA donor. I am against this because it seems to be playing God.

Therapeutic cloning is basically doing the same thing with the embryo, however you don't let it grow into a human being. Instead, you will use the stem cells that develop from the embryo to make tissues, organs, or other parts that will be identical to the DNA donor. So let's say someone needs a heart transplant. We all know that organs are always in short supply, so if the person gets therapeutic cloning done, they will not only get their heart but it will be a genetic match and therefore their body will be much less likely to reject the new heart.


hmmm, so we got way off topic.. o well