Michael J. Fox talks about campaign/Rush

Joined
Jun 14, 2002
Messages
2,754
Ratings
110
Age
38
Offline
Didn't see this posted...


<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/o8lsjfjgAA8"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/o8lsjfjgAA8" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>
 

ra

I'm happily on drugs
Joined
Nov 24, 1997
Messages
24,886
Ratings
600
Age
110
Location
noitacoL
Offline
His positions are shakey at best.


(ps.... Like Rush should know how much medication somebody should be taking... what a lamer.)
 

misterbeefy33

You stepped in WHAT?
Joined
Aug 24, 2002
Messages
1,899
Ratings
335
Age
48
Location
Harrison, AR
Offline
His positions are shakey at best.


(ps.... Like Rush should know how much medication somebody should be taking... what a lamer.)
That's not even CLOSE to being funny. There is NOTHING funny about his or anyone else's situation with this disease. I, for one, have a minor simptom called Essential Tremors. It could someday evolve into Parkinson's, but I hope and pray to God not. I, am also a Republican by belief. However, no faction is perfect, and neither is any belief. Think about it before you respond. Don't just go with what everyone else thinks. How would you feel if you were in that position? I can tell you first hand that it's not nice. I get teased for it everyday. Even though there's nothing I can do, and no medicine to control it.
 

Dave

Super Forum Fanatic
Joined
Mar 14, 2006
Messages
6,578
Ratings
1,762
Offline
Rush shouldn't have taken it to a personal level by saying that he thought Fox was off his medication or exaggerating. Rush was obviously wrong because Fox has since said that he was overmedicated in those political ads. Fox did admit in his book that he purposely didn't take his medication before he testified before Congress. The minute someone makes attacks on a personal level is when we stop talking about the actual issue. Rush was wrong and he has apologized.

Michael J Fox isn't being completely honest in those political ads. He says "Senator Jim Talent opposes expanding stem cell research. Senator Talent even wanted to criminalize the science that gives us a chance for hope." Senator Talent has been a consistent supporter of increased funding for stem cell research that doesn't involve the destruction of human embryos and has only sought to criminalize human cloning. Missouri does have a bill on the State ballot that would allow the cloning of human beings and then require their destruction prior to gestation.

Fox also released a similar ad attacking Michael Steele in Maryland. The only person in that race to have voted against stem cell research is Steele's opponent Ben Cardin:

On September 6, 2006, the Frederick News Post reported: “[Cardin] opposes suggestions that stem cell research is acceptable if the embryo isn't destroyed. (Liam Farrell, “Pursuing Change,” Frederick News Post, September 2, 2006)

Michael Steele added, “I am an enthusiastic supporter of cord blood, adult stem cell and embryonic stem cell research that does not destroy the embryo, and I fully support expanding innovations in technology that make it possible to treat and prevent disease without the willful destruction of human embryos.”

Cardin Voted AGAINST Expanded Research On Stem Cells That Do Not Destroy Embryos.

Alternate Stem Cell Research Methods – Passage. “Barton, R-Texas, motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill that would require the National Institutes of Health to conduct and support research on the isolation, derivation and production of pluripotent stem cells that do not destroy human embryos. It would require the Health and Human Services secretary to issue final guidelines for additional stem cell research, with priority for research with the greatest potential to yield benefits in the near future, within 90 days of the bill's enactment.” (S. 2754, CQ Vote #380: Motion rejected. July 18, 2006, Cardin voted Nay)
The Senate Voted Unanimously To Pass the Same Bill that Cardin voted AGAINST. Both Senators Mikulski and Sarbanes Voted In Favor Of The Bill.

Alternate Stem Cell Research Methods – Passage. Passage of the bill that would require the National Institutes of Health to conduct and support research to develop techniques for the isolation, derivation and production of pluripotent stem cells that do not destroy human embryos. It would require the Health and Human Services secretary to issue final guidelines for additional stem cell research, including a prioritization of research with the greatest potential to yield benefits in the near future, within 90 days of the bill's enactment.” (S. 2754, CQ Vote #205: July 18, 2006, Sarbanes voted Yea; Mikulski voted Yea)
http://www.steeleformaryland.com/SE...ainstStemCellResearchforPurePoliticalGain.htm

When scientists try to manipulate them into ESC's they tend to cause potentially dangerous tumors. Dr. James Sherley, associate professor of biological engineering at MI, explained this just a few weeks ago. He said "When you put them [ESC] in an environment where they can grow and develop, they make lots of different kind of tissues. This tumor formation property is an inherent feature of the cells. And all you have to do is simply inject them into an animal tissue--this happens at very high efficiency." He also said "And although some might say we can solve the tumor problem down the road, that's equivalent to saying we can solve the cancer problem, and we may, but that's a long time coming."
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20557912-1702,00.html

The Washington Post's recent article on this subject: "Injecting human embryonic stem cells into the brains of Parkinson's disease patients may cause tumors to form, U.S. researchers reported on Sunday."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/22/AR2006102200325.html

The journal Nature Medicine came to the same conclusionsin a report this week.
http://www.nature.com/nm/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/nm1495.html

If those who think embryonic stem cells are the answer, it appears that it may soon be possible to directly create embryonic-type (pluripotent) stem cells without creating, using, or destroying human embryos. The procedure is proposed by William Hurlbut who is the professor of Neurological Science at Stanford. The procedure is known as Altered Nuclear Transfer Oocyte Assisted Reprogramming.
http://www.alterednucleartransfer.com/

I don't blame Fox for supporting something that he thinks might lead to cures. If there were evidence that ESC's could do what some claim they can then I would definitely support it.
 

Saintman2884

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Dec 17, 2003
Messages
13,561
Ratings
1,404
Offline
Dave, what you jsut described is what we see in some political ads these days and maybe the past 10-20 years, its called telling the truth convenient to your cause and leaving out the rest. You know I was having an argument with some people tonight about a few political issues and some guys told me that Governor Blanco was a scapegoat painted by the media during Katrina and that really she had no blame it in all compared with Bush and Nagin, in fact it was pure BS on their part. One guy went as far to say that Blanco coudlnt have done anything to help the problem out better, I then realized he was letting his biases dictate the facts. I mean at the college I go too you have a lot of liberals that tell you the best version of their truth according to them and then leave out the rest becuase it may bring some doubt to their argument their trying to tell you.

Its goes both ways, I dont say this as some right wing conservative, I say this becuase some people can craft an argument that seems flawless and good but leave out some important facts that may hurt their argument overall.
It annoys me quite frankly, to be perfectly honest.
 

TriPolarTroy

AKA ShoelessTroy
Gold VIP Contributor
Joined
Apr 24, 2003
Messages
2,822
Ratings
2,909
Age
50
Location
Ponchatoula, LA
Offline
Not too funny bro.

His positions are shakey at best.


Dude, how is that even a little bit funny. I take a medicine that causes Akathesia , which often described as a "Parkinson's like" side effect. If you ever have the displeasure of experiencing this disease, I seriously doubt you would think this clip of Fox is, as you put it, "shakey at best'.


Akathisia (or "acathisia") is an often extremely unpleasant subjective sensation of "inner" restlessness that manifests itself with an inability to sit still or remain motionless, hence the origin of its name: Greek a (without) + kathesis (sitting).

Akathisia may range in intensity from a mild sense of disquiet or anxiety (which may be easily overlooked) to a total inability to sit still with overwhelming anxiety and severe dysphoria (manifesting as an almost indescribable sense of terror and doom). In the most severe cases, dysphoria can be so severe that the patient is literally compelled to take action, leading, possibly, to suicide attempts. It is not uncommon to have patients literally run out of a hospital or emergency room.
 

Saintman2884

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Dec 17, 2003
Messages
13,561
Ratings
1,404
Offline
But Shoeless, you know that from Dave's post the ad Fox is making isnt interily accurate, in other words he is leaving out some key elements of the story that may be important to the overall issue. I mean dont you think that this is a good example of telling the truth conveneint to your cause and not what the whole truth is.

You should at least try to tell the whole story in politics, its not easy, but it couldnt hurt, you know.
 
Joined
Aug 15, 2000
Messages
36,032
Ratings
54
Age
54
Location
da boyah
Offline
>>One guy went as far to say that Blanco coudlnt have done anything to help the problem out better, I then realized he was letting his biases dictate the facts. I mean at the college I go too you have a lot of liberals that tell you the best version of their truth according to them and then leave out the rest becuase it may bring some doubt to their argument their trying to tell you.

While I disagree with her, make no mistake that she took some orchestrated heat (though much of it deserved). I think an honest review of the facts would show that Bush, Nagin and Blanco (in that order) deserve the appropriate blame. I'm not a huge fan of the governor, and did not support her in 2003. But the state did what it could initially. Arm-chair quarterbacking, maybe they could have turned the National Guard over to the feds, and a lot of people say that. But what good might that have done as the feds weren't prepared anyway outside of the Coast Guard (the heroes) and first responders and citizens who went door to door and rooftop to rooftop.

Bush has to take the most blame because he is in charge of the federal response (initially inept, no one can possibly argue that) and also the Army Corps of Engineers who are under him. The magnitude of the compounded problems of a hurricane aftermath and a city being flooded was a learning experience.

Nagin goes second for failing to get more of the poor segment of the population out of town. In my mind, he's almost been derelict in his second term. I haven't seen anything worth a damn coming out of City Hall. The streets are now sub-3rd world, there is no plan, and I just don't see him as any kind of leader that we need right now.

Blanco gets third blame. The state did a pretty good job with the contraflow. Two complaints I had were some podunk towns who refused to adjust their 1 or 2 traffic lights to account for unbalanced (tens of thousands) traffic patterns while local police just sat there in their cars watching. I thought many of them should have been arrested by state troopers, so that is a failure. They also did a good job (despite some of the parishes, e.g. Jefferson - the 2nd largest in the state) in getting 85% of the people out of the metro area in 48 hours when we always knew it was going to require 72. But they failed to get needed supplies in to suffering Louisianians. So they were inept too.

JMHO.

TPS
 
Last edited:

Saintman2884

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Dec 17, 2003
Messages
13,561
Ratings
1,404
Offline
Agreed, TPS. But on more then a few college campuses the attitudes are very slanted and pointed to a direction where if someone doenst think the majority of the classroom and may have stark differences with the person teaching the class, the guy who disagrees is seen as sort of an oucast of not exactly seen as one of the majority opinion that is agreed upon. I think thats a fault of many places of learning in this country, sure they challenge you but their thinking is well lets put it this way, flawed. Many college professors when they give a lecture for a class tell what they can give you and hos it may be relevent to their way of thinking and that thiking could be seen as flawed or subject to debate. But if craft the argument a certain way, you can convince them its the right one even when its not some of the time.

Not bashing RebSaint here becuase he is a professor in a college at LSU but if he were here he would say that if you have a class to teach in History for example becuase thats his trade and profession, it would take much longer and much more depth to tell the whole story behind the Recontrcution of the South after the Civil War but it has to be done in fairlt quick manner becuase of time constraints in a semester, so you have to choose what you think is more importat and less important, well what yu may choose to be less important may not be that way or the way it was supposed to be in how it realy happened.
Because History is complicated and nots something thats piecemeal, you have people who could see certain things in it that fit their wolrd view and well it leads them to develop a perconceived idea of history.

Reb is the history professor here and I will respect his authority on what he is talking about, but I have noticed that in how some professors pick and choose their ideas of what implies in a course and what doesnt
 

Saintman2884

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Dec 17, 2003
Messages
13,561
Ratings
1,404
Offline
TPS, let me make a confession buddy. I think when I say certian people have a preconccived idea and it dictates their thinking, let me say man I am at times no different. I get along with you becuase I think that despites our political thinking, I can agree with you as a person and get think highly of you as a poster on this board. And I admit it I have had at times had certain ideas or biases in my own life, it anything it makes an damn good indictment of my inability to listen and to learn something new and to change. And honestly TPS change isnt always in my vocubalary, its hard to rethink or adapt a new course of a new idea of a new way of thinking, its harder then anything in the world to me. But I feel now that as a man and as a human being its time to rethink those strategies I was thinking before.
Nobody wants to be known as a guy who thinks of has the unpopular way of thinking or even the wrong one, but is their a reason to change and its a good one, then considering is what I should do.

Social issues are no different, you now man, I can think and discuss rather ten scream and shout and be disagreeable, its that makes me liberal, then so be it and the effort is worthwhile
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2001
Messages
835
Ratings
2
Age
47
Offline
And honestly TPS change isnt always in my vocubalary, its hard to rethink or adapt a new course of a new idea of a new way of thinking, its harder then anything in the world to me. But I feel now that as a man and as a human being its time to rethink those strategies I was thinking before.

Not to hijack the thread or anything - but what was the impetus for new course/change 2884? It sounds like you had an epiphany of some sort -- I do agree with you about change, esp. in a core belief - it's incredibly difficult. Good luck with your further introspection.
 

ra

I'm happily on drugs
Joined
Nov 24, 1997
Messages
24,886
Ratings
600
Age
110
Location
noitacoL
Offline
That's not even CLOSE to being funny. There is NOTHING funny about his or anyone else's situation with this disease. I, for one, have a minor simptom called Essential Tremors. It could someday evolve into Parkinson's, but I hope and pray to God not. I, am also a Republican by belief. However, no faction is perfect, and neither is any belief. Think about it before you respond. Don't just go with what everyone else thinks. How would you feel if you were in that position? I can tell you first hand that it's not nice. I get teased for it everyday. Even though there's nothing I can do, and no medicine to control it.
If you knew me, you would know that I can laugh about almost anything... there's a big difference between laughing about something and laughing at someone.
I've got a million things wrong in my life and my family that I don't mind making a quick joke here and there about. It helps to not make it worse than it really is.
 

theSpaniard

Make It Rain
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
3,011
Ratings
68
Age
34
Location
Rochester New York
Offline
If you knew me, you would know that I can laugh about almost anything... there's a big difference between laughing about something and laughing at someone.
I've got a million things wrong in my life and my family that I don't mind making a quick joke here and there about. It helps to not make it worse than it really is.

Exactly. Making jokes about things wrong in your life can help you get through some really tough times. We all know that MJF's condition is sad, but don't get on those of us who don't pity him. That is not the answer either.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Similar threads




Saints Headlines (The Advocate)

Headlines

Top Bottom