'When you wade into political life you have every right to say what you want, but you cannot in turn argue that no one has the right to take you on'...
Okay...now what is wrong with this statement.
If Michael J Fox wants to say stuff, fine. If people don't agree with what he says, THEY have a right to say stuff back...
Liberals do love this page of the playbook...throw out people that are sympathetic figures to project the liberal message and hope no one attacks them back...
Liberals have lots of good political strategies like that...but guys, when you get called on it, you have to be a man (woman) and admit it...
WISCONSIN SPIN
Democratic governor Jim Doyle has some comments for people like Rush who said that Fox stopped taking meds to look more sympathetic:
Fox wrote in his autobiography that he stopped taking his medicine before giving congressional testimony on the research to the Senate in 1999 to show the effects of the disease.
Doyle, whose mother Ruth died this year after a 30-year bout with Parkinson's, said today that Limbaugh's comments were reprehensible."It is unbelievable to me that Rush Limbaugh and others would attack Michael J. Fox, and to anyone like me who has had a parent (or other relative) with Parkinson's disease, to listen to someone like Rush Limbaugh say someone is exaggerating their symptoms is unbelievable," Doyle said at a press conference outside the Capitol.
Again, Doyle is saying you shouldn't say about Fox, why?
Wednesday, October 25, 2006
LIMBAUGH ON MICHAEL J FOX
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
11 comments:
I agree with Michael J. Fox on this issue. Stem-cell research is not murder, and Republican efforts to polish this turd do not sit well with me. I want the GOP to be the pro-science pro-technology pro-defense party it was under Eisenhower.
Good call, Jason.
Jason,
This is issue is totally clouded. Stem cell research is fine, if the stem cells aren't from embryos which as I've exhaustively explained, are people at the earliest stages of their development. I've a far better idea. If Fox is so concerned about a cure, why doesn't he sacrifice himself rather than sacrificing others who are unable to defend themselves.
Do you know at what stage of development one transitions from a "clump of cells" to a human being with full rights guaranteed by the Constitution? Can you then insure that all who are aborted or chosen for research has not yet reached that precise point? Do you realize that Fox's own foundation admits that most of the funding does NOT go to embryonic stem cell research, which seems unreasonable given the crap about what a slam dunk it is for creating cures? If you can provide facts that illustrate the exact moment that "clump" becomes a person, I would be willing to study it and even change my position. Until then, a human being is a human being, whether it be a fully formed adult at the end of his life, or merely the fertilized ovum at the beginning of IT'S life. This is NOT a turd. This is human life. Humanity trumps science, not the other way around. The human spirit is such that it need not MURDER other human beings to provide for it's needs. Thus, Jim is wrong again. Bad call.
my biggest problem is how these people talk with confidence that this research will cure everyone and if you don't want to give full federal funding of it, you are stopping people from being cured...is rediculous
game,
it is emotional blackmail by the left. They can't deal with you straight on true facts. They have to blur the lines between ASC research and ESC if not with Human Cloning. They are not stand up people and resort to Michael Fox looking as bad as he can make himself look to sway your emotions since Fox can't argue facts truthfully.
Guys, embryos are not people and do not even have souls. They don't have thoughts. They don't have memories. They don't have feelings. They don't have sensations. There is absolutely no moral ambiguity here.
game--
The problem is this. Bush approves Democrat education spending. He approves Democrat health care spending. He does almost nothing about pork barrel spending running out of control. And he uses his first and only veto for what-- to veto federal stem cell funding. This is clearly a ploy to influence enthusiastic religious types who think the science here is sin.
Just because I don't want to negotiate with tyrants and have a centralized government directed economy does not mean I will take positions that are anti-science. I'm not going to defend the Republicans where they are wrong. They are going after Michael J. Fox for not being on his meds in the ad without asking ***why*** some Republicans are trying to criminalize certain avenues of research in the first place.
If embryonic stem cell research was the be all, end all that the supporters are making it out to be, why aren't private companies dumping massive amounts of money (and embryos) into it? The ban is only on public funding of ESC, not private.
Jason,
My main point has to do with the fact that liberals try to make it seem like embryonic stem cell research is going to save every sick person in the world...
Pal has it correct...
if you want to back federal funding of embryonic stem cell research, you should also go ahead and back federal funding for cloning...it MIGHT help in the medical field some day as well
"Guys, embryos are not people and do not even have souls. They don't have thoughts. They don't have memories. They don't have feelings. They don't have sensations. There is absolutely no moral ambiguity here."
How does one measure the presence of a soul? I do agree with your last line. There IS no ambiguity here, it's killing a human being. Doesn't matter what they haven't yet developed. They are not human because they have sensations, thoughts, or a place in the Hamptons. They are a human beings because they are a result of the process by which human beings are created. They can be nothing else. It is scientifically impossible. It's not a matter of my religion, but that my religion and science are in total alignment on this issue.
And it is the same with Bush. He's every bit a believer in the sanctity of this human life as I am or his Christian constituents are. And he rightly believes that my tax dollars shouldn't go to something so obviously wrong.
I'm with you on this subject, Jason.
However on this: "Bush approves Democrat education spending. He approves Democrat health care spending."
I would have to remind you that the Republics have TOTAL control of Congress. Total. They control the agenda, they control the ammendments, they control the text, they control the debate (or lack thereof), they control the amount of time members have to vote, they control the revotes, they control the House/Senate meetings to reconcile differences in versions, and they control changes made to the bill after all the voting without holding new votes. They even control the Republic and corporate lobbyists who write the original bills.
Just how does ANY of this become Democrat education spending or Democrat health care spending?
I would have to read the story
Post a Comment