runs the Republican National Coalition for Life, a division of the Schlafly empire. She’s upset by the platform language about stem-cell research, which, in her view, does not distinguish sufficiently sharply between embryonic and other kinds of stem cells. She thinks that the failure to distinguish reflects a deliberate attempt by the platform writers to omit a reference to the president’s funding of a limited amount of embryonic stem-cell research. That way, there would be no challenges to his policy from the right at the platform hearings. She wants to make such a challenge. In my own view, the stem-cell language is quite artful. It mentions the permissive aspects of the president’s policy descriptively; it does not endorse them. It says only that Bush’s policy was “carefully considered.” The platform goes on to “strongly support the president’s policy that prevents taxpayer dollars from being used to encourage the future destruction of human embryos.” Note that the word “policy” in that sentence is followed by the word “that,” not by a comma and the word “which.” As I said, artful.