Rachel Maddow Responds to Cal Thomas' Ugly Remarks at CPAC

All this from someone who proclaims to be a "born-again Christian?" What you do and what you are saying don't add up old Cal! Seems like you are two faced.

er um, bush banned all stem cell research, regardless of whether they accept money or not from the government.

Wrong. You apparently don't understand what an "Executive Order" is.

1 - Here's a definition: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_order

2 - Here's the Bush EO; http://img.slate.com/media/40/13435-stemcells.pdf

I completely understand what an Executive order is. What the @!$%# does that have to do with anything about the 'banning of stem cell research'.

When Bush wrote the EO, it ENDED ALL STEM CELL RESEARCH in the United States.

And what Obama did with his Executive Order is that he issued an interpretation that the ability of a religious institution to not provide BC through their insurance policies ONLY was valid if it was the religious organization itself, and not an enterprise owned by that religious organization.

So, church is allowed to not provide coverage, but the church's hospital, or the churches schools, are SEPARATE entities, and therefore do not qualify for that exemption. If you want to take that further, this fundamental concept of this law would also prevent a Madrassa from being set up in the US, because all accredited schools must follow the curriculum of the state that they are located in. (yes, that is not related to the law, but the concept is there).

Wrong again, to wit;

1) No. 2:Blocking Stem-Cell Research
Executive Order 13435 (PDF)

What the order says: In August 2001, Bush issued a rule Limiting federal funding for embryonic-stem-cell research to existing colonies of such cells. Five years later, he expended the first veto of his presidency to reject legislation served up by a Republican Congress to ease those restrictions. This subsequent executive order a year later, issued the same day he vetoed the legislation a second time, encourages research into alternative measures of creating pluripotent stem cells. The order directs the Department of Health and Human Services and the National Institutes of Health to prioritize research consistent with Bush's previous directives and devote resources to finding other means of creating human stem cells. - http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/recycled/2009/01/ten_to_toss.single.html

Note the words, "federal funding", it did not apply to all embryonic stem cell research.

2) You obviously do not understand that the Catholic Church does NOT own or run the multitude of different institutions that carry the Catholic name. They legally SPONSOR such groups and if they do not abide by the terms and conditions of such sponsorship, the church can legally remove it.

In the case of Birth Control, if a sponsored organization does not follow it's ecclesiastical teachings, they have every right to remove said sponsorship. Obama's EO was a direct assault on Catholic hierarchy done for the express purpose of allowing his corporate benefactors, the insurance and pharmaceutical industry, to tap into the lucrative Catholic market.

most catholic institutions already provide birth control, but did you see the latest, the catholic church's position isn't just about the church, they want to force ALL companies to not provide contraception coverage.

As for the first part, did you realize that ALL embryonic stem cell research is government funded.

It is like saying, any facility that takes any government funding can't provide abortions, which basically means that it would require that a facility be set up that ONLY PROVIDES abortions. It's an end run. It is worded in a way that makes it look like one thing, but is really, because of the details, far more comprehensive.

1) most catholic institutions already provide birth control, but did you see the latest, the catholic church's position isn't just about the church, they want to force ALL companies to not provide contraception coverage.

Prove it. Everyone seems to be repeating this same talking point then site Georgetown and DePaul as examples. Sorry, there are thousands of Catholic institutions in the US. Two or even twenty do not a majority make. Where's the studies that say this? I went to a large Catholic university that did NOT provide it for their students or employees.

2) As for the first part, did you realize that ALL embryonic stem cell research is government funded.

Wow, this is classic. I'm just supposed to take your word on this? I don't think so. a) prove it, b) read up on stem cell research. http://www.wpi.edu/Pubs/E-project/Available/E-project-050409-141307/unrestricted/The_Economics_of_Stem_Cells.pdf Yes, it impacted all of the institutions both private and but in no stretch of the imagination does the government fund ALL research facilities.

This is going too far off topic.

who cares if she is old, ulgy, hot, stacked, proficient with a strap on, or any other negative or positive attribute that is attached to her. That has NOTHING to do with her message. Her personal attributes are meaningless because alas, she aint going to be sleeping with them, so there is no point worrying about it.

Instead of attacking her, they should be addressing her message. Her message was about as biting as they can get, and quite frankly, they can't address it, therefore they resort to personal attacks.

And probably the most offensive part of his message is that he would support contraceptives for liberals, that is STRAIGHT out of eugenics, STRAIGHT out of the holocaust.

who cares if she is old, ulgy, hot, stacked, proficient with a strap on, or any other negative or positive attribute that is attached to her. That has NOTHING to do with her message.

Agreed.

Her personal attributes are meaningless because alas, she aint going to be sleeping with them, so there is no point worrying about it.

No point whatsoever, but for some reason they just won't let it go.

Instead of attacking her, they should be addressing her message. Her message was about as biting as they can get, and quite frankly, they can't address it, therefore they resort to personal attacks.

That's it.

And probably the most offensive part of his message is that he would support contraceptives for liberals, that is STRAIGHT out of eugenics, STRAIGHT out of the holocaust.

Goes without saying.

CrowMeris, Sorry to take the wind out of your sails but this is exactly like Cal Thomas. Have you read his column much? He is forever on some rant and is ALWAYS derogatory towards liberals and democrats. An apology is all well and good, but sorry is only a word & its what someone does after they say sorry that matters. We will be watching to see if what he says is what he does. IMO he will continue on with his snide, hateful and demeaning remarks. Its who he is and a fine example of what many "born again Christians" are today.

Believe me, I'm no fan of Cal Thomas. Never have been, never will be. He seems to enamored of his own sweet self, and can often be extraordinarily vicious.