Obama event full

Unfortunately, the Obama event on Friday has filled up. If anyone wanted to go but couldn't get back to us in time for whatever reason, shoot us an email via www.washudems.org and we'll put you on the priority list for our next big ticket-only event.

Obama tix $25; Robin Carnahan; Stem Cells; Blunt's Low Grade

Tickets to go see Barack Obama in St. Louis on Friday are now $25! We have a very limited number of seats available, so email Aaron Keyak right away if you would like to go.

Our thoughts and prayers go out tonight to Missouri Secretary of State Robin Carnahan, who yesterday announced that she has breast cancer. With any luck, she will win the fight against this disease.

St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay has come out in favor of the pro-stem cell initiative. Slay stated,

The ballot measure is a modest one. Far from breaking any new ground, it simply asks that the state of Missouri not make its statutes regulating stem cell research more stringent than the federal laws on the same subject. Adopting more restrictive laws, argues the bi-partisan coalition, would put the state at an economic disadvantage – and would kill the important life science research of university centers in St. Louis and Kansas City.

Also, the NEA gave Gov. Blunt a "D" on his education policies. Ironically, the reason for the grade was, and I kid you not, Blunt's "65% Plan."

Bill to Ban Republican Adoption

Ohio State Senator Robert Hagen has introduced a bill to ban Republicans from adopting children. The bill states:

"[C]redible research'' shows that adopted children raised in Republican households are more at risk for developing ``emotional problems, social stigmas, inflated egos, and alarming lack of tolerance for others they deem different than themselves and an air of overconfidence to mask their insecurities.''

Maybe he went a little over the top, but the bill still has an interesting message; Nathan Newman at TPMCafe provides some interesting commentary:

Hagan admits that he has no scientific evidence to support the above claims, but then he notes, neither do those who argue gays are a threat as parents.

Hagen's bill is tongue-in-cheek, but more seriously, the reality is that 20,000 children each year go into the foster care system who will never get adopted, 20,000 children desperate for a home but who will reach adulthood with no one EVER adopting them.

With so much need to recruit more adoptive parents, it's a bit crazy (and cruel) that any loving parents, whatever their political party or sexual orientation, would be barred from adopting.

Fair and balanced (TM)

Ummm...I believe the correct answer is no.

Civil war in Iraq?, plus Obama visits St. Louis

Iraq has endured a wave of sectarian violence over the past two days because of the bombing of one of the most sacred sites in Shiite Islam, and I would have to say the outlook is not good for preventing civil war over there (though hopefully there will be none). This just goes to show what happens when you view the world in a Manichaean, black-and-white way, and you avoid all of those pesky details such as whether or not Sunnis or Shias would rip each other and Iraq apart in the event that Iraq's stabilizing institutions fell apart. Remember, this was a war by choice; Saddam may have been a brutal dictator, but he did not have extensive ties to terrorists or Osama bin Laden. It is becoming increasingly clear that the war in Iraq is making the US less safe (by increasing Muslim discontent with the US, by turning Iraq into a training ground for insurgents, and by creating a situation in which Iraq can be ruled by theocrats) and destablizing the region. Many Democrats foolishly went along with this war, but have no doubts that this war is Republican in nature; at the heart of the matter, this is the Bush administration's fault, plain and simple. Critics say, what could be worse than Saddam? My answer is, a civil war that kills millions and makes Muslims hate us even more.

On a more uplifting note, Barack Obama will be visiting St. Louis next Friday to headline a fundraiser for Claire McCaskill's U.S. Senate bid against incumbent (and Republican) Jim Talent. But what's even better is that student tickets are $50. Contact Aaron Keyak for more information if you would like to attend.

Also, please see our website for more information on the protest of Exodus International this weekend in St. Louis.

Talent's troubles, Missouri news, and some random blog links

I hope everyone had a pleasant weekend...I got to see a sizable swath of the state on my travels to and from Springfield, or at least as much of the state as I could see blasting by at 100MPH.

Everyone grab a hanky for Senator Jim Talent since he's been having a rough ride lately. His main fundraiser is apparently tied to Jack Abramoff and his stances on embryonic research might cost him re-election. With any luck we'll be able to bid sayonara to the sucker come November.

Gov. Blunt wins the award for this week's most ironic press release, for his masterpiece "Healthcare for All Missourians." Check it out:

Having access to quality and affordable healthcare is important for all Missourians, and together we must ensure this need is addressed.

Blunt's method of accomplishing this? Massive Medicaid cuts leaving 100,000 Missourians without healthcare. Amazing.

Also, State House Minority Leader Jeff Harris issued a press rlease on Monday proposing that all Missourians be allowed to deduct their college-tuition payments from their state income tax payments. So while Blunt is busy trying to sell MOHELA to Fannie Mae, Dems are working to actually save people money. While it was a little troubling to me that Harris didn't bother to calculate the cost of the program, this first step is encouraging to say the least.

And for some national politics fun, Chris Bowers of MyDD writes about election strategies for November, while Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo ponders the irony of Harry Whittington apologizing to the Vice President for being shot in the face by him, and discusses what this reveals about Cheney's Vice Presidency. Orcinus provides us with a very good but perhaps overlong analysis of Ann Coulter's ethnically insensitive remarks at the Conservative Political Action Committee Conference. As Orcinus writes:

Let's face it, Coulter has been spewing hate -- ethnic and otherwise -- for a
long time under the guise of "political humor." In terms of poisoning the public
discourse, just how much worse is an ethnic slur than calling for us to invade
Muslim nations and forcing them to convert to Christianity? Or, for that matter,
wishing for the bombing of the New York Times Building? Calling liberals
innately "treasonous," and calling for their oppression? Disenfranchising women?
Extolling the benefits of "local fascism"? Fantasizing about shooting the
president?

Indeed. More to come sometime soon. In the meantime check out www.washudems.org for new volunteer and campaign opportunities.

Talent Flip-Flops; GOP Base Split

In the past couple of weeks, Sen. Jim Talent has dropped his support for the Senate bill banning all forms of cloning and embryonic stem cell research. The bill, which we blogged about a few days back, would criminalize embryonic stem cell research and slap ten years' jail time on offending scientists.

Besides dropping his support for the aforementioned bill, Talent is also sponsoring a measure promoting an "alternative" to embryonic stem cell research called altered nuclear transfer. From the Kansas City Star...

Sen. Jim Talent attempted an election-year pirouette Friday on stem-cell research, an issue that has split the Missouri Republican Party.

Talent withdrew his four-year support of federal legislation that would ban human cloning, including what opponents call embryonic therapeutic cloning that most researchers see as key to early stem-cell study. Talent’s pro-life supporters adamantly oppose the technique.

In making his position change, the Missouri Republican sought to satisfy the pro-life camp by promoting a type of stem-cell research that “signals the end of ethical dilemmas in this type of research.”

Alterned nuclear transfer does hold some promise and should be encouraged. But there is no guarantee that it will work and trying to promote it as an alternative to stem cell research could close down more promising avenues of research. The Post-Dispatch quotes Wash U. prof Steven Teitelbaum:

Steven Teitelbaum, a professor of pathology at Washington University, is among [the skeptics]. "Is our goal to complicate the science and delay the possible use of the science? Or should we be moving forward as rapidly and efficaciously as we can?" he asked. "What this involves is a politicization of science."

Teitelbaum is also quoted in the Kansas City Star article, along with William Neaves of the Stowers Institute in Kansas City, another major center for medical research in the state.

No researchers at Kansas City’s Stowers Institute or St. Louis’ Washington University currently do altered nuclear transfer research, said scientists at the state’s two leading bioresearch centers.

“All federally allowed research with stem cells should proceed,” said William Neaves, president of the Stowers Institute. “At this time, it’s not possible to know which type of research would hold the most promise.”

And it doesn’t make sense at this time to tilt the playing field in favor of one type of research, especially for altered nuclear transfer, for which “there is no evidence this will work in people,” said Steven Teitelbaum, a researcher at Washington University who uses stem cells in his research.

Perhaps taken alone, Talent's support for alterned nuclear transfer could be uncontroversial. But promoting it while simultaneously seeking to ban more promising techniques is nearly as misguided as banning embryonic stem cell research alone. And Talent has made the sloppy political move of declaring that he still supports the goals of the anti-science legislation that criminalizes embryonic stem cell research. In that context, removing his name from the bill reeks of political opportunism. And if stem-cell-research advocates are rolling their eyes, the Religious Right is livid.

... many in the pro-life movement view altered nuclear transfer as no more acceptable than the research they condemn as cloning. That is because the research still involves creating a blastocyst — a ball of cells — and crippling it in the petri dish to prevent it from growing into a human embryo.

“We have concerns about the intentional creation of what may be developmentally disabled human ‘embryos’ for the sole purpose of destroying them to harvest their stem cells,” wrote Carrie Gordon Earll of Focus on the Family, a leading conservative group.

...

“There’s been a lot of support for Jim Talent from the pro-life community,” said Larry Weber, executive director of the Missouri Catholic Conference. “Today he stepped off that platform. At this point, it’s essentially vacant with respect to the U.S. Senate election. His candidacy gave pro-life voters something they could gravitate towards. Unfortunately, it’s just not there any more.”

The controversy has been strong enough that even the national press has taken notice. Newsweek's Eleanor Clift wrote about the issue in an online column, published on 2/17.

The intersection between religion, science and public policy is a treacherous place for politicians. Those who alter their views in response to changing public mores will either reap the reward or pay the price. We’ll know in November whether Missouri Sen. Jim Talent made a smart move or committed political suicide when he went to the Senate floor last Friday to withdraw his name as cosponsor of an anticloning bill that would outlaw a promising form of embryonic stem-cell research.

Talent cited new science that would alter the genetic material of an embryo to prevent it from developing into a human being. A “developmentally disabled” embryo should in theory address the moral qualms of critics who view even an unfertilized egg in a petri dish as a potential person. But the reaction to Talent’s shift was blistering. Pro-life conservatives felt they’d been betrayed and threatened to abandon him at the polls, and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which helped write the Senate bill, rejected Talent’s rationale that there is “an ethically untroubling way” of getting embryonic stem cells.

...

One of the experts Talent consulted with is William Neaves, president and CEO of the Stowers Institute, a biomedical research facility in Kansas City. Neaves does not advocate altered nuclear transfer, but he welcomes Talent’s support, however conditional, for continued research. The senator stopped short of endorsing the proposed ballot measure, explaining he would cross that bridge once the required signatures were gathered. Neaves told NEWSWEEK he was “very confident” a constitutional amendment allowing stem-cell research would be on the ballot, and that it would pass. A bipartisan coalition to support the amendment is co-chaired by former Republican senator Jack Danforth, an ordained Episcopal priest, who is appearing in public-interest television ads to make the moral and religious case for the research.

Neaves is a scientist by training, but he is also well-grounded in religion and has studied the philosophical and moral implications of the research he is promoting. He points out there is no religious consensus on when life begins. Judaism believes a new person comes into existence gradually. Islam believes that until an embryo is implanted in a uterus, there is no possibility of a person. In Buddhism, Neaves says, whatever happens in a petri dish is irrelevant. Christianity has varying positions with the most dogmatic one equating early cells with a human being reflected by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. “Yet a great majority of Americans regardless of religious tradition do not believe that cells in a petri dish are a person,” says Neaves, adding, “Nor do I. If I felt that was a person, I wouldn’t advocate research on that either.”

We encourage ALL Wash U. students who favor allowing embryonic stem cell research to vote for Claire McCaskill AND to vote "yes" on the expected ballot measure. And if you know someone uncommitted on whether to vote for McCaskill or Talent, direct them to the articles posted here. Claire McCaskill's going to need every vote she can get and the Senate Democrats are going to need every vote they can get. Let's not lose this one; November's not such a long time away.

Traveling

I'll be away in Springfield (MO) for the weekend, so I'll be leaving control of the blog to Akshay (WustldemsPR) until Sunday night. That, of course, means my big weekend update will actually be on either Sunday or Monday this week. Anyway, have a great weekend and check out our website for information on new campaign manager position availabilities.

Great Daily Show Clips

I guarantee that you'll be on the floor laughing over these Daily Show clips about the Cheney hunting fiasco and the Olympics Opening Ceremony. What, you say? What's so funny about the Olympics Opening Ceremony? Aside from the ridiculous avant-garde theatrical performances, the teams apparently marched into the stadium to a random collection of 70's and 80's American dance hits. Denmark, and this is absolutely true, marched in to "Please Don't Let Me Be Misunderstood," and Iran's theme was "Funky Town." Click on "#2 With a Bullett" and "Five Ring Circus" here.

McCaskill, corruption, #2 with a bullet, and miscellaneous things

The latest Rasmusseun poll showed McCaskill and Talent in a dead heat, with Talent up 46 to McCaskill's 41 with a +/- 4.5 percentage points margin of error, showing some slippage for McCaskill. Nevertheless, it's becoming increasingly clear that the race is indeed going to be a close one.

Over at MyDD, Simon Rosenberg writes about corruption in Congress, while Talking Points Memo summarizes a barrage of emails from hunters about the Cheney incident. For those of you unfamiliar with what happened, allow me to explain: Vice President Cheney, while on a trip to Texas to hunt penned wingless quail, became the first Vice President since Aaron Burr to shoot someone, specifically his friend Harry Whittington. We'll have some hilarious Daily Show videos to post on the subject tomorrow.

Over at TPMCafe, Nathan Newman muses on Illinois' recent progressive reforms, including a new healthcare program for children, the expansion of gay rights, and corporate whistleblower legislation. A far cry from Missouri as of late, don't you think?

Also at TPMCafe, Ohio senatorial candidate and Iraq veteran Paul Hackett writes about Iraq and his belief in bringing the troops home. While I can't say I agree, he does make some good points:

Lets get real about the War on Terror. It was never in Iraq until we allowed it to be there, by not securing the borders. Saddam was a secular dictator, a horrible man, but not a religious fanatic and not a friend of Osama Bin Laden. In fact they were bitter enemies. Bin Laden even offered the service of his mujahedeen army in the removal of Iraq from occupied Kuwait in 1990, before the U.S. stepped in. The Iraq conflict had nothing to do with the War on Terror. It was a diversion from pursuing the real enemy, Al-Qaeda. We need to stop wasting the valuable resources of our military and reengage in a full-scale pursuit of Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda. I personally have looked terrorism in the eye and vanquished it. If the President and Karl Rove want to question my patriotism, I say "bring it on."

And in other news, Ann Coulter delivered some lovely remarks at the Conservative Political Action Conference the other day:

Iran is soliciting cartoons on the Holocaust. So far, only Ted Rall, Garry Trudeau, and the NY Times have made submissions.

She also stated,

I think our motto should be post-9-11, 'raghead talks tough, raghead faces consequences.

Intelligent discourse at its best. Why say "terrorist" when you can use a term traditionally used as a derogatory ethnic slur? Really remarkable.

Vice President Cheney Accidently Shoots a Guy

So, uh, Cheney apparently shot a guy.

P.S. Remarkably and perhaps prophetically, Howard Dean called Cheney "Aaron Burr" this morning for completely different reasons.

Gold!

U.S.A! U.S.A!

MO Dems Win 2 out of 3 Special Elections! (Oh, and Jim Talent Wants to Send Wash U. Scientists to Jail)

Many Wash U. and St. Louis-area college students volunteered for the victorious Jane Bogetto campaign in the 94th District last fall. Bogetto's 58-42 victory was seen as evidence of a Democratic wind blowing this way since the 94th hadn't elected a Democrat in decades.

Observers who called Bogetto's victory a fluke will now have to explain how, exactly, that same fluke repeats itself three more times; on Tuesday, Missouri Democrats won two out of three special elections for the Missouri State House of Representatives:

Democrat Michael Frame won in the 105th District, which takes in parts of Jefferson, Franklin and St. Louis counties. Frame, 44, an official with Local 1 of the Service Employees International Union, defeated Republican Ed Groom, a commercial carpenter, and Libertarian Richard Ford, who runs a bait shop.

Republican Dwight Scharnhorst won a bitterly contested race in the 93rd District in southwest St. Louis County. Scharnhorst, 58, who runs a photography studio in Eureka, defeated Democrat Genevieve Frank, a lawyer.

Both victories were narrow but otherwise reflected the leanings of both the 105th and the 93rd.

That wasn't the case in southwest Missouri, where both parties were caught off guard by the strong showing of Democrat Charles Dake, a livestock veterinarian from Miller, Mo., who captured almost 56 percent of the vote against Republican Eric Seifried, an insurance agent who had been the favorite.

All three races were great news for Democrats and bode well for the future. The website of the Missouri Democratic Party has this to say:

Missouri voters overwhelmingly took out their frustration with Matt Blunt and the Republicans at the polls. Democrats won two out of three special elections even though President Bush handily carried all three districts in 2004.

In a stunning victory, Charlie Dake won one of the most conservative districts inrural Southwest Missouri, the 132nd in Lawrence County. To put things in perspective, John Kerry only received 28.5% of the vote in 2004, and Matt Blunt got OVER 71%. This district is right in Matt Blunt’s backyard, and it just goes to show that the people that know Matt Blunt the most, voted for the
Republicans the least.

Michael Frame also captured victory in the 105th district in Jefferson and Franklin counties. This district has been a bell-weather for Missouri with Bush taking it last year with 52%. We are excited that Michael was able to keep this seat in Democratic hands.

Frustration with Matt Blunt was also prevalent in St. Louis County where Gen Frank received 48% of the vote in an area where Matt Blunt carried with 56%. George Bush also got over 59% of the vote, and only a strong candidate like Gen and the continuing backlash against Republicans in power made this possible. This conservative St. Louis County district is going the way of the rest of Missouri and will be an exciting place come November.

Kos features some analysis on the national implications of these races. Keeping in mind that Kos might not be quite an authority on Missouri politics, his analysis seems pretty sound. When Republicans are unable to carry a district that went 71% for Bush and when they win by only 200 votes in an district where Bush got 59%, those are signs that the Missouri electorate isn't exactly thrilled by Republican (mis-)administration.

In particular, these results bode well for Claire McCaskill in her campaign to oust Republican Sen. Jim Talent, a Wash U. alum. We noted below that several polls have McCaskill leading Talent at this early stage. This is still going to be a very tough race to win; Jim Talent has access to LOTS of money and Missouri is still a pale red, dare-I-say-it, "pink" state. But the political climate and Talent's own positions have given McCaskill a clear opening. And one of those key issues is stem-cell research.

As many here are aware, Wash U. is one of the leading institutes in the country for embryonic stem cell research. Yet, if Jim Talent has his way, scientists who do embryonic stem cell research ANYWHERE in the United States would face a one million dollar fine and up to ten years in prison. Luckily for Missouri, Claire McCaskill opposes such criminalization and has endorsed a ballot-measure to guarantee the legality of embryonic stem cell research in Missouri:

Saying that we need to promote hope for people with debilitating disease, not criminalizing the actions of those working to improve their quality of life, U.S. Senate candidate Claire McCaskill today announced her support for a Missouri ballot initiative that will guarantee the ability for research into lifesaving cures to take place in the state.

“We should be promoting hope for people suffering with Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, diabetes, ALS, spinal cord injuries, and other debilitating diseases,” Claire said. “Stem cell research holds the promise of saving lives and alleviating the pain and suffering endured by so many of our people.
This initiative enables Missouri doctors and researches to be at the forefront of lifesaving research and it has my support.”

Lucky for McCaskill, polls show the Missouri body politic in favor of the initative by a 2 to 1 margin. Even better from a partisan point of view is how this issue has divided the State GOP. In fact, the Associated Press has an article on that very subject, right here.

We encourage ALL Wash U. students who support ECS-research to vote for McCaskill and to spread the world - not just Democrats, mind you, since we need the genuine support of independents and moderate Republican voters to win.

Budget busters

I'm just going to cut to the chase: the federal budget plan put forth by President Bush on Monday is absolutely ridiculous. In a nutshell, the budget cuts a massive amount of funding for healthcare, education, and the environment in order to pay for Bush's ridiculously exorbitant tax cuts for the wealthy. Because why should those who can most afford to pay be forced to make sacrifices? Bush says the budget's focus is on national security, but let me bluntly say that all of his talk is pure, unadultered crap; it just shows how the Republican Party, under absolutely no circumstances, is willing to repeal tax cuts. As E.J. Dionne puts it, this is absolute lunacy. But not only that, the budget is dishonest, since it lies about a half-trillion dollars in costs that will likely be incurred in coming years. Check out this NY Times article for more information.

Meanwhile, in other news Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez recently testified before Congress to defend Bush's unwarranted domestic spying. Over at TPMCafe, Senator Russ Feingold explains why Democrats should oppose Gonzalez and Bush's efforts to erode our civil liberties.

And of course, who could forget about Missouri? For a basic summary of recent political news here, the AFL-CIO has endorsed Claire McCaskill in her campaign for the U.S. Senate, while State Attorney General Jay Nixon is suing the federal government over the Medicare Part D fiasco.

Muhammad cartoon riots

If anyone out there is interested in hearing a Middle East expert speak about the Muhammad cartoon riots, check out Juan Cole's commentary over at Informed Comment. DailyKos' georgia10 provides an, er...more judgmental view of the situation.

SOTU Updates

I hope everyone had the opportunity to watch or read Bush's State of the Union speech, which was, to say the least, less than inspiring. I would like to remind everyone that saying does not equal doing. Of course we have an addiction to oil; does that mean Bush is going to get tough on energy policy, that he will finally break free from the iron grip of Big Oil? I don't think so. Anyway, for some interesting stuff check out TPMCafe for commentary on the State of the Union's approach to Iran and isolationism. The Heartland Democrats also provide some reasons to be skeptical about the speech.

In other news, Alito was confirmed as an associate justice on the Supreme Court. No filibuster, nada. Interestingly enough, in his first decision on the court Alito sided with the liberal justices on a death penalty case. But let's not get our hopes up; he's probably just taking a short break from rolling back minority rights, women's rights, and workers' rights.

Also, Roy Blunt lost the race for Republican majority leader to John Boehner. Seems like Blunt might be a little too close to the corruption scandals for most House Republicans' tastes. Others speculate his heavy-handed tactics may have backfired on him.

And sadly, the budget cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, student loans, and child support enforcement all passed.

Clearly, we have some work to do.