It's full steam ahead on embryonic stem cell trials in humans!

Despite the fact that the use of embryonic stem cells in animals has raised health concerns for the recipients of the treatment . . .

Despite the fact that the use of adult stem cells in humans is already treating human disease without those health concerns . . .

Despite the fact that harvesting embryonic stem cells requires the death and destruction of a live, growing, human fetus . . .

And despite the fact that scientists are concerned the company proposing the trial hasn't done the requisite animal testing . . .

Barack Obama's Food and Drug Administration has approved an application for a clinical trial injecting cells derived from aborted children into other human beings.  (Link to story here .)

Why the rush?

Abortion advocates, like Obama and most (if not all) Democrats, are on the wrong side of the moral debate.  And they know it.

They're desperately seeking to plant the "necessity" of killing babies to cure disease into the American psyche.  They're rushing embryonic stem cell research because they can't afford to have ethically-derived, adult stem cells curing all the diseases reserved as "moral" justification for aborting children.

This is making me sick.

Won't - Can't - Then who will?

The government of the United States won't guard our national borders, enforce our immigration laws, and protect America from the scourge of illegal immigration.

State governments, at least according to a federal judge in Arizona , can't do the job.

That leaves me wondering . . . who will?

Or, sadly, is the cause lost?  And the country with it?

Not a happy Sunday for Robin Carnahan

Why not?

The top of the page, very bold headline in the very Pro-Carnahan St. Louis Post-Dispatch read:  "POLL SHOWS BLUNT IN LEAD."  (Link to story here - if the website is actually working.)

Now, of course, those of us paying attention have been reading that writing on the wall for some time now but it is great to see the liberal local newspaper confirming that Roy Blunt is up six points in the race for the United States Senate.

The Post is also reporting that in the same poll 57% of Missourians disapprove of Barack Obama's performance as president.  That bodes well for Blunt (and Missouri).  Only 37% approve of Obama's job performance.

Here's a not-so-subtle message to the 9% of Missouri voters who disapprove of Barack Obama's job performance but, apparently, aren't lined up behind Roy Blunt quite yet . . . Robin Carnahan would be vote in the back pocket of Barack Obama for remaining length of his presidency.

It is time to lend your support.  Put on that Blunt bumper sticker.  Donate if you can.   Tell all your friends and get out to vote.  The GOP needs the seat.  And Missouri needs Roy Blunt.

Bart Stupak must be proud . . . U.S. Government to fund killing of Pennsylvania children

It has now been reported (link here ) that the Obama administration, despite empty promises and even a sham of an Executive Order to the contrary, has decided to use American taxpayers' money - yours, mine, and even Bart Stupak's, to fund abortion in Pennsylvania.

The liar-in-chief, a.k.a. Barack Obama, had promised that under Obamacare, "no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions."

So much for Obama promises.  Would you like your Obamacare vote back Bart?

Eric Holder tells the truth about Immigration

            From the front page of today’s St. Louis Post-Dispatch under the headline “U.S. battles Arizona law in suit over immigration” . . . “The Justice Department, contending that immigration is a federal responsibility, sued Arizona on Tuesday and asked a federal court to halt the state’s new law aimed at illegal immigrants.

            “Attorney General Eric Holder said the lawsuit was prepared after extensive consultation with law enforcement officials and civil rights groups that oppose the state law.

            “’Setting immigration policy and enforcing immigration laws is a national responsibility,’ Holder said.”

            This story sent me over the edge and dragged me out of my self-imposed hiatus.  Two important points need to be made:

First, the Obama administration prepared this lawsuit “after extensive consultation” with people and groups “that oppose the state law.”  Maybe they should be consulting some of the folks in Arizona dealing with the reality of failed immigration enforcement.  Maybe they should be consulting with some people who support the law before deciding to attack it.  Maybe there is a way for Washington and Phoenix to work together.  In a rational world, there would be.

Second, the lawsuit is based on the reality that the federal government is supposed to be protecting America’s borders.  Attorney General Holder’s words, “setting immigration policy and enforcing immigration laws is a national responsibility,” could not be more true.  Unfortunately, they miss the point of the Arizona law entirely . . .

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS NOT MEETING ITS “RESPONSIBILITY.”  Until it does, someone must, and Arizona is trying.  Whether their approach is perfect or not is a matter for another day. 

If the federal government wants the states to stay out of immigration enforcement, the federal government should enforce our immigration laws and protect America’s borders.