CNN’s senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin criticized Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin on Tuesday’s Election Center program for having a "very extreme" position on the issue of embryonic stem cell research: "By excluding that entire scientific method, it seems like you're an extremist, and frankly, her position is very extreme in the American spectrum. And I think that is the real problem here." Toobin later used the same phrase to label Palin’s stance on global warming near the end of the program.
Toobin’s comment came as host Campbell Brown began the program with the controversy over remarks made by Palin’s Democratic opponent, Delaware Senator Joe Biden, who made an indirect reference to the Alaska governor’s developmentally-disabled son during a campaign stop in Columbia, Missouri earlier that day: "I hear all this talk about how the Republicans are going to work in dealing with parents who have both...the joy and the difficulty of raising a child who has a developmental disability, who were born with a birth defect. Well, guess what folks? If you care about it, why don't you support stem-cell research?"
Brown moderated a panel discussion with Toobin, CNN contributor Roland Martin, and Republican strategist after correspondent Candy Crowley gave a report on the controversy. The host turned to the senior legal analyst for his take on the issue after asking Martin and Buchanan. Toobin first answered that "this is a very perilous issue for the Republicans, because -- I mean, forget this phony outrage over what Biden said. I think that's just a total sideshow." "Phony outrage" is an interesting term, since it is the exact phrase Barack Obama would use on Wednesday to describe the Republican response to the Democratic candidate’s "lipstick on a pig" remark, which he made on Tuesday.
Toobin then continued, focusing on the impact of stem cell research issue in the electoral campaign: "What's interesting is -- stem cell research is very popular with swing voters -- people in the middle, families who have multiple sclerosis, who have Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, all these decisions where stem cell research is promising." He then made his "extremist" remark about Palin. Martin responded by voicing his agreement with Toobin.
During the final gubernatorial debate before the 2006 election in Alaska, KTOO-TV reporter Christopher Clark brought up the issue of stem cell research to one of Palin’s opponents, independent Andrew Halcro (the question was asked about 25 minutes into the debate, which can be viewed here): "[A]s you may know, next week in Missouri, folks there will be voting on whether to allow stem cell research -- embryonic stem cell research in that state.... Opponents say that this is -- involves the destruction of an embryo, therefore it should not be allowed. Should Alaska allow stem cell research here?" After Halcro answered that he would support embryonic stem research, Clark asked Palin the same question:
CHRISTOPHER CLARK: Miss Palin, you have up to a minute. Should Alaska allow stem cell research?
SARAH PALIN: Well, another hypothetical, because you certainly haven't seen that on the docket there in our university systems -- stem cell research. But here again, with a pro-life position -- and it's interesting that so many questions, I guess, do revolve around that -- that centeredness that I have of respecting life and the potential of every human life. That no stem cell research that would ultimately end in destruction of life -- I couldn't support.
So Palin is against the kind of stem cell research that hasn’t produced any real benefits yet, as opposed to adult stem research, which has produced breakthroughs time and time again.
The transcript of the relevant portion from the panel discussion, which came 9 minutes into the 8 pm hour of Tuesday’s Election Center program:
CAMPBELL BROWN: Jeff?
JEFFREY TOOBIN: I think this is a very perilous issue for the Republicans, because -- I mean, forget this phony outrage over what Biden said. I think that's just a total sideshow. What's interesting is -- stem cell research is very popular with swing voters -- people in the middle, families who have multiple sclerosis, who have Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, all these decisions where stem cell research is promising. By excluding that entire scientific method, it seems like you're an extremist, and frankly, her position is very extreme in the American spectrum. And I think that is the real problem here. That's why they're trying -- the Republicans are trying to make her look like a victim, rather than talk about the merits of her position.
MARTIN: Absolutely....
—Matthew Balan is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
This is BS
Wed, 09/10/2008 - 20:55 ET by well99Guess that hands off the family doesnt apply to VP.
"I hear all this talk about how the Republicans are going to work in dealing with parents who have both...the joy and the difficulty of raising a child who has a developmental disability, who were born with a birth defect. Well, guess what folks? If you care about it, why don't you support stem-cell research?"
Sara "That no stem cell research that would ultimately end in destruction of life -- I couldn't support."
Tobin is either simple a Obama shill distorting her view or both.I will go with both.
Facts on Stem Cell Comments
Wed, 09/10/2008 - 20:57 ET by DamianoFact: stem cell research has zero potential to impact Down Syndrome, which is the result of an additional chromosome.
So, Biden is not only a piece of trash, he's incompetent too.
Toobin also needs to be taken to the woodshed, since "Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, all these decisions where stem cell research is promising" are completely out of context within the frame of the discussion, since none are childhood diseases.
Now, I am no expert, but I am unaware of ANY childhood developmental disease in which stem cell research could be a benefit.
That said, I am a support of stem cell research and I think that the Republicans are generally on the wrong side of this issue. Still, within the framework of the "discusssion" that was not the point. The point was, 1. were Biden's remarks appropriate (no, and they are also without any factual merit) and 2. is Sarah Palin opposed to stem cell research (based on the quote provided, the answer is no, although she does support some limitations).
So, is Campbell Brown's sole purpose to promote Democratic talking points the run outside of the scope of the framework she is presenting and allow commentators to run at the mouth in clear opposition to facts?
I can only conclude that the answer is yes.
Am I the only one who despised CNN even more than MSNBC?
Childhood diseases
Wed, 09/10/2008 - 21:03 ET by AFCloneCould stem cell research help with far-left liberalism? I don't mind liberals, just the foaming at the mouth types. Since everything is tied to genetics (fat gene, cheat gene), could we find that one?
It is a coin flip
Wed, 09/10/2008 - 21:20 ET by well99It is hard to say which of the two networks has the most people with their nose up Obama's butt.Could be why he says um ooh ahh so much.
So, Biden is not only a
Wed, 09/10/2008 - 22:00 ET by motherbeltAnd unless someone else has info that I have missed, he's dissembling, or exaggerating, or something.
He said
"I hear all this talk about how the Republicans are going to work in
dealing with parents who have both...the joy and the difficulty of
raising a child who has a developmental disability, who were born with
a birth defect. Well, guess what folks? If you care about it, why don't
you support stem-cell research?"
Where did you hear all this talk?? ?
No one is going around saying Republicans are going to do this or that about developmental disabilities. The only place Biden has heard that kind of talk recently was in Gov. Palin's acceptance speech at the Convention when she specifically said to the parents of these children that she would be their advocate in the White House.
I would add more, but I have to get my duct tape!
Stupid science from the left
Wed, 09/10/2008 - 20:57 ET by nkviking75"By excluding that entire scientific method, it seems like you're an
extremist, and frankly, her position is very extreme in the American
spectrum. And I think that is the real problem here." Toobin later used the same phrase to label Palin’s stance on global warming near the end of the program.
Thanks, Jeff. It's always helpful to get the opinion of a lawyer on scientific issues. And speaking of excluding, why does your side only talk about embryonic stem cells and ignore adult and umbilical cord stem cells? Research in those types are actually getting some results.
Biden: "I hear all this talk about how the Republicans are going to work in
dealing with parents who have both...the joy and the difficulty of
raising a child who has a developmental disability, who were born with
a birth defect. Well, guess what folks? If you care about it, why don't
you support stem-cell research?"
Hey, Joe, see my comment above, and think about this: If parents refuse to abort a Down's Syndrome child because they value life, why would they sacrifice some other poor unborn child for their stem cells?
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
Not to mention that is it
Thu, 09/11/2008 - 07:26 ET by dscottNot to mention that is it not extreme to spend billions of dollars more on a deadend line of research (embryonic stem cell) that has already consumed billions of dollars with exactly zero results? Sounds to me like a typical liberal boondoggle. Had the same amount of money been spent on adult and cord stem cell research we may have already cured Alzheimers, Dementia, and a whole host of other diseases. It seems that the promise of doing something good is all the liberals want, the actual achieving of good must be avoided at all costs.
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.
How do you define "extreme"?
Wed, 09/10/2008 - 20:58 ET by AFCloneGallup poll has 32% for opposing embryonic stem cell research, with 18% strongly opposed. I would have thought "extreme" would be in the single digits.
The fact of the matter is
Wed, 09/10/2008 - 21:03 ET by MrSnugglesThe fact of the matter is that embryonic stem cells are obsolete, and they never showed good results anyways. But I have no doubt that the left will distory being anti-embryonic stem cells to being anti-stem cells in general.
Beatn to the punch
Wed, 09/10/2008 - 21:24 ET by Dr_LibertyI was beaten to the punch on this by somebody called Mr. Snuggles! Well, I must bow down and give due respect. Good job, MS. This was my point exactly.
(If I could add, though, that while a number of biotech companies are investing money into adult stem cell research, they have not been funding stem cell research ... which tells you where scientists with a stake in the issue are placing their bets.)
<insert witty signature here>
Adult v embryonic stem cell research
Wed, 09/10/2008 - 21:10 ET by DanDanAdult stem cell research has produced success to some degree in over 170 medical conditions ----- embryonic stem cell have produced “0” results --- zilch – nadda ---- if the liberals are so all fired up about And think it is such a good deal – and has such a chance of such great success ---- there should be no problem getting private funds to support it --- why should tax payers have to pay the bill ----
Lee
<td hei
Embryonic stem cell
Wed, 09/10/2008 - 21:27 ET by 10thAmendmentEmbryonic stem cell research is legal. Researchers who want to kill live human embryos can raise the money to do so.
Please don't force me to finance it.
It isn't the job of the feds to pay for medical research. Embriotic stem cell research has so little hope of results that "big pharma" won't chip in because they see no possibility of return on the investment.
If you want it - PAY FOR IT. Your money, not mine. Don't kill embryos in my name.
I'm all for stem cell research. Umbilical, adult and now stem cells grown from wisdom teeth. But it should NOT be paid for by the Federal Government. Read the 10th Amendment.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
I thought...
Wed, 09/10/2008 - 21:45 ET by Dr_LibertyI thought the Tenth Amendment was eviscerated in the 1930s under FDR.
<insert witty signature here>
It was. But since it's
Wed, 09/10/2008 - 23:01 ET by 10thAmendmentIt was. But since it's still in the Constitution, hope springs eternal. Judicial appointments are VERY important.
Bad SCOTUS decisions can be reversed (Dred Scott comes to mind).
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Toobin proves his prejudice
Wed, 09/10/2008 - 23:25 ET by KC MulvilleRemember when Don Corleone advised Michael that whoever made the offer, by that act itself, proved himself to be the traitor? These days, to use the phrase "outside the mainstream" about anything pro-life is automatic proof of liberal prejudice.
Toobin knows the difference between the wide topic of stem cell research and the narrow moral problem of using embryos to do it. But he deliberately obfuscates them anyway. By doing that, he threw away any credibility as an honest analyst. He's just another self-important, self-adoring liberal TV hack.
Buzzwords
Thu, 09/11/2008 - 05:44 ET by FoolicanUgh.
Imagine if she came out in support of the FairTax or repealing the 18th Amendment.
Katie: Sarah Palin's views on taxation has been defined by experts as 'super-duper mega ultra off-the-wall extreme.'
Keith: Come on, Sarah, do you really buy into this ultra right-wing evangelical bulls**t?
Brian: In the wake of a disastrous economy with a skyrocketing unemployment rate, Sarah Palin supports a surprisingly drastic and perhaps out-of-place measure to destroy the federal income tax. How will this impact the poor and unemployed? We have a special non-partisan whistle-blower report coming up next...
Something for Toobin, and for Biden, too.
Thu, 09/11/2008 - 09:37 ET by Mike BrattonI just found out something, and I wanted to share it with you open-minded, progressive fellows! You're going to love this!
There's big news from the World of Science: Did you know that some Scientists have theorized that they can get cures for diseases from the hearts of week-old children? Why, yes! Isn't it exciting? Now, there's the issue that these week-old children can't exactly make it without their hearts, but the important thing is that Science needs their cells!
What? You boys think it's a bad idea to kill week-old children and harvest their hearts for Science? Why, how silly is that? I mean, come on... a little consistency, please! You've already signed off on killing developing children and taking cells from them for Science, right? So, what's a few months' difference in development make?
--Mike
www.thebrattonreport.com
(The preceding was a post using sarcasm to make a point. For those who read quickly, and for those who don't get sarcasm, I do not advocate infanticide in the name of science, just as I do not advocate killing the unborn in the name of science.)
Have you noticed that
Thu, 09/11/2008 - 10:34 ET by kilimanHave you noticed that pretty much any issue that doesn't agree with the liberal position is always considered "extreme"?
They used the same argument with respect to the environment, abortion, religion, guns, etc.
It doesn't matter if half the country do not share their view, it's still extreme!
As usual, liberals tend to have a hard time figuring out what words really mean.
Biden's ignorance is astounding.
Tue, 10/21/2008 - 16:10 ET by Mike Bratton"Hey, Republicans, if you care about children and families so much, why don't you support killing children and experimenting on their remains?"
I had a friend suggest that old-fashioned secession might not be a bad idea if Obama and Biden are elected. At first, I did a double-take, but the more I read from the law firm of Lightworker and Plagiarist, the more it's sounding like a good idea.
--Mike
www.thebrattonreport.com
"That no stem cell
Fri, 10/24/2008 - 05:58 ET by fsteele"That no stem cell research that would ultimately end in destruction of life -- I couldn't support."
That's not extremist -- that's a middle position on the question. Extremist would be 'no stem cell research at all.'
Iirc, elsewhere Palin was more clear about favoring the adult stem cell research.
Her father was a science teacher! On this as on evolution, she seems to follow the scientific orthodoxy.