Throughout its brief history, this blog has supported and promoted many entrenched GOP positions, from tax cuts to the war in Iraq to intelligent design theory. But while TheSolidSurfer.com certainly leans Republican, I do disagree with the party's official line (and President Bush's actions) on a number of key issues. Here are some, along with the reasoning behind my stances:
Immigration
President Bush has strongly favored an open immigration policy, offering numerous benefits (including guest-worker status) to illegals and leaving porous borders between the U.S. and both Canada and Mexico. I believe this is a large mistake. Of course, America has been built on immigration (and, in fact, I'm married to an immigrant), and by no means do I propose ending it. Immigration provides new Americans with countless opportunities not present in their birth countries, while giving this nation a fresh supply of skilled workers. But at the same time, we do have finite resources and cannot realistically accept all would-be immigrants without straining ourselves beyond capacity. Therefore, we should more effectively police our borders and ensure that if people wish to immigrate, they do it legally instead of sneaking over the fence (unless, say, it's an emergency refugee situation).
The situation is also all the more urgent, now that we've caught known Al-Qaida members trying to infiltrate America from Mexico. Even beyond immigration issues, we must keep terrorists out of this country. And building a better, well-policed border fence is the way to do it.
Stem Cells
President Bush and leading Republicans have ruled against using embryonic stem cells in medical research, citing a violation against their pro-life principles. Here too, I disagree. Abortion is one thing, but embryonic stem cells come not from fetuses, but from rejected fertility treatment embryos. During such treatments, numerous embryos are created with the hope that one will become a viable fetus able to be implanted in the woman's uterus. When this occurs, the rest are discarded. These embryos are never implanted and never given the chance to develop into an actual person. If you're going to throw them out anyway, you certainly might as well use them to help cure some of humanity's worst diseases.
Israel-Palestinian Conflict
I certainly agree with much of President Bush's and the GOPs actions regarding this situation, particularly their strong support for Israel. But that said, I vehemently disagree with their continuing to reward the Palestinians for doing absolutely nothing to combat terror, extremism, and bad government. Israel has done all it can to try and make peace, and now the ball is completely in the Palestinians' court. And yet the U.S. continues to hold Israel almost entirely responsible for achieving calm in the region. This line of thinking is dangerously wrong, and Bush's policies here will fail just as Clinton's and every other former president's did, unless he acknowledges the Palestinian leadership (and the surrounding Arab countries) as the real cause of the problems and acts accordingly.
Big Government
Traditionally the Democrats have been the party of big government while Republicans preferred a leaner federal structure. But in recent years, Republicans have greatly expanded numerous governmental programs from Medicare to Farm Acts. Even excluding defense and homeland security budgets (which are vital and must remain), President Bush has become the largest spending president in thirty years. Big government is getting out of control and we must find ways to better manage and reduce it.
Surfer, you said it just about exactly the way I feel. Bush has certainly been wishy-washy on the illegal alien problem and kissing Fox's ass. I have lost a lot of faith in Bush over this immigration thing.
Now today, he's in Arizona finally to talk about getting tough on illegals, but I'd almost bet you a weeks' pay it's all gonna be hot air! The reason he's doing this is to placate the pissed off Republicans that are against his plan for an amnesty and that's what it is, an amnesty. When you reward illegal immigrants, it's an amnesty. A spade is a spade.
Bush has been twiddling his thumbs for 5 years and now he finally decides to act?? Bet me!!! I don't trust him as far as I could throw him!
We have like 10 or 12 million illegals in this country and they are driving the wages down so low that our own workers can't compete with them.
California hospitals are going bankrupt because of having to treat illegals free.
Posted by: Tazzmax | November 28, 2005 at 11:47 AM
Surfer, you said it just about exactly the way I feel. Bush has certainly been wishy-washy on the illegal alien problem and kissing Fox's ass. I have lost a lot of faith in Bush over this immigration thing.
Now today, he's in Arizona finally to talk about getting tough on illegals, but I'd almost bet you a weeks' pay it's all gonna be hot air! The reason he's doing this is to placate the pissed off Republicans that are against his plan for an amnesty and that's what it is, an amnesty. When you reward illegal immigrants, it's an amnesty. A spade is a spade.
Bush has been twiddling his thumbs for 5 years and now he finally decides to act?? Bet me!!! I don't trust him as far as I could throw him!
We have like 10 or 12 million illegals in this country and they are driving the wages down so low that our own workers can't compete with them.
California hospitals are going bankrupt because of having to treat illegals free.
Posted by: Tazzmax | November 28, 2005 at 11:49 AM
I agree with you Surfer, but I have reservations about embryonic stem cells. Not saying I think what you said is wrong, but I also know that when one opens the door for embryonic research they kick up the stakes a notch. I need hard evidence that this testing is well founded and can't be done just as effectively with non-embryonic stem cells.
Consider me skeptical, but not closed off to the possibilities.
Posted by: Madzionist | November 28, 2005 at 09:38 PM
MZ, that's a very valid point. If people aren't careful, ethics could be gradually thrown out the door here, which would be a terrible thing. I agree - if the medical research in question could be done equally as well with non-embryonic stem cells, then we'd have a win-win situation for everyone. Thing is, I'm not sure if that's the case; would have to do some research to find out.
Posted by: Solid Surfer | November 29, 2005 at 03:14 PM
First off Solidsurfer I agree with everything except the stem cell issue. Thank you for putting it all up.
I would like to address the FACT that there are a number of medical treatments being currently applied that have come from research into Adult Stem cells. The continuing research into embryonic stem cells MAY pay off some day but Adult Stem Cell Research is paying off NOW and will have a lot more payoff from treatments currently being tested and researched. More most likely will follow.
What can be done with embryonic stem cells that can't be done wilth Adult isn't clear to me. (maybe someone could help me here?)
My understanding is that the researchers have NO IDEA yet how to control the initial differentiation and mostly end up with uncontrolled growths that do more harm than good. (can one say trial-and-error in the dark with mittens on?) Just learning this mechanism might be a MAJOR break through in understanding how organisms work and allow us to have full control of the growth, but, it appears to be far in the future without a break-thru.
I have also heard of an alternate method of obtaining embryonic stem cells from the umbilical cord. Anyone have any information on that?? This would be a way around the objections of myself and many others who believe that Life starts at conception. That is, the sperm and ovum combine creating the DNA for the child. As the DNA is THE blueprint and is complete at this point, except for growth of the organism, what differentiates this from an adult??
Yes, I believe we should NOT use embryonic stem cells in spite of the promise if it is necessary to destroy embryos to acquire them.
The practice of saying that the baby cannot survive outside the womb and therefore it is OK to kill it simply is hypocritical. How many people are dependant on technology for life? Should they be involuntarily terminated for this dependency?
Solidsurfer, thank you for the forum.
Posted by: kuhnkat | December 08, 2005 at 02:11 PM
Kuhnkat,
Glad you've enjoyed the site; I really enjoy reading your comments as well.
Regarding stem cells, I'm not exactly sure what embryonic cells can do that adult stem cells can't, but I think there are some key differences.
Posted by: Solid Surfer | December 08, 2005 at 07:43 PM
Solid,
I am not real clear on it but I believe it is tied into the differentiation issue mentioned above. If we could master how to instruct the embryonic stem cells what to become that would be pretty powerful. At this point in our knowledge we don't even know if there are fundamental differences in adult and embryonic stem cells that would make learning this impossible with the adult.
Supposedly adult stem cells can only become one thing which also gives them their stability. I believe that is currently under review though.
I just flash on Commie and Nazi doctors experimenting on people every time I think about killing or manipulating embryos in destructive fashion. Yes those doctors contributed unique and important data to us. It also contributed to the de-humanisation of both the victim and the researcher.
See ya later.
Posted by: kuhnkat | December 10, 2005 at 04:35 PM