"This bill would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others," Bush, speaking at the White House, said after he followed through on his promise to veto the bill. "It crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect. So I vetoed it."
The House and Senate do not appear to have the votes needed to override the veto, meaning it is unlikely the measure will become law this year...Bush rebuffed emotional calls from prominent Republicans, including Nancy Reagan and conservative Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (Utah), to support the measure.
On that same blog, the debate is indelicately called "stemapalooza." It seems that, since some of the conservative base will be incensed by this vote and Frist allegedly still wants to run for President, he would do well to treat their concerns with a little more respect than this blog post shows. Tacky.
Charmaine Yoest at FRC was live-blogging the veto ceremony today. Another FRC blogger bemoaned the defeat of the alternative stem-cell research bill, which would avoid the destruction of embryos.Here's the basic info on the bill itself. According to the Spokesblogger, debate in the House should start soon.Stones Cry Out appreciates the President's call on this:
It's sad that it took Bush this long to veto anything, but it's a fine one to start on. Morally and financially, this was the right call.RedState thanks the President and bashes Frist:
It is fitting that the President's first veto would erase a bill to increase spending. Somehow, many in the Republican Party who are opposed to increased spending have a blind spot on this morally divisive issue - perhaps some are merely opposed to increased spending on programs they dislike, and change their minds when it's something that social conservatives care about. We wish the President would veto more increased spending as a rule, especially in areas where the free market should determine investment - as in this controversial circumstance - but it is a good start.