Part-Time Principles: The Moralaity of Stem Cell research and the Bush administration

George W. Bush says he believes in up-or-down votes. He proclaimed it shortly after his first inaugural, and included that trust in his 2005 State of the Union address, when he demanded that "every judicial nominee deserves an up-or-down vote."

A one-vote majority, says the President, should determine nominations and issues. He constantly talked about up-or-down votes in the Senate for the nomination of John Bolton as ambassador to the U.N., for bills to ban gay marriages, to make it illegal to burn the flag, and almost every bill his administration proposed. His words were echoed by the Congressional leadership and by the evangelical underlying Christian base.

He disagrees with Senate rules, which need 60 votes to override a filibuster. The suspect President Bush believes in the "up-or-down" law of governance is because for most of his administration he has had a Republican Congress willing to do anything it takes to advance a neoconservative political and group agenda.

Since President Bush believes in one-vote majorities, it shouldn't have been a qoute for him to accept a 238-194 vote in the House and a 63-37 vote in the Senate to allow medical researchers to use stem cells from embryos, with their donors' consent, that would have been discarded by fertility clinics. About 400,000 icy embryos are in clinics; a few will be "adopted" by mothers who have them implanted in their uteruses; most embryos will be thrown away.

Embryonic stem cells are the basic building blocks of life, cells that will make into any cell in the body, and are the key to learning more about life itself. Stem cell study could lead to cures for Parkinson's Disease, diabetes, numerous cancers, spinal cord injuries, heart disease, and Alzheimer's. Nancy Reagan, whose husband's last years were spent in the fog of Alzheimer's, is a strong proponent of stem cell research.

Almost seven months after his first inauguration, President Bush declared that the federal government would fund study only on stem cell lines that had already been developed, and not for any new ones. He equated the medical use of stem cells with murder, and threatened to veto any new legislation to advance stem cell research. His veto threats had worked on 141 other bills over a five and a half year period, as the Republican-controlled Congress meekly revised bills or eliminated them.

This time, Congress--faced by the political reality that about 70 percent of Americans supported wide stem cell research--didn't buckle. Fifty House Republicans broke from the White House legislative controls; in the Senate, nineteen Republicans and all but one Democrat voted for the bill. The President renewed his veto threat.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-Calif.) had asked the President, "not to make the first veto of your presidency one that turns America backward on the party of scientific advance and limits the promise of medical miracles for generations to come." Bill Frist--heart surgeon, Senate majority leader, and one of the most active voices in pushing the Bush-Cheney agenda--also opposed the veto. "Given the potential of this study and the limitations of the existing lines eligible for federally funded research, I think supplementary lines should be made available," Dr. Frist said.

But the president did veto the bill, and neither the House nor the Senate had the two-thirds vote vital to override the veto. The President's veto, said Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) is a "shameful display of cruelty, hypocrisy, and ignorance." Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.) said he plan the President was "captured by his own ideology and taking his ideology to an extreme." Research, said Jim Langevin (D-R.I.) "will now continue in the underground sector with insufficient funding and a lack of government oversight, all while millions of citizen wait for cures to devastating diseases.

President Bush said in April 2002, "We have a moral imperative to protect the sanctity of life," and continued to throw "sanctity of life" in almost every speech or annotation about stem cell research. At the time he explained his veto, he declared the bill--approved by significantly more than an "up-or-down" vote--"crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect."

If the President assuredly believed in a "moral boundary" and the "sanctity of life," he would not have exploited a combine of dozen "snowflake babies"--children born from implanted embryos--by using them as props in the East Room when he explained why he vetoed the bill.

He would not have lied about the non-existent ties in the middle of Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda or the weapons of mass destruction he claimed were in Iraq in order to begin an invasion that has cost more than 2,500 American lives and caused injuries, many life-threatening, to someone else 18,000, in expanding to 30,000-70,000 civilian deaths. He would not have decided that the Geneva Accords didn't apply to thousands of prisoners that his administration confined in Abu Ghraib, Guantánamo, and other prisons. If he had any kind of a "moral compass," he would have allowed prisoners to have due process, to be treated humanely, and not be subjected to "renditions" the change to underground prisons in countries that use torture.

If this former non-combatant National Guard officer had any concern for humanity, he would not have ordered severe cuts in combat pay and house benefits for active duty military, proposed a .3 billion cut in veterans' benefits, and an increase in health care costs.

If he believed in a moral administration, he would not have allowed Halliburton, the financial empire once run by Dick Cheney, to continue to get some multi-million dollar no-bid contracts in New Orleans and Iraq after being exposed for price gouging and fraudulent business practices.

If George W. Bush understood the meaning of the "sanctity of life," he would not have spent some minutes at a photo-op in Florida where he read "My Pet Goat" to children after being notified that the first plane had hit the Twin Towers. He would not have been embarrassingly slow and seemingly unconcerned to respond following the Sumatra-Andaman earthquake/tsunami in Southeast Asia, or after Hurricane Katrina hit America's Gulf Coast.

He would not have disregarded the ubiquitous warnings from the scientific society about global warming and the multitudinous pleas to keep and defend the environment. He would not have settled political cronies into senior executive positions in the Federal emergency administration Agency, and then cut that agency's funding for disaster response. He would not have diverted funds for disaster relief, and cut back on health and welfare needs.

If he believed in "morals," he would have cut all ties with his good buddy, "Kenny Boy" Lay, whose business cheated thousands of employees out of their pensions, while the executives were living in luxury.

If the President of the United States was concerned about "morals" and the "sanctity of life," he would have condemned hunting and the gun lobby that was one of the customary contributors to his political campaigns. He would have condemned the spurious and vicious attacks upon Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in the 2000 customary contest, and the Swift Boat attacks upon Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) in the 2004 general election.

There is a lot that the President of the United States could do to prove he is a moral leader, one who believes in the sanctity of life. But, his record, not his rhetoric, shows otherwise.

made my day Part-Time Principles: The Moralaity of Stem Cell research and the Bush administration made my day

Key Factors of Multicultural Team administration & Leadership

Veterans Benefits Network - Key Factors of Multicultural Team administration & Leadership Advertisements The content is good quality and useful content, Which is new is that you simply never knew before that I know is that I even have discovered. Before the unique. It's now near to enter destination Key Factors of Multicultural Team administration & Leadership. And the content associated with Veterans Benefits Network.

Do you know about - Key Factors of Multicultural Team administration & Leadership

Veterans Benefits Network! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends.

Multicultural teams have become very coarse in modern years. With cross border mobility becoming much easier the whole of population piquant from one country to someone else has grown significantly. This has also led to more population from distinct cultural and ethnic backgrounds intermarrying. Their children could be born and grow up in distinct countries and have hybrid cultural identities. Globalization and the advances in communication and communication technology have reduced trade barriers and increased interaction among people.

What I said. It isn't outcome that the actual about Veterans Benefits Network. You check out this article for info on what you want to know is Veterans Benefits Network.

How is Key Factors of Multicultural Team administration & Leadership

We had a good read. For the benefit of yourself. Be sure to read to the end. I want you to get good knowledge from Veterans Benefits Network.

Is global homogeneity a feasible and desirable vision? Philosophically this would be very questionable. This would be immediately equated with suppression of differences and diversity, which are inalienable human rights. It can be argued that it would destroy cultures and diminish creativity. There are adequate instances in human history e.g., the fate of the Native Americans or the Conquistador actions in South America, where one culture has by force exterminated other cultures. Then there are scores of other examples where aspects of cultures have blended through interaction e.g., India and the United States. Today, though genocides happen under our very eyes e.g., in the Balkans or in some parts of Africa, the prevailing models of cultures influencing others is mutual interaction, where there is ample room for retaining one's own cultural identity. As of the 2000 census, "minorities" have become the majority population in six of the eight largest metropolitan areas in the United States. Thus living with and managing diversity has become the central theme of this century.

Many studies have in fact shown that diversity in human capital positively leads to increased creativity and efficiency in many cases. Studies have also shown that the failure to successfully consolidate diverse workforces has negative implications for organizational performance. This is most publicly expressed in legal actions, such as modern discrimination suits against multinational corporations such as Coca-Cola, Wal-Mart, Xerox.

The skills needed for managing with population from diverse backgrounds at work or exterior the workplace can be very distinct because in the workplace we are in our work roles and there are many external constraints to our behavior. Many population positively spend more time awake with their colleagues than with their spouse and children. So any problems arising in this area will by all means; of course spill over onto the incommunicable life.

Looking determined into the factors that affect multicultural team leadership or management, we can recognize five factors that operate at team levels:

National culture Corporate culture of the organisation Nature of the business or functional culture (coal mine, marketing, accounting) Stage of team development Personal attributes

National Culture - There are ample theories and much research into how national cultures affect team behavior. Ger Hofstede's Culture's Consequences (1980) and Cultures and Organizations (1991) are two examples. National culture has many dimensions like orientation to time, style of communication, personal space, competitiveness and worldview. Generally we are dealing also with stereotypes and cultural biases here. Regional and personal life contact or character traits can override these ascribed 'national' culture traits. In real life this means that an Italian team member can be a shy, quite person or a German can be hopeless with timetables.

Corporate Culture - Corporate culture is very intimately linked to the functional culture and it is a follow of a historical process where the founder and successive leaders have left their marks. A large multinational organisation is bound to have a more structured, hierarchic and bureaucratic arrival to running its affairs while an Internet web build enterprise with 5 young creative artists would be an entirely distinct environment.

Nature of the business - Coal miners, web designers and international bankers would seem to come from distinct worlds. Dress, language, etiquette, unwritten codes of behavior, standard practice and skills needed on the job vary to a great extent in distinct industries. It is of vital importance that the industry, the organisation or the environment allows team members to display a sense of pride in one's professional identity.

Stage of Team development - If the team is just recently formed with no history or experience, the rules of the game have to be learn by everyone. If the team has a history of performing efficiently, new entrants can rely on established practice and older members to teach them the skills required. The stage of development of the team member also plays a great role here. If the team is in the formation stage, the rules of the game are still being negotiated and population are studying their own roles. The 'veteran' team member has carved a accumulate role for himself while the entrant has to struggle.

Personal Attributes - Last but not least is all the other factors like personality, competence profile, the individual's own life experience, expectations of rewards, acknowledgment and delight from working in the team as well as previous history of team working.

The first three factors are static factors, which means that their characteristics cannot be positively changed by private action. Team members or even the whole team cannot convert the national culture. Individuals, teams and organisations have to learn to adapt to them. In fact the efficiency of the team is directly correlated to how well this adaptation has been achieved. But intervention can greatly affect the last two factors of Stages of Team development and Personal Attributes. A team can accelerate its advance from formation stage to the stage of maturity and an private can convert personal attributes by acquiring new competences.

Superior sustainable team carrying out can be achieved only if team members learn to take into account dimensions of organizational culture and those of national culture like orientation to time, style of communication, personal space, competitiveness and worldview. Only when these have been successfully adapted to their working practices to reflect the team members' background realities can teams positively see the added value that multicultural teams bring.

I hope you get new knowledge about Veterans Benefits Network. Where you'll be able to offer use in your life. And most of all, your reaction is Veterans Benefits Network.Read more.. Key Factors of Multicultural Team administration & Leadership. View Related articles associated with Veterans Benefits Network. I Roll below. I even have recommended my friends to assist share the Facebook Twitter Like Tweet. Can you share Key Factors of Multicultural Team administration & Leadership.