Response to Michael J. Fox Ad

dkst0426

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nguJQ_dRPXw

::applauds::

Songburst

I know that I take lots of stock in what jocks and sitcom stars have to say. Jesus himself on the other hand ... I'm surprised that they didn't have him dressed in proper crucifixion attire.

I like how they claimed that there won't be any cures obtained from stem cell research for 15 years as if that were bad. Praying for cures to come up with themselves has yielded much better results.

Purple Hawk

Songburst wrote:

I know that I take lots of stock in what jocks and sitcom stars have to say. Jesus himself on the other hand ... I'm surprised that they didn't have him dressed in proper crucifixion attire.

I like how they claimed that there won't be any cures obtained from stem cell research for 15 years as if that were bad. Praying for cures to come up with themselves has yielded much better results.

Ok, i actually did watch the ad, very good.

i also like how people don't know the difference between embryionic stem cells and all the other types.

i also like how people automattically assume that if someone opposes embryonic research, they oppose stem cell research.

i also like how evidence suggests that there's not much to gain by expanding current stem cell research (which is going on and which no republicans are trying to outlaw) into embryonic research.

bootlegger10

Somebody look up the stats on what has yielded better advances: adult stem cells or embryonic stem cells? My gut tells me adult stem cells. My gut also tells me that the left won't tell us this.

Purple Hawk

bootlegger10 wrote:

Somebody look up the stats on what has yielded better advances: adult stem cells or embryonic stem cells? My gut tells me adult stem cells. My gut also tells me that the left won't tell us this.

since they've set up this false dichotomy, and put forth this idea that you can't be both for stem cell research and against embryonic stem cell research, i would agree with you. This seems to be either an act of desperation, or a move to cover up the facts that don't support their viewpoint.

darthvedder81

Songburst wrote:

I know that I take lots of stock in what jocks and sitcom stars have to say. Jesus himself on the other hand ... I'm surprised that they didn't have him dressed in proper crucifixion attire.

I like how they claimed that there won't be any cures obtained from stem cell research for 15 years as if that were bad. Praying for cures to come up with themselves has yielded much better results.

Wow. You almost deserve congratualations for missing the point so well.

Your "praying" comment is especially ignorant.

The issue that the ad is addressing is that somehow by voting yes on this proposition (or voting for candidates in favor of embryonic stem cell research) Michael J. Fox and others like him will soon be miraculously healed. It's just like what Kerry and Edwards did with Chris Reeve—vote for us and the lame shall rise! It seems all the Democrats have anymore is playing on people's emotions—how can you argue with the Parkinsons sufferer and not look heartless?

I love Michael J. Fox and would rejoice to see him cured but that doesn't make it right to exploit the voting public in this way.

Hope&Anger

darthvedder81 wrote:

It seems all the Democrats have anymore is playing on people's emotions—how can you argue with the Parkinsons sufferer and not look heartless?

And the Republican argument characterizing an embryo sitting around in a freezer as "human life" ISN'T playing on people's emotions? I mean, don't you need, like, a uterus before an embryo becomes human life?

upina2001

I guess dumbass Rush Limbaugh said MJ Fox was "acting" and needed to maybe "get off the drugs."

Go figure....

RainDog

darthvedder81 wrote:

Wow. You almost deserve congratualations for missing the point so well.

Your "praying" comment is especially ignorant.

The issue that the ad is addressing is that somehow by voting yes on this proposition (or voting for candidates in favor of embryonic stem cell research) Michael J. Fox and others like him will soon be miraculously healed. It's just like what Kerry and Edwards did with Chris Reeve—vote for us and the lame shall rise! It seems all the Democrats have anymore is playing on people's emotions—how can you argue with the Parkinsons sufferer and not look heartless?

I love Michael J. Fox and would rejoice to see him cured but that doesn't make it right to exploit the voting public in this way.

Wolves in the Wilderness is a much better way of exploiting the voting pubic, then? Or are you more like me - you don't really have a big problem with exploiting the public, but really wish the other side wouldn't do it.

I find it surprising that people actually believe that Al-Queda can take over our country - yet, every time a post 9-11 election comes around, there it is on my television screen: Osama Bin Laden will overthrow the government if you don't vote for <<fill in candidate or largely unrelated bill here>>

Michael J. Fox has a particular interest in increasing research on embryonic stem cells. People know him - so why shouldn't he use that recognition to bring attention to what he has a particular interest in? Politics tends to hype shit up around election time - so the possibility of a cure for Fox's condition arrising from research over the course of a number of years becomes a "miracle cure" in television ads. On the other side, the possiblity of a terrorist killing hundreds of people becomes the <<ahem>> "very real" threat of fundamentalist Sharia law and bowing down before President for Life bin Laden.

But, you know, I'm with you. Only the other side should play nice.

Purple Hawk

upina2001 wrote:

I guess dumbass Rush Limbaugh said MJ Fox was "acting" and needed to maybe "get off the drugs."

Go figure....

instead of guessing, why don't you listen to what he actually said:

"Fox was either acting or STOPPED taking his drugs."

someone misquoting someone from the right, go figure!

Rushlimbo

Purple Hawk wrote:

instead of guessing, why don't you listen to what he actually said:

"Fox was either acting or STOPPED taking his drugs."

someone misquoting someone from the right, go figure!

"He is exaggerating the effects of the disease," Limbaugh told listeners. "He's moving all around and shaking and it's purely an act. . . . This is really shameless of Michael J. Fox. Either he didn't take his medication or he's acting."

"This is the only time I've ever seen Michael J. Fox portray any of the symptoms of the disease he has," Limbaugh said. "He can barely control himself."

Later Monday, still on the air, Limbaugh would apologize, but reaction to his statements from Parkinson's experts and Fox's supporters was swift and angry.

dkst0426

Purple Hawk wrote:

"Fox was either acting or STOPPED taking his drugs."

Rushlimbo wrote:

This is really shameless of Michael J. Fox. Either he didn't take his medication or he's acting."

6 of one, half-dozen of the other.

Well, it was pretty shameless, and he admitted to doing the same in front of the Senate Subcommittee in his own book. That's pandering.

Hope&Anger

Rushlimbo wrote:

"He is exaggerating the effects of the disease," Limbaugh told listeners. "He's moving all around and shaking and it's purely an act. . . . This is really shameless of Michael J. Fox. Either he didn't take his medication or he's acting."

"This is the only time I've ever seen Michael J. Fox portray any of the symptoms of the disease he has," Limbaugh said. "He can barely control himself."

Later Monday, still on the air, Limbaugh would apologize, but reaction to his statements from Parkinson's experts and Fox's supporters was swift and angry.

And of course, what we know from experts in Parkinson's Disease is that the medication itself produces the twitches and the shaking. If he weren't taking the medication, he'd basically be frozen.

But really, shouldn't Rush stay away from the comments about other people's drugs, what with the oxycontin and the viagra?

Hope&Anger

Going back to the ad, it seems to me like it's just Exhibit Nine Million in the Republican War on Science.

Yes, that's right, $6 billion in stem cell research and no new cures. How many billions of dollars have we invested in cancer research, and nope, we haven't cured that yet either. But that doesn't mean we're going to stop investing in that research.

This argument really glosses over what science is about -- how it's a process, and it's slow, and it requires trial and error, and it's expensive, but over the long haul, it produces results.

And Patricia Heaton's comments about harvesting eggs being dangerous? I have no idea where that comes from. It's a pain in the ass, it's true, but dangerous? Hardly. (Yeah, I guess things can go wrong, but things can go wrong when you're having your teeth cleaned. It's rare, and we don't really plan things around these rare events.)

And this claim about exploiting poor women? The opportunities for that are already available. Fertility clinics are willing to take egg donations. But because it's such a pain in the ass, it's hardly worth the money that clinics are willing to offer. And it's not like we see lines of poor women trying to sell their eggs to fertility clinics.

And just for the record, my supporting embryonic stem cell research hardly means that I OPPOSE research in adult stem cells.

Rushlimbo

Hope&Anger wrote:

But really, shouldn't Rush stay away from the comments about other people's drugs, what with the oxycontin and the viagra?

http://www.rushlimbaughonline.com/articles/familyvalues.htm


http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0706062rush1.html

NOCODE#1

darthvedder81 wrote:

Wow. You almost deserve congratualations for missing the point so well.

Your "praying" comment is especially ignorant.

The issue that the ad is addressing is that somehow by voting yes on this proposition (or voting for candidates in favor of embryonic stem cell research) Michael J. Fox and others like him will soon be miraculously healed. It's just like what Kerry and Edwards did with Chris Reeve—vote for us and the lame shall rise! It seems all the Democrats have anymore is playing on people's emotions—how can you argue with the Parkinsons sufferer and not look heartless?

I love Michael J. Fox and would rejoice to see him cured but that doesn't make it right to exploit the voting public in this way.

playing with emotions is having iraqi citizens get their thumb colored to vote then sending 'em back to their shacks with no electricity to die slowly and shit in a hand dug pit. BUT DEMOCRACY IS WORKING!

NOCODE#1

dkst0426 wrote:

6 of one, half-dozen of the other.

Well, it was pretty shameless, and he admitted to doing the same in front of the Senate Subcommittee in his own book. That's pandering.

next time we'll tell anyone who's handicapped to park the wheel chair outside. we dont want to unfairly influence anyone.

putting the ouche in douchebag= dkst0426

PJPOWER

Shameless or not, the fact that it was a shaking Michael J. Fox shouldn't effect the decisions of anyone. I personally don't give any more of a shit about Fox's political views than I do any other actor.

hippiemom

dkst0426 wrote:

6 of one, half-dozen of the other.

Well, it was pretty shameless, and he admitted to doing the same in front of the Senate Subcommittee in his own book. That's pandering.

Shameless? Why? Parkinson's is a devastating disease. Drugs can only mask the symptoms, they do nothing to cure or lessen the progress of the disease. It seems to me that taking drugs to mask the symptoms would be the greater deception, making the disease look more benign than it is.

PJPOWER wrote:

Shameless or not, the fact that it was a shaking Michael J. Fox shouldn't effect the decisions of anyone. I personally don't give any more of a shit about Fox's political views than I do any other actor.

I don't value Michael J. Fox's opinion any more highly than the opinion of any other semi-retired actor with extensive personal knowledge of a disease who chairs a foundation devoted to finding a cure for that disease.

enharmonic

I wonder if Limbaugh thinks that Muhammad Ali is faking it too?

:(

I also wonder if Bush were to be stricken with Parkinsons (God forbid!), if he'd be quietly whisked off to Europe for experimental treatments derived from stem cell research.

Hmmm...

Pearl Jam and toast

Hope&Anger wrote:

And the Republican argument characterizing an embryo sitting around in a freezer as "human life" ISN'T playing on people's emotions? I mean, don't you need, like, a uterus before an embryo becomes human life?

yeah really..

Most of the major republican issues today could be introduced with "Hey christians look here.."

They play on more emotions than Barry White's sweet baritone.

dkst0426

NOCODE#1 wrote:

next time we'll tell anyone who's handicapped to park the wheel chair outside. we dont want to unfairly influence anyone.

putting the ouche in douchebag= dkst0426

He's not handicapped. He has a medical condition that has medication to control the symptoms, and he has plainly chosen to NOT use said medication when making public/political statements of record. As I said, at best that's pandering to the emotions of voters. He's the one who chose to put himself in the public eye. I have no problems with anyone using their celebrity status to create/increase awareness of issues or conditions, but when you do that, realize that you put yourself in the crosshairs.

So who's the douchebag now?

dkst0426

hippiemom wrote:

Shameless? Why? Parkinson's is a devastating disease. Drugs can only mask the symptoms, they do nothing to cure or lessen the progress of the disease. It seems to me that taking drugs to mask the symptoms would be the greater deception, making the disease look more benign than it is.

I guess it's easy to use that logic when you're trying to garner votes and support.

Pearl Jam and toast

dkst0426 wrote:

I guess it's easy to use that logic when you're trying to garner votes and support.

why would you want to cover up the disease you've been stricken with when trying to gain support to fix it?

And hippiemom's right, the meds don't fix a damn thing it just hides the shakes.

Pearl Jam and toast

hippiemom wrote:

I don't value Michael J. Fox's opinion any more highly than the opinion of any other semi-retired actor with extensive personal knowledge of a disease who chairs a foundation devoted to finding a cure for that disease.

match : hippiemom. You're on tonight.. don't forget "and is also a victim of the disease himself"

Hope&Anger

dkst0426 wrote:

He's not handicapped. He has a medical condition that has medication to control the symptoms, and he has plainly chosen to NOT use said medication when making public/political statements of record. . . .
So who's the douchebag now?

I say it's still you.

The medication actually GIVES him the tremors. Without the medication, he would be completely frozen.

Read this:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102400691.html

which states in relevant part:
"Limbaugh's shock at Fox's appearance is a measure of the disease's devastation, advocates say. Contrary to the charge that Fox might not take his medicine to enhance his symptoms, the medicine produces some of the uncontrolled body movements."

So Limbaugh's head is up his ass, as is yours, I think.

decides2dream

Hope&Anger wrote:

I say it's still you.

The medication actually GIVES him the tremors. Without the medication, he would be completely frozen.

Read this:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102400691.html

which states in relevant part:
"Limbaugh's shock at Fox's appearance is a measure of the disease's devastation, advocates say. Contrary to the charge that Fox might not take his medicine to enhance his symptoms, the medicine produces some of the uncontrolled body movements."

So Limbaugh's head is up his ass, as is yours, I think.

well stated.
anyway, it is HIS choice to use, or not use, his meds as he sees fit. if he were to choose not to use his meds to prove a point, it is his freewill to do so...and has nothing to do with 'acting'...and everything to do with the real reality that he has to face and live everyday.

Purple Hawk

decides2dream wrote:

well stated.
anyway, it is HIS choice to use, or not use, his meds as he sees fit. if he were to choose not to use his meds to prove a point, it is his freewill to do so...and has nothing to do with 'acting'...and everything to do with the real reality that he has to face and live everyday.

this post is the most irrelevent post i've ever seen. what does this have to do with anything? not a personal attack, sorry. but rush says the guy stopped taking his meds for effect. people are outraged. then it comes out, that it's probably the case that rush was right. so now it's like..ok, so that's his right. Rush never said the guy couldn't do what he did, he just pointed out the lies in what fox asserted.

Purple Hawk

Hope&Anger wrote:

I say it's still you.

The medication actually GIVES him the tremors. Without the medication, he would be completely frozen.

Read this:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102400691.html

which states in relevant part:
"Limbaugh's shock at Fox's appearance is a measure of the disease's devastation, advocates say. Contrary to the charge that Fox might not take his medicine to enhance his symptoms, the medicine produces some of the uncontrolled body movements."

So Limbaugh's head is up his ass, as is yours, I think.

the problem is...is that you, and most people in the media, etc...focus on this one quote from rush. you like to focus on emotional crap like this, instead of substantive issues, particularly what fox was actually saying was complete crap, and had his head up his ass. he implied republicans are against stem cell research, which is not true. he implied that a vote for a republican will kill people with parkinsans. this is the real world, only a minority live in the great bubble (see the harold ford thread)

Abookamongstthemany

Purple Hawk wrote:

this post is the most irrelevent post i've ever seen. what does this have to do with anything? not a personal attack, sorry. but rush says the guy stopped taking his meds for effect. people are outraged. then it comes out, that it's probably the case that rush was right. so now it's like..ok, so that's his right. Rush never said the guy couldn't do what he did, he just pointed out the lies in what fox asserted.

I guess Rush was making some of those idiotic assertions and that's where the problem lies.

Hope&Anger

Purple Hawk wrote:

this post is the most irrelevent post i've ever seen. what does this have to do with anything? not a personal attack, sorry. but rush says the guy stopped taking his meds for effect. people are outraged. then it comes out, that it's probably the case that rush was right. so now it's like..ok, so that's his right. Rush never said the guy couldn't do what he did, he just pointed out the lies in what fox asserted.

I am going to go literally crazy, but I'll repeat myself . . . for the third time.

He was taking his drugs. It's the drugs that are giving him the tremors. If he didn't take the drugs, he would be frozen solid.

I mean, has anyone seen Awakenings? People with Parkinson's shake in the beginning stages, but as the disease advances, they become immobilized.

Does anyone actually care about the facts? Or should we just keep repeating Limbaugh's preposterous and ignorant claims?

Geez . . .