Mystery Science DNC 2008

I love this Internet streaming that FoxNews is doing during the DNC and can’t wait for the RNC version of it.

Keep it up Fox! (And Shep, your commentary is priceless!)

http://www.foxnews.com/video2/live.html

Click here to view the embedded video.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Stem cells made from human embryos can home in on damaged eyes, hearts and arteries of mice and rats, and appear to start repairs, a U.S. company said on Monday.

Massachusetts-based Advanced Cell Technology said it had devised a straightforward way to make blood vessel precursor cells out of the stem cells and plans to test them in humans.

“We figured out how to produce literally billions of so-called ‘hemangioblasts’ — the mythical cell in the embryo that gives rise to our entire blood and immune system as well as to the blood vessels in our body,” Dr. Robert Lanza, vice president of research and scientific development at ACT, said in an e-mail.

“We’ve also tested these cells in animals for the first time, and it turns out that they have incredible reparative potential.”

Embryonic stem cells are the ultimate master cell of the body, giving rise to all of the tissues and organs. The use of human embryonic stem cells is controversial because many people oppose destroying the embryo.

The U.S. Congress has passed several bills that would expand federal funding of human embryonic stem cell research but President George W. Bush vetoed one and has said he will veto any more.

However, companies working with private funding, such as the over-the-counter listed ACT, may do as they please.

Working with embryonic stem cells is not easy. For medical uses, researchers would like to partly differentiate them — start them down the road toward becoming a specific cell or tissue type.

Another roadblock is that many of the current batches, or lines, of stem cells must be grown in a serum culture taken from animal blood. This can contaminate them with viruses.

Writing in the journal Nature Methods, Lanza’s team said they found a way to grow and differentiate human embryonic stem cells without using culture.

They directed the stem cells into becoming what they believe are hemangioblasts, the blood vessel precursor cells, although other teams will have to replicate this for it to be accepted.

“When injected into the bloodstream, they homed to the other side of the body and repaired damaged vasculature within 24 to 48 hours,” Lanza said.

“For example, we injected the cells into mice with damaged retinas due to diabetes or other eye injury. The cells (labeled green) migrated to the injured eye, and incorporated and lit-up the entire damaged vasculature. The cells are really smart, and amazingly, knew not to do anything in uninjured eyes.”

The researchers killed the mice to check the cells’ progress, so they do not know the long-term effects.

“The cells also showed remarkable reparative capacity in animals with heart attacks and ischemic (blocked by a blood clot) limbs. The cells reduce the mortality rate by 50 percent after a massive heart attack,” Lanza said.

“If the same thing works in humans (these would be the same human cells we would probably use), you might be able to prevent patients from having legs and other limbs amputated by simply injecting some cells.”

William Caldwell, chairman and chief executive officer of Advanced Cell Technology, said the company wanted to test the cells in people and had asked the Food and Drug Administration for permission to do so by the end of next year.

“We also have studies underway indicating that the cells can also considerably accelerate wound healing, repair lung damage, and can even generate unlimited amounts of red blood cells for transfusion,” Lanza said.

Click here to view the embedded video.

With the recent VT shooting and the Dems still sore about the “Assault Weapons Ban” sunsetting in 2004, they are going to be preparing an all-out assault on the second amendment and the approximately 80 million U.S. Citizens who exercise it. Contrary to what they want you to believe, less than 33 people would be dead now if 1 or more of the people in that building had a firearm. Yes there still would be fatalities, but not to the magnitude to make it the “Worse One man Shooting spree in U.S. History”.

1. An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject.
2. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone.
3. Colt: The original point and click interface.
4. Gun control is not about guns; it’s about control.
5. If guns are outlawed, can we use swords?
6. If guns cause crime, then pencils cause misspelled words.
7. “Free” men do not ask permission to bear arms.
8. If you don’t know your rights you don’t have any.
9. Those who trade liberty for security have neither.
10. The United States Constitution (c) 1791. All Rights Reserved.
11. What part of “shall not be infringed” do you NOT understand?
12. The Second Amendment is in place in case the politicians ignore the others.
13. 79,999,987 firearm owners killed no one yesterday. (Based on 80 million)
14. Guns only have two enemies: rust and politicians.
15. Know guns, know peace, know safety. No guns, no peace, no safety.
16. You don’t shoot to kill; you shoot to stay alive.
17. 911 – government sponsored Dial-a-Prayer.
18. Assault is a behavior, not a device.
19. Criminals love gun control — it makes their job safer.
20. If guns cause crime, then matches cause arson.
21. Only a government that is afraid of its citizens, tries to control them.
22. You only have the rights you are willing to fight for.
23. Enforce the “gun control laws” we ALREADY have: Don’t make more.
24. When you remove the people’s right to bear arms, you create slaves.
25. The American Revolution would never have happened with gun control.
26. “A government of the people, by the people, for the people…”

As the Supreme Court recognized in Roe v. Wade in 1973, this issue is complex and highly personal; the rights and lives of women must be taken into account. It is precisely this erosion of our constitutional rights that I warned against when I opposed the nominations of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito.” -Hillary ClintonI strongly disagree with today’s Supreme Court ruling, which dramatically departs from previous precedents safeguarding the health of pregnant women. As Justice Ginsburg emphasized in her dissenting opinion, this ruling signals an alarming willingness on the part of the conservative majority to disregard its prior rulings respecting a woman’s medical concerns and the very personal decisions between a doctor and patient.
- Barack Obama

The Democrats are angry because the Supreme Court is opposing the “right” for women to hire “hitmen” [the doctors] to murder newborn babies AS they are being born, in the process of birth. WTF is wrong with these people?!

“Partial-birth abortion” is also a legal term of art, which has been defined by federal statute as any abortion in which the fetus is extracted “past the navel [of the fetus] . . . outside the body of the mother,” or “in the case of head-first presentation, the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother,” before the fetus is terminated.”

If I had to compromise, I’d vote to allow abortion in the first trimester before it is viable (able to live outside on it’s own). But AS it is being born, coming down the birth canal, the head is outside the womb, in open air and it is “terminated” by cutting it’s little skull open and sucking out it’s brain. Sometimes they come feet first and the forceps and tube are inserted and the same procedure happens.

They [the babies] don’t always die right away, sometimes it happens to quick and the are almost all the way out before they are “aborted”. Abort means to stop something before it happens, Not AS it is happening. Sometimes there are complications.

Here are some pictures of the aftermath…(NOT FOR THE SQUEAMISH).

People go to jail for killing kittens, puppies and other animals… But it’s OK to kill HUMAN BABIES!

Click here to view the embedded video.

Click here to view the embedded video.

But it’s TOO WARM!!!  Too warm to fly planes!!  They all need to be cooled before taking off! Oh NO!

Come on! Give me a break! It’s funny how on a lot of the days there are “global warming” events over the winter months, the temperature hits record lows, cancelling the event or preventing most of the attendees from arriving.

But,

Gore insisted that the link is beyond dispute and is the source of broad agreement in the scientific community.

“The planet has a fever,” Gore said.

No, Mr. Gore, I think you are the one with a fever, you look pretty bad in this picture, YOU better go see a doctor… And have him check your head too. I think your mommy might have dropped you too hard on it and now the area of your brain that processes temperature is damaged.

He’s sorry that civilians — including women and children — died when he and his men reacted to an attack that killed a comrade in Haditha, but Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich says today he would make the same decision that caused their deaths. Wuterich is charged with killing 18 civilians. He led three other Marines also charged with murder. His interview with Scott Pelley, the first time any of them has spoken publicly about that day, is part of a report to be broadcast on 60 MINUTES Sunday, March 18 (7:00-8:00PM, ET/PT) on the CBS Television Network.

“There is nothing that I can possibly say to make up or make well the deaths of those women and children, and I am absolutely sorry it happened that day,” says Wuterich. Despite the outcome, Wuterich insists it was the right decision. “What I did that day, the decision that I made, I would make those decisions again today,” he tells Pelley. “Those are decisions that I made in a combat situation and I believe I had to make those decisions.”

One of those decisions, which Wuterich admits to in the interview, was shooting five unarmed Iraqi men in their backs. Wuterich says the men were running from a car that had appeared on the scene at about the same time their comrade was killed by a roadside bomb. Wuterich says their killing was justified; he says he identified them as having hostile intent toward the Marines. Wuterich also maintains that the Iraqi men disobeyed the orders of one of his squad members and that the Iraqis should have known what to do.

“Normally the Iraqis know the drill…if something happens…get down, hands up…

They started to take off, so I shot at them,” Wuterich says. Other Marines have told investigators that the Iraqis appeared to be following orders and were not fleeing. Pelley asks Wuterich how running away from the scene could have constituted hostile intent. He replies that he thought they may have detonated the roadside bomb. He adds, “But also at the same time, there were military-aged males that were inside that car. The only vehicle, the only thing that was out, that was Iraqi, was them. They were 100 meters away from that IED. Those are the things that went through my mind before I pulled the trigger. That was positive identification,” Wuterich tells Pelley.

Another decision Wuterich made that day was to lead an attack on two houses. That attack killed three women and six children. The Marines attacked the first house with the permission of a superior officer because they thought two or three shots were fired at them from it. Wuterich says the Marines tossed a grenade into a room in the dwelling before determining who was inside. They pressed the attack with a charge through the door and gunshots to kill any survivors. According to Wuterich, this was the best way to clear a house safely, and he has no compunction about doing it. “You can’t hesitate to make a decision. Hesitation equals being killed, either yourself or your men… That’s what we do. That’s how our training goes.”

Wuterich says he saw that the attack on the first house had killed women and children. But he did not stop the assault, because he says he saw a back door open in the house and assumed the sniper had gone through it to the next house. “My responsibility as a squad leader is to make sure that none of the rest of my guys died …and at that point we were still on the assault, so no, I don’t believe [I should have stopped the attack],” he tells Pelley.

“We went through that house much the same, prepping the rooms with grenades, going in there, and eliminating the threat and engaging the targets,” says Wuterich. In the second house, a man, two women and four children who ranged in age from 2 to 14, died. “Did we know that civilians were in there? No. It would have been one thing if we went in those rooms and looked at everyone and shot them,” Wuterich tells Pelley. “We cleared these houses the way they were supposed to be cleared.”