Rush Limbaugh, Michael J. Fox and Parkinson's Disease
POSTED BY: misbehaven
UPDATED: Saturday, November 18, 2006 01:39
VIEWED: 26984
PAGE 4 of 19
Incidentally, Fox also recorded a campaign advertisement for Sen. Specter, because he's one of the few Republicans who supports federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. That sort of makes it a little difficult to say that Fox is just shilling for the Democrats.
Artists to my mind are the real architects of change, and not the political legislators who implement change after the fact.
- William S. Burroughs
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Yep. Fox's ad should be challenged; that’s what it means to have a national debate. A point is made, which is challenged until its veracity is accepted. Unfortunately, I think many view the whole point of Fox’s ad as to stifle that debate, because anyone who does challenge Fox will be demonized as hating sick people, as evident by many of the responses to your post. Fox’s ad, setting aside the many misleading statements, is a logical fallacy in and of itself, Argumentum ad Misericordiam, appeal to pity. As if somehow, because Fox has Parkinson’s that means that stem cell research is the end all and cure all of every known illness on the earth and will even make Julian fries and Fox is just a stupid doe-eyed sick person with no agenda, and anyone who challenges his point of view is villainous monster who wants all sick people to die a horrid agonizing death.
Originally posted by Hero:
I disagree with most of Limbaugh's personal comments about Fox, but the ads are political cheap shot, false and misleading, and Fox is taking advantage of his disease to generate sympathy for a pet cause. He deserves to be challenged on the issue, if not the medium he chose.
I don’t think Fox is stupid. I’m certain that he knows exactly what he is doing and that this is a calculated move because he believes it will help to silence criticism against stem cell research. That’s his prerogative, and he certainly has a dog in this fight, but it is still important to examine the issue. While stem cell research appears promising it is still in its infancy, and there is more we don’t know about it then that we do. No approved medical treatments have been derived from research on embryonic stem cells. Any time someone makes a prediction about the effectiveness of stem cell research on medicine, it should be carefully scrutinized, not simply accepted because of sympathy towards the person making the claim. It is also not true that stem cell research is banned, as I often hear stated. Stem cell research continues to enjoy federal government funding for both adult and embryonic stem cells, with embryonic stem cells limited to existing lines. Furthermore, private research has no such restriction. So, the supposed “banning” on stem cell research is in fact nothing more then a cautious line being drawn around the human fetus.
Personally, I’m not against embryonic stem cell research. In fact, I’m one of those people who believe that it will change the face of medicine, but I also understand the concern behind the idea of harvesting human embryos to fuel the pharmaceutical industry. The idea of such a thing makes me cringe. I’m not without sympathy for Fox’s condition either and while I doubt that stem cell research in any form will ever help him, I believe that it might for future generations; however I also think that some serious consideration needs to go into how those embryonic stem cells are harvested and whether they are needed at all. There are laws and regulation that must be considered. If we can use adult stem cells then maybe we should. Little is certain at this point, I think.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Here's the thing, Finn. The message of the ad isn't what is being challenged. The messenger is. Here's what Michael J Fox says in the ad:
Quote:
As you might know, I care deeply about stem cell research. In Missouri you can elect Claire McCaskill, who shares my hope for cures. Unfortunately, Senator Jim Talent opposes expanding stem cell research. Senator Talent even wanted to criminalize the science that gives us a chance for hope. They say all politics is local, but that’s not always the case. What you do in Missouri matters to millions of Americans. Americans like me.
That's part of the message of the ad. And, since I don't think anyone's dissected this yet I'll take a stab at it...
“As you might know, I care deeply about stem cell research.”
Hard to argue with that.
“In Missouri you can elect Claire McCaskill, who shares my hope for cures.”
Hard to argue with this either.
“Unfortunately, Senator Jim Talent opposes expanding stem cell research.”
Whether or not this is unfortunate depends on your point of view. For someone who cares deeply about stem cell research, I can see how this is unfortunate. As far as opposing the expansion of stem cell research, Talent did vote against the Senate bill that would’ve allowed for the expansion of federally okayed stem cell research. You know, one of the few bills in the past many years that had actual real bipartisan support. The one that Bush vetoed. Yeah, that one.
“Senator Talent even wanted to criminalize the science that gives us a chance for hope.”
I have no clue what this refers to. Could be right on or totally bogus.
“They say all politics is local, but that’s not always the case.”
Hard to argue with this.
“What you do in Missouri matters to millions of Americans.”
Umm. Probably not. I don’t think I’d agree with this one
. You probably only think this if you're in Missouri (apologies to my grandma's family still living in the vicinity of Willard, MO).“Americans like me.”
Sure. Why not.
Maybe I missed the part where Limbaugh was debating each of these points. I only saw the part where he was waving his arms mocking Michael J Fox and accusing him of fakery.
There is a way to debate, and there is a way to attempt to stifle debate. Limbaugh was attempting to stifle debate through mockery.
So, I might as well return the favor and pass along the best snark I've read so far on this (via a commenter over at Crooks and Liars):
"Are we surprised that Limbaugh automatically equates shaking with cutting off your meds?"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Michael J Fox should do another advert for Diet Pepsi, but without taking his meds for Rumsfeld's Disease (Aspartame poisoning).
www.sweetpoison.com
www.dorway.com
Wicked Sir Rumsfeld Knight of the British Empire on South Park:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8339201394200451031&hl=en
My wife had 4 heart attacks at age 32. The biggest change she made was elimination of diet sodas, which made the cardiologist sugeon angry, since he wanted to amputate her pacemaker cells: "We do it to young women all the time". She was a restaurant manager, so she had all the diet soda she could drink...
Of course, a pedophile Jewish drug addict like "Rush" would never report this disease to his sheeple, even when side effects from Oxycontin (hillbilly heroin) overdose made him lose his hearing. What do you expect for his $300-million contract?
And you don't have to genocide and cannibalize 7,000 US babies every day for stem cells, since every part of the body produces stem cells, especially umbilical cords. So abortion of 45-million US citizens, so far, is not part of the stem cell equation.
"We're flying a lot blinder than usual here. We need to get our bearings. I think we need to talk to Mr. Universe (Pirate News TV)."
-Wash, Serenity
FIREFLY SERENITY PILOT MUSIC VIDEO V2
Tangerine Dream - Thief Soundtrack: Confrontation
http://radio.indymedia.org/news/2006/03/8912.php
www.myspace.com/piratenewsctv
www.piratenews.org
Does that seem right to you?
www.scifi.com/onair/
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You know Rumsfield isn't a Knight of the British Empire right?
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
“As you might know, I care deeply about stem cell research.”
Hard to argue with that.
Yep!
Quote:
Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
“In Missouri you can elect Claire McCaskill, who shares my hope for cures.”
Hard to argue with this either.
Yep, but the same can be said of practically every american, excluding of course the wackos at "Skippy is Sexier, Alex must Die"
Quote:
Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
“Unfortunately, Senator Jim Talent opposes expanding stem cell research.”
Whether or not this is unfortunate depends on your point of view. For someone who cares deeply about stem cell research, I can see how this is unfortunate. As far as opposing the expansion of stem cell research, Talent did vote against the Senate bill that would’ve allowed for the expansion of federally okayed stem cell research. You know, one of the few bills in the past many years that had actual real bipartisan support. The one that Bush vetoed. Yeah, that one.
All true, but he has also co-sponsored legislation that would expand stem cell research derived from umbilical chord blood [Senate Bill S.681]. He has also come under fire for supporting bills which were not popular with his pro-life base, see article:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11410626/site/newsweek/
All and all, he sounds like a typical politician on this issue, walking a razors edge depending on the way the political wind blows, but what else can we expect from the idiots we elect these days?
Quote:
Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
“Senator Talent even wanted to criminalize the science that gives us a chance for hope.”
I have no clue what this refers to. Could be right on or totally bogus.
I can't find anything that supports this position either, but then I can't prove a negative so the burden lies with Fox to produce evidence to support his claim, barring that, I have to call BS on this one.
Quote:
Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
Maybe I missed the part where Limbaugh was debating each of these points. I only saw the part where he was waving his arms mocking Michael J Fox and accusing him of fakery.
I don't want to turn into a Rush defender, but he does talk about this on his website, and how the video has been manipulated to exclude the audo, here's the link:
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_102606/content/correcting_
the_record.guest.html
Quote:
Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
There is a way to debate, and there is a way to attempt to stifle debate. Limbaugh was attempting to stifle debate through mockery.
I suppose if you believe he was mocking him, I'd have to agree with you, but I'm sure there are Rush fans who would tend disagree about whether or not he was mocking Fox. Personally, I don't think that was his intent, but I can see where people who don't like him would come to that conclusion.
So, I might as well return the favor and pass along the best snark I've read so far on this (via a commenter over at Crooks and Liars):
"Are we surprised that Limbaugh automatically equates shaking with cutting off your meds?"
I suppose if you believe he was mocking him, I'd have to agree with you, but I'm sure there are Rush fans who would tend to disagree about whether or not he was mocking Fox. Personally, I don't think that was his intent, but I can see where people who don't like him would come to that conclusion.
To go back to your opening statment:
Quote:
Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
Here's the thing, Finn. The message of the ad isn't what is being challenged. The messenger is. Here's what Michael J Fox says in the ad:
I agree that Limbaugh was challenging the messenger, but so what? When a public figure injects himself into the political debate, they are fair game. Their health condition does not exclude them from criticism, nor should it. Limbaugh believes Fox's political position is wrong, so because Fox suffers from a debilitating disease means he should not question those positi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
interview
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Razza
"When a public figure injects himself into the political debate, they are fair game." As is Rush. So Rush's addictions, impotence, credibility, motivations, and basic humanity are all fair game. Right? And that belongs in a political debate about the issues. Right?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:That's f***ing bull***t, you a**hole!
Originally posted by Razza:
Under that logic, Mel Gibson shouldn't be in any trouble for his recent comments since he is obviously suffering from alcholism, a debilitating illness in it's own right.
How dare you equate a lack of personal control with a degenerative DISEASE that ultimatly causes death?
Let me take a stab here, you drink WAYYY too much, but it's a 'disease', so it's not you fault, right?
Sorry, I assumed Hero was the cruelest dope hereabouts. My bad.
Rabid Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Razza
"When a public figure injects himself into the political debate, they are fair game." As is Rush. So Rush's addictions, impotence, credibility, motivations, and basic humanity are all fair game. Right? And that belongs in a political debate about the issues. Right?
Absolutely!
-----------------
"History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon."
---Napoleon Bonaparte
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME