About Me

Name: Gregory L. Vince
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Roll

 

The First Veto

 

Today, President Bush vetoed his first bill ever.  It was a bill that Congress sent to his desk that called for federal funding of stem cell research.  There is a plausible argument one can make about taxpayer dollars funding stem cell research.  One can say it is more reckless spending.  Another can say it's more big government getting involved with something that could be handled by the private sector better.  Both those arguments are conservative and libertarian arguments against this bill. 

As for my thoughts on stem cell research, I feel it is something that can benefit society.  In the name of economics, science, and health such research could help millions of people.  Aborted embryos are simply discarded as is.  Last time I checked, abortion is still legal.  Why not make the best of a tragic situation, and put it to good use.  Why turn back the clock on scientific progress?  I somehow doubt that we will see herds of pregnant women running to the nearest abortion clinic in the name of stem cell research, especially if it is proven to be not as effective as some thought.

As for how our government dollars are spent, I can think of worse ways to spend them.  Bridges to nowhere and other pork filled highway and energy bills have fiscal hawks foaming at the mouth, yet Mr. Bush has had no problems signing both into law.  I tend to feel that the private sector could very well benefit from stem cell research.  A clear majority of people in this country support such research.  The people, should be heard and listened to. 

There is a debate to be had on this research and it seems to be something that is uniting factions of conservatives and liberals.   Mr. Bush has stalled that debate today.  I think he has slapped conservatives in the face many times, and this was not a veto to support them, it was a veto to support the religious right.  The facts have mounted up that Bush is not a conservative and there is nothing that he can do to prove otherwise to me now. 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Dr. Dean

Democract National Committe Chairman, Howard Dean is back in the news.  This time Dr. Dean has decided to take on the New York Court of Appeals, who yesterday ruled that the state contistution does not guarantee the right of same sex couples to marry.  Dr. Dean issued the following statement:

"As Democrats, we believe that every American has a right to equal protection under the law and to live in dignity. And we must respect the right of every family to live in dignity with equal rights, responsibilities and protections under the law. Today's decision by the New York Court of Appeals, which relies on outdated and bigoted notions about families, is deeply disappointing, but it does not end the effort to achieve this goal."

While the good doctor certainly has a right to his opinion and makes a good case for those in favor of judicial activism and overturning what has been voted on already.  Yet where he goes wrong is that he was on the 700 Club, where he cailms that the Democratic platorm specifically states that marriage is between a man and a woman.  I haven't the time or the stomach to read the official party platform, but I guess it is much more convenient to take shots at the judges (and why not?) than the party of which you are the chairman of. 

I despise government activism from all branches, which often puts me at odds with my own party, who has recently decided to fiddle with the Constitution and federally ban flag burning and gay marraige.  I had it brought up in a debate the other day, that gay couples should be subject to the same benefits as married couples.  I know of many companies who provide benefits to gay couples already.  As for tax breaks and economic benefits, I don't necessarily support this incentive for married couples either.  A vote to grant these benefits to gays would be a step in the wrong direction.  It may be fair, but it isn't right.  Government should have stayed out of marraige all together, and leave it to the church. 








Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

From the Begining

Good day, to all of you who have decided to read this blog.  Being that this is my Townhall.com debut, I shall tell you all about myself and where I stand.  I am almost 26 years old, and have been working behind a bar or in a restaurant for over six of those years.  I plan on making a return to college in the future to start an education in journalism or political science. 

Politics has been a huge interest of mine since I was about 14 or so, after being fortunate enough to have been in an excellent government class.  I have been a registered Republican for nearly eight years now.  I believe in small government, fiscal responsibility, tax reform, states rights, property rights and strong defense.  One the issues of the day, I can go either way:

1.  I was for going into Iraq, on a mission to find WMD, but am very much opposed to the nation building that has gone on since.

2.  While I am personally opposed to abortion, flag burning, and gay marriage I do not endorse the idea of what I call "executive and legislative activism" by tampering  with the Constitution. 

3.  I believe the Supreme Court Justices that voted in favor of New London in Kilo vs. New London are guilty of treason.

4.  Guantonamo Bay should remain open.

5.  While I voted for President Bush twice, I feel he has sold out conservatism to the religious right and big government. 


There are many other issues, you will hear my comments on in the future.   I welcome all comments and look forward to being part of the great online community that is Townhall.com


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »