The political rhetoric surrounding embryonic stem-cell science reveals a widespread misconception of how medical products are created.

The Obama administration refused to defend me against the lawsuit filed for José Padilla. Now even the liberal Ninth Circuit agrees the suit was frivolous.

In October of 2009, Kumud Majumder, the father of an 11-year-old son with advanced leukemia, joined a lawsuit challenging the federal ban on compensating bone-marrow donors. He wanted to save his son's life. Last week Mr. Majumder and his co-plaintiffs enjoyed a victory. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that the majority of bone-marrow donors may lawfully be compensated.

Senators will be given a chance this week toincrease funding for alternative sources. They should not miss thispromising opportunity for scientific and ethical statesmanship.

Even as critics complain that the Bush administration has limited stem cell research, state and private funding of such research goes forward.

As scientists around the world race to explore the potential of stem cells, the regulatory and research funding picture has become increasingly complex. Critics believe the limitations posed by the U.S. federal stem cell policy have put a damper on public and private research. Other countries are setting up research...

At the recent GOP debate in Iowa, Gingrich defended his pro-life record, declaring, “I believe that life begins at conception” and stating that embryos at fertility clinics “should be considered life because by definition they’ve been conceived. I am against any kind of experimentation on embryos. And I think my position on life has been very clear and very consistent.” No, it hasn't.

All of us raging moderates and institutionalists can now breathe a sigh of relief: At least for now, the center holds.