D_House 0 Posted October 25, 2006 A close family member had Parkinsons, he had off days and on days, even while medicated. Obviously, nobody here has the background to definitively say one way or another whether Fox was medicated or not... But does it really matter? It's still a factual depiction of the symptoms of the disease that he has spent the last several years suffering from and fighting for funding for. It's amazing how partisan a lot of folks on here are. How does supporting a candidate that supports research with possible benefits to millions of Americans make Fox a scumbag? Re-evaluate your lives if you actually believe this. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
surferskin 30 Posted October 25, 2006 A close family member had Parkinsons, he had off days and on days, even while medicated. Obviously, nobody here has the background to definitively say one way or another whether Fox was medicated or not... But does it really matter? It's still a factual depiction of the symptoms of the disease that he has spent the last several years suffering from and fighting for funding for. It's amazing how partisan a lot of folks on here are. How does supporting a candidate that supports research with possible benefits to millions of Americans make Fox a scumbag? Re-evaluate your lives if you actually believe this. fox has even said in his own autobiography that he's gone off his medication when it's necessary to get his point across...what was wrong about what rush said? the crux of what rush was getting at was that the Ad was not only just trying to get an emotional response out of people but also misleading. which it was just that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hoytdwow 202 Posted October 25, 2006 Oh no, it's the Libyans! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Patriotsfatboy1 1,432 Posted October 25, 2006 i listened to the show and watched the fox commercial...rush was right. fox was clearly off his medication. We can tell that you love Rush. However, he was criticizing Fox for politicizing the effects of the disease. However, that is what Rush does on a day-to-day basis. Rush Limbaugh is a hypocrite of the highest order. The medications in question merely treat the SYMPTOMS of the disease. They sometimes work better than other times. What Fox wants is for embryonic stem cell research to advance so that we might find a CURE for his disease (and many others). Rush and his right wing followers would love to have embryonic stem cell research abandoned altogether and his slamming of Fox is merely another attack in that battle. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Isotopes 1 Posted October 25, 2006 i listened to the show and watched the fox commercial...rush was right. fox was clearly off his medication. and exactly what qualifies you to determine whether he was on his meds or not? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
D_House 0 Posted October 25, 2006 fox has even said in his own autobiography that he's gone off his medication when it's necessary to get his point across...what was wrong about what rush said? the crux of what rush was getting at was that the Ad was not only just trying to get an emotional response out of people but also misleading. which it was just that. one... rush was speculating, as i said, he is not qualified to determine whether or not fox was on his meds, and honestly, neither are any of you, unless there is someone here who is a neurologist or other physician familiar with Parkinsons. Yes, the ad was obviously trying to get an emotional response out of people. But how is it misleading if these are actual symptoms of the disease? Two, my post was in response to the moron that called fox a scumbag. Rush is a blowhard and is known for being a hypocrite and flat out wrong on a regular basis, so it's not surprising that he weighed in on this. What surprised me is that such a strong reaction to Fox's positive advocacy exists. The guy has raised millions for Parkinsons research. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phillybear 365 Posted October 25, 2006 It's amazing how partisan a lot of folks on here are. How does supporting a candidate that supports research with possible benefits to millions of Americans make Fox a scumbag? Re-evaluate your lives if you actually believe this. Scumbag. Scumbag. Scumbag. It has nothing to do with political parties. I just want to punch Michael J Fox in his shaky face repeatedly. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
surferskin 30 Posted October 25, 2006 We can tell that you love Rush. However, he was criticizing Fox for politicizing the effects of the disease. However, that is what Rush does on a day-to-day basis. Rush Limbaugh is a hypocrite of the highest order. The medications in question merely treat the SYMPTOMS of the disease. They sometimes work better than other times. What Fox wants is for embryonic stem cell research to advance so that we might find a CURE for his disease (and many others). Rush and his right wing followers would love to have embryonic stem cell research abandoned altogether and his slamming of Fox is merely another attack in that battle. stem cell research is already legal in missori...he was promoting amendment 2 is has more to do with genetic cloning. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Isotopes 1 Posted October 25, 2006 Scumbag. Scumbag. Scumbag. It has nothing to do with political parties. I just want to punch Michael J Fox in his shaky face repeatedly. Why? Right or wrong people listen to celebrities. He believes strongly in a cause, why shouldn't he speak out for it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
D_House 0 Posted October 25, 2006 The medications in question merely treat the SYMPTOMS of the disease. They sometimes work better than other times. What Fox wants is for embryonic stem cell research to advance so that we might find a CURE for his disease (and many others). Well said. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Patriotsfatboy1 1,432 Posted October 25, 2006 stem cell research is already legal in missori...he was promoting amendment 2 is has more to do with genetic cloning. Amendment 2 has NOTHING to do with genetic cloning. It merely protects research in Missouri for things that are legal at the Federal government level. It is designed to prevent CMH422343's boss and his cronies from enacting legislation that prevents embryonic stem cell research in Missouri even though it is legal at the Federal level. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
D_House 0 Posted October 25, 2006 Scumbag. Scumbag. Scumbag. It has nothing to do with political parties. I just want to punch Michael J Fox in his shaky face repeatedly. Oh... I forgot you're the psycho killer schtick guy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phillybear 365 Posted October 25, 2006 Why? Right or wrong people listen to celebrities. He believes strongly in a cause, why shouldn't he speak out for it? Exactly. People follow celebrity opinions like drooling retards. People should form their own opinions, and not just adopt the opinion of a Paris Hilton or Alec Baldwin or James Woods or the Beastie Boys or Green Day, etc. And people are fascinated by celebrities. Think about all the shows on VH1, MTV, E! Network, Bravo, reality shows, etc, etc, etc, that deal with celebrities and their lives. Think for yourselves, dammit. Draw your own conclusions. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kpbuckeye 2 Posted October 25, 2006 Amendment 2 has NOTHING to do with genetic cloning. It merely protects research in Missouri for things that are legal at the Federal government level. It is designed to prevent CMH422343's boss and his cronies from enacting legislation that prevents embryonic stem cell research in Missouri even though it is legal at the Federal level. you used to be fair and reasonable in your posts. any more you are just a partisian hack. Not sure if you just want to suck on the local whiners d1ck or you are just in need of a friend. nothing like following a crowd, hopefully they will let you jack them off. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bandwagoneer 0 Posted October 25, 2006 "I am tired of these immigrants going into our country and stealing our diseases! It's all these diseased liberals like Michael J. Fox who want to raised taxes to fund their anti-american ways. We need to protect our borders and stop the Steve Nash's, Pedro Martinez's, and Russell Crow's from entering our country. We need to continue to support our of war on terror by searching and destroying their depots of weapons of mass destruction. Mainly, the Screen Actor's Guild and the professional players' unions!! This is only way that we will win the war in Iraq. And by the way- Does anyone know someone else with Parkinson's Disease besides Michael J. Fox and Muhammad Ali? A liberal immigrant and a muslim....think about it!" Whitey Wright for Congressman...2008 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Isotopes 1 Posted October 25, 2006 Exactly. People follow celebrity opinions like drooling retards. People should form their own opinions, and not just adopt the opinion of a Paris Hilton or Alec Baldwin or James Woods or the Beastie Boys or Green Day, etc. And people are fascinated by celebrities. Think about all the shows on VH1, MTV, E! Network, Bravo, reality shows, etc, etc, etc, that deal with celebrities and their lives. Think for yourselves, dammit. Draw your own conclusions. I agree with you but that is the fault of the idiots of who listen to them not the actual celebrity. If people are willing to listen to them I don't see why they shouldn't speak up for what the believe in though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
supermike80 1,317 Posted October 25, 2006 Rush Limbaugh is a jackass. I wish he would just get a heart attack and die already. Michael J Fox is a scumbag. I don't want to EVER hear the opinion of a celebrity/actor/musician on politics. EVER. Fact: you know nothing about politics, no one cares about your uninformed opinion, and shut the fock up. Stick to whatever made you famous, or just die already. Michael J Fox deserves to get another disease. Something fatal, so he will get off the TV already. Fock him. This is the REAL relevance dablammit. Fox is on my 2006 death pool and the year is quickly ending. He would be worth a LOT of points. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
surferskin 30 Posted October 25, 2006 Amendment 2 has NOTHING to do with genetic cloning. It merely protects research in Missouri for things that are legal at the Federal government level. It is designed to prevent CMH422343's boss and his cronies from enacting legislation that prevents embryonic stem cell research in Missouri even though it is legal at the Federal level. http://www.suntimes.com/news/novak/97998,C...novak16.article Misleading measure may launch U.S. cloning October 16, 2006 BY ROBERT NOVAK Sun-Times Columnist A new video available on YouTube marks a late attempt by pro-life forces to avert serious defeat in Missouri Nov. 7, with national implications. Cathy Ruse, speaking for Missourians Against Human Cloning, declares: "Amendment 2 is a fraud. It is an attempt to trick Missourians into approving -- in their Constitution -- human cloning, the right of biotech firms to do human cloning in Missouri -- something Missourians oppose by an overwhelming majority." But Amendment 2 is identified for many Missouri voters by the language at the beginning of the five-page, 2,000-word ballot initiative: "No person may clone or attempt to clone a human being." That explains why polls have shown a substantial margin of support for the constitutional amendment, also backed by key Republican politicians and business interests. It seems to offer the best of all worlds: government support of stem cell research without fear of cloning. The problem is that the proposal so narrowly defines cloning as to open the door in Missouri to any cloning procedure that takes place outside the womb. If this is approved by a state that historically is a barometer of national trends and is considered a pro-life stronghold, it will be a national model for breaking popular resistance to what the scientists and biotech companies want. ... This confrontation on what is in the ballot proposition is enough to confuse voters. Amendment 2 bans only cloning that involves planting an embryo within the womb. It specifically prohibits government from interfering with somatic cell nuclear transfer, which involves replacing the nucleus of a human egg outside the womb -- the cloning procedure used to produce Dolly the sheep. HTH Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Patriotsfatboy1 1,432 Posted October 25, 2006 http://www.suntimes.com/news/novak/97998,C...novak16.article... HTH I am sure that even you know that Novak is a horrible source. So, maybe you should go to the actual text of the ballot question from Missouri.gov http://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/2006ballot/ Plain Language Explanation:This amendment will allow Missouri patients and researchers access to any method of stem cell research, therapies and cures permitted under federal law. It also will set limits on any stem cell research, therapies and cures, including banning human cloning or attempted cloning. Violators will be subject to criminal and civil penalites. HTH you used to be fair and reasonable in your posts. any more you are just a partisian hack. Not sure if you just want to suck on the local whiners d1ck or you are just in need of a friend. nothing like following a crowd, hopefully they will let you jack them off. I have not changed my views. Perhaps you are just too defensive and have swung too far to the right Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
surferskin 30 Posted October 25, 2006 I am sure that even you know that Novak is a horrible source. So, maybe you should go to the actual text of the ballot question from Missouri.gov http://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/2006ballot/ HTH you don't like my source? why don't you try to prove it wrong than. Amendment 2 bans only cloning that involves planting an embryo within the womb. It specifically prohibits government from interfering with somatic cell nuclear transfer, which involves replacing the nucleus of a human egg outside the womb -- the cloning procedure used to produce Dolly the sheep. yeah, that link had a real thorough run through of amendment 2. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Patriotsfatboy1 1,432 Posted October 25, 2006 you don't like my source? why don't you try to prove it wrong than. Amendment 2 bans only cloning that involves planting an embryo within the womb. It specifically prohibits government from interfering with somatic cell nuclear transfer, which involves replacing the nucleus of a human egg outside the womb -- the cloning procedure used to produce Dolly the sheep. yeah, that link had a real thorough run through of amendment 2. Are you that dense that you could not click on the hyperlink to the Full Text of the Amendment? Here is the beginning of the full text: http://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/2006petitions/ppStemCell.asp THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT Be it resolved by the people of the state of Missouri that the Constitution be amended: One new section is adopted by adding one new section to be known as section 38(d) of Article III to read as follows: Section 38(d). 1. This section shall be known as the “ Missouri Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative.” 2. To ensure that Missouri patients have access to stem cell therapies and cures, that Missouri researchers can conduct stem cell research in the state, and that all such research is conducted safely and ethically, any stem cell research permitted under federal law may be conducted in Missouri, and any stem cell therapies and cures permitted under federal law may be provided to patients in Missouri, subject to the requirements of federal law and only the following additional limitations and requirements: (1) No person may clone or attempt to clone a human being. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
D_House 0 Posted October 25, 2006 http://www.suntimes.com/news/novak/97998,C...novak16.article... HTH That article is heavily biased. It is a stem cell initiative, these pro-life groups are clouding the issue with this human cloning bit. How much clearer does it get than "No person may clone or attempt to clone a human being."? The author of the article states "It specifically prohibits government from interfering with somatic cell nuclear transfer, which involves replacing the nucleus of a human egg outside the womb -- the cloning procedure used to produce Dolly the sheep." Somatic cell nuclear transfer in and of itself could not lead to the cloning of a human being without implantation into the uterus, which would be prohibited specifically by this language in the bill: “Clone or attempt to clone a human being” means to implant in a uterus or attempt to implant in a uterus anything other than the product of fertilization of an egg of a human female by a sperm of a human male for the purpose of initiating a pregnancy that could result in the creation of a human fetus, or the birth of a human being." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Franknbeans 46 Posted October 25, 2006 fox has even said in his own autobiography that he's gone off his medication when it's necessary to get his point across...what was wrong about what rush said? the crux of what rush was getting at was that the Ad was not only just trying to get an emotional response out of people but also misleading. which it was just that. what was wrong about it was he has no evidence to support his opinion and the ad wasn't misleading at all. People with Parkinson's (either on or off the meds) shake. I'm sure even Rush can relate to that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
surferskin 30 Posted October 25, 2006 Are you that dense that you could not click on the hyperlink to the Full Text of the Amendment? Here is the beginning of the full text: http://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/2006petitions/ppStemCell.asp are you so dense that if you read further into the actual amendment that it very specifically defines what human cloning is and leaves loopholes...did you miss the whole point of novak's article or did you just not read any of it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Patriotsfatboy1 1,432 Posted October 25, 2006 are you so dense that if you read further into the actual amendment that it very specifically defines what human cloning is and leaves loopholes...did you miss the whole point of novak's article or did you just not read any of it? Instead of taking Novak's twisted interpretation of the law, I went to the actual text. It defines cloning as: (2) “Clone or attempt to clone a human being” means to implant in a uterus or attempt to implant in a uterus anything other than the product of fertilization of an egg of a human female by a sperm of a human male for the purpose of initiating a pregnancy that could result in the creation of a human fetus, or the birth of a human being. Bear in mind that the measure does not actually provide any funding, but merely prevents the state from legislating against measures that have been approved at the Federal level. People who are not in favor of this legislation are doing so because they would like to ban embryonic stem cell research altogether. That is wrong. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phillybear 365 Posted October 25, 2006 I agree with you but that is the fault of the idiots of who listen to them not the actual celebrity. If people are willing to listen to them I don't see why they shouldn't speak up for what the believe in though. I'd rather that people stop listening, but that isn't going to happen. So this is the only solution that I can see. But that isn't going to happen, because most celebrities have huge egos, and believe they can resolve all of the world's issues with a sound bite. I can't decide which are typically stupider, the celebrites themselves, or the people who blindly agree with them. Ah, fock it. I think I'll go piss off our building's roof and aim for the people on the sidewalk. That should make me feel better. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Patriotsfatboy1 1,432 Posted October 25, 2006 I'd rather that people stop listening, but that isn't going to happen. So this is the only solution that I can see. But that isn't going to happen, because most celebrities have huge egos, and believe they can resolve all of the world's issues with a sound bite. I can't decide which are typically stupider, the celebrites themselves, or the people who blindly agree with them. Ah, fock it. I think I'll go piss off our building's roof and aim for the people on the sidewalk. That should make me feel better. Check the direction of the wind first. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
parrot 789 Posted October 25, 2006 Are we really counting on stem cell advances coming out of Missourah? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
surferskin 30 Posted October 25, 2006 Instead of taking Novak's twisted interpretation of the law, I went to the actual text. It defines cloning as:Bear in mind that the measure does not actually provide any funding, but merely prevents the state from legislating against measures that have been approved at the Federal level. People who are not in favor of this legislation are doing so because they would like to ban embryonic stem cell research altogether. That is wrong. well, i'm not going act like an expert on this amendment but one thing i have noticed when reading through it...it IS confusing. it seems at times to contradict itself ...you can quote different parts of it to prove either position. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Patriotsfatboy1 1,432 Posted October 25, 2006 well, i'm not going act like an expert on this amendment but one thing i have noticed when reading through it...it IS confusing. it seems at times to contradict itself ...you can quote different parts of it to prove either position. One item that I also have to take note of is the mention of Dolly. This is a strawman because: 1. Dolly was not human 2. Dolly was implanted in the uterus and was grown like any other embryo (in the womb) I am not an expert on the Amendment, but cmh9276 and I got into a discussion a short while back, so I actually read what it meant. Are we really counting on stem cell advances coming out of Missourah? I said the same thing a few weeks ago when discussing with cmh9276. However, it appears that some funding is coming from people who live in Missouri. There is one really rich guy who is pouring tens of millions into research himself. More importantly, this is a Red state enacting legislation protecting stem cell research. It is very symbolic of the movement towards acceptance of this type of research by moderate Republicans and may serve to (further) alienate those too far to the right. That might eventually help the Republican party, since many are upset at the pandering to the religious folks that has been going on in recent years. I am not sure that it will happen, but it could. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kpbuckeye 2 Posted October 25, 2006 I am sure that even you know that Novak is a horrible source. So, maybe you should go to the actual text of the ballot question from Missouri.gov http://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/2006ballot/ HTH I have not changed my views. Perhaps you are just too defensive and have swung too far to the right Swung to the right? Link? perhaps you just don't realize that sucking on these guy's cacks all day has obstructed your view of reality. here is a site I recommend for guys like you and parrot: www.pleasebemyinternetfriend.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
parrot 789 Posted October 25, 2006 here is a site I recommend for guys like you and parrot: Why you dragging me into this? So I can bitch-slap you a little bit then you can whine about me stalking you, yet again? It's pretty clear who the pathetic little bitch aching for internet attention is here, as usual. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GobbleDog 822 Posted October 25, 2006 Cure horrible deases or protect a blob of cells. Gee, that's a tough one. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Patriotsfatboy1 1,432 Posted October 25, 2006 perhaps you just don't realize that sucking on these guy's cacks all day has obstructed your view of reality. Other than saying that I have no view of reality, do you actually have a point in this discussion? I am pretty comfortable with my views and my reasoning in having those views. How about you? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
D_House 0 Posted October 25, 2006 Are we really counting on stem cell advances coming out of Missourah? Washington University in St. Louis has a great biomedical research program. The Stowers Institute in Kansas City also has some really good science. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wiffleball 4,660 Posted October 25, 2006 I saw Rush Limblob's pants. Rush was clearly off his viagra. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
parrot 789 Posted October 25, 2006 Washington University in St. Louis has a great biomedical research program. The Stowers Institute in Kansas City also has some really good science. Sarcasm. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
D_House 0 Posted October 25, 2006 well, i'm not going act like an expert on this amendment but one thing i have noticed when reading through it...it IS confusing. it seems at times to contradict itself ...you can quote different parts of it to prove either position. The amendment is crystal clear on human cloning, these people are clouding the issue, either through their own ignorance of the science, or deliberately, to MISLEAD people. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FranksTanks 0 Posted October 25, 2006 The Republicans can use Terry Schiavo, but the Democrates should not be allowed to let Fox speak up about this disease? Rush is an assshole and only trashing this ad because he knows it is devestatingly effective. Fock him and anyone sticking up for him on this issue. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CantTouchThis 23 Posted October 25, 2006 Greats God!!! This is heavy....... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites