Anti-stem cell subterfuge

Mad scientists. Cow people. A sinister, omniscient cloning industry straight out of a cheap horror flick.

The group against Proposal 2 has conjured up some truly deceptive, paranoid bunk to whip up fear over lifting Michigan's ban on embryonic stem cell research.

But here's the most dishonest thing of all.

Spokesman Dave Doyle flatly told me it last week it doesn't matter.

"We don't take a position on specific legislation or anything else," he said.

Say what? This is the fundamental issue of Prop 2. Voters absolutely have the right to know the answer to this question. And they should ask why MiCAUSE is being so shifty. What do you have to hide?

I pressed Doyle why he didn't think it was important.

"Our group was formed to oppose the constitutional amendment and we only talk about that," Doyle replied, lapsing into neatly typed talking points.
Really, what does he take us for?

Back in 2006, can you imagine Leon Drolet ducking whether or not he opposed affirmative action when he was gunning for a constitutional amendment banning it? That's just bad PR, as my professional media hound friend would probably tell you.

Both are the loudest opponents of embryonic stem cell research out there. Their criticism is on religious grounds, which I respect. However, they go way too far by arguing that potentially life-saving research on microscopic cells from fertility clinics (that would have been chucked in the dumpster otherwise) is akin to abortion or infanticide.

That's just disingenuous. Those cells are never going to say "goo." But they could find a cure for people suffering from Alzheimer's, which claimed my grandfather 16 years ago this spring. And they could help millions suffering from Parkinson's, multiple sclerosis, Type I diabetes, spinal cord injuries and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS).

So why doesn't MiCAUSE just come clean and say it's against embryonic stem cell research? After all, the group is bought and paid for by special interests that are.

Turns out, that's an easy one. Doyle and the other hired guns at Marketing Research Group (MRG) are no dummies. Polls show about 60 percent of Americans back the research, including a majority of Catholics.

So Doyle stresses that it's A-OK to be pro-stem cell and anti-2 because the amendment "goes too far." This is the standard argument against any ballot proposal. The sky will always fall if Prop X passes.

And since MiCAUSE can't win a fair fight, it's time for the smears and smokescreens. I give its high-priced consultants credit. The group has a flair for the dramatic, if you've watched its ominous, apocalyptic ads envisioning a world of animal-human clones and science run amok.

Too often, journalists don't call B.S. when we see it. Oh, no, the charlatans might come after us, insisting we write a correction that black is white. Well, this is as clear-cut an issue as I've ever seen. MiCAUSE is lying to you. Period.

Here's a reality check. Michigan already has a tough law banning cloning. Some embryonic stem cell research takes place here but it's extremely limited. The Legislature and governor are free to regulate an industry designed around saving lives. And it will create thousands of good-paying life sciences jobs critical for our economically decimated state.


Proposal 2 is precisely what the Wolverine State needs right now. Its opponents are the logical heirs to the Flat Earth Society.

But he is parroting MiCAUSE's crazy rhetoric on clones and weird science, which he need not do. George would one day make a fine congressman or lieutenant governor, but he's hurt his credibility in the long-run, even if he's endeared himself to the receding right-wing of his party.

He might want to talk to Republican former House Speaker Rick Johnson, who passionately believes that being pro-Proposal 2 is the most pro-life position there is, since it could save the lives of people suffering from debilitating diseases. Johnson knows of what he speaks, having a brother who was severely injured in an accident two decades ago.

"If they ever had the opportunity to sit in a hospital ER ward wondering if someone's going to live or die, and knowing that something like this could help save those lives, they may look at things a little differently," Johnson says quietly. "I have; I have gone to funerals of people who have passed away that this kind of research can help."

It's time to ask yourself how you'll feel about closing the door on that research. That's what you'll do by voting no on Proposal 2.

Joe Sixpack snubs Sarah Palin

Doggone it, if it weren't for that George W. Bush, America would be head-over-heels for Sarah Palin.

They're both plain folks, who play up their folksy accents that are just as American as all get-out. Their unflinching, moral absolutist vision of the world is distilled into simple sound bites, unlike some snooty, professorial Harvard-types, Barack. They tap into our hopes and especially fears because they "don't blink" or ever "wave the white flag of surrender" to terrorists.

In this "American Idol" era, we're supposed to go for the guy we can chug a beer with or the gal we can giggle with over a skinny mocha latte.

But not this time.

Why? Been there, done that.

We've already rolled the dice on a president with a fatal allergy to intellectual curiosity, demanding only "yes" men who won't challenge his chillingly narrow view of the world. We tried likeable and down-home and wound up with war(s?) we cannot win, a $10 trillion debt and an economy that bears more than a casual resemblance to the one Herbert Hoover bequeathed to us in the 1930s.

So, ya know, we're kinda sayin' "thanks, but no thanks" to that sweet Sarah Palin.

As Joe Biden's mother might say, "God love her," but this ain't amateur hour, kiddies.

But this raises a more important question: How can we trust John McCain when he's willing to entrust the country he loves so deeply with someone so inexperienced and unintellectual?

That fancy-pants know-it-all Obama doesn't seem like such a bad guy to steer us through a financial meltdown no one seems to comprehend. As conservative icon Charles Krauthammer ruefully observes, the Democrat has a "first-class intellect and a first-class temperament. That will likely be enough to make him president."

He won't lurch from stunt to stunt, as McCain jarringly has for his entire campaign. And Obama doesn't need flash cards to solve the crisis, like Palin brought to her debate last week.

Afterward, the talking heads (those evil Eastern elites) were convinced Joe Sixpack would go as ga-ga for Palin as they did, because the pretty lady said "Joe Sixpack," "hockey mom" and the Reagan classic, "There you go again."

We didn't. Why? Americans are smarter than a fifth grader. We do value substance over style. The fact that she can only spout scant talking points on the bailout and doesn't grasp McCain's position on Pakistan bothers us. That's why every poll showed Biden wiped the floor with her.

Deflated conservatives still insist the self-proclaimed Sarahcuda is connecting with Main Street Americans. Dozens of polls say otherwise; she can't win over women or independents.

No matter. Her flinty winks literally sent hard-up right-wingers like Rich Lowry into a fit of embarrassing ecstasy, mooning over the "little starbursts" he felt through the teevee. Ahem.

Sarah should have been the perfect focus-grouped candidate, down to the effortless way she drops her g's and winks at you (only you). The GOP couldn't have built a better veep if they'd finagled some of that sci-fi-style cloning technology the pro-life loonies warn will take over Michigan if the pro-embryonic stem cell Proposal 2 passes.

Palin would have killed in the heyday of Newt Gingrich, as the apple-cheeked, high-heeled embodiment of gun-totin' rugged individualism. But now we're back to the era of big government, aided by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The country has changed, snapping back to the middle and even (gasp!) the left.

For too many years, we've plucked presidential candidates with criteria fit for a glitzy Hollywood biopic, not the leader of the free world. That was part of the problem with John Edwards, a coiffed empty suit whom desperate Democrats projected their hopes and dreams onto because he came in a slick, Southern-fried wrapper.

On the campaign trail, Palin brings the heat to a movement running cold. "This is not a man who sees America as you and I do - as the greatest force for good in the world," she drawls (rhetoric that incited one cultured fan to shout, "Kill him!")

She's warned us. Obama "pals around with terrorists" and will maniacally raise our taxes. We know blood will be on our hands.

And yet, a clear majority of us are planning to vote for him. She doesn't do it for us.

Palin will soon be relegated to irrelevance, perhaps the de facto leader of the far-right fringe of a party teetering on the brink of combustion. That's why David Brooks calls her brand of anti-intellectual populism a "fatal cancer to the Republican party."

I hope it eats the party alive so it reverts back to the civil spirit of Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt and Eisenhower. But instead of looking backward to '80s-style solutions, the young Turks will have to embrace a 21st century realism to the staggering problems ahead.

Palin can serve as a parable for the dangers of always choosing glib politics over good policy. She can invigorate the GOP, perhaps by destroying it as Democrats take both houses of Congress, the White House, most governor's mansions and more state and local seats across the country.

And for that, let's salute ya, Sister Sarah.