M. (hristine Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 Limbaugh, whose syndicated radio program has a weekly audience of about 10 million, was reacting to Fox's appearance in another one of the spots, for Missouri Democrat Claire McCaskill, running against Republican Sen. James M. Talent.I will be voting. Please get out and vote. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
darkstar Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 It's really hard to take anything that guy says or does seriously. He gives people the impression that anyone who is conservative is a mindless, uncaring freak. And fuck him anyways with his law and order bullshit and his pomposity. In the past few years this guy has: Caused a racial flap with his comments about Donovan McNabb and the NFL, been busted for having a huge stash of perscription dope in his posession (that kind of weight, if it had been a "normal" citizen would have been put away for years), flying in and out of the Dominican Republic with perscription meds (Viagara!) in his posession without a perscription, and now this flap. The thought that he goes on and on about lawbreakers and dopers etc, etc and yet he is one cracks me up. This guy is a complete jagoff and a hypocrite to the 10th degree. Pompus douchebag Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jakobnicholas Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 I feel bad for Michael J. Fox, but y'know, it's really hard to take anyone involved with Back to The Future 3 seriously. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Atticus Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 I think both the ad and the Limbaugh comments were shameless. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
embiggen Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 I think both the ad and the Limbaugh comments were shameless. you would. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
John Smith Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 Jesus. Can Limbaugh be a bigger dick? I ask you -- can he?? This is up there with Ann Coulter stating whatever she did about the 9/11 widows expoliting their husbands' deaths. There is also video footage out there of Limbaugh physically mocking Fox. The guy is a dick through and through. Even with his lame apology he still made the comments and they will stick with his listeners. Fox is simply using his celebrity, his profile and his disease to raise awareness for his disease. Talent supporting stem cell research is a far cry from supporting embryonic stem cell research. The embryonic stem cells have properties we do not understand. These properties somehow allow the cells to divide into different tissues. Scientists have long thought that learning about how this occurs could lead to cures for diseases. It might not too, but that is the point of research to find these things out. Adult stem cells will never morph into any other tissue, they are what they are and will not change. Heck democracy in Iraq was based on a think tank hypothesis (project for a new American Century) and the research on that is going horribly wrong, yet no one has suggested pulling that funding. That said I believe that Fox would run ads for any candidate who supported embryonic stem cell research. As to the other point about him shamelessly putting his disease out there for political purposes, that is utter bullshit unless you call people of all persuasions on it, and you don't. The Ann Coulter comparison is interesting. Those of you from Illinois may or may not pay attention to the local politics, but Todd Beamers father recently made a political stop in Illinois. This guy travels the country stumping for republican only candidates. He puts words in his dead son's mouth and uses his dead sons corpse to drum up support for right wing candidates. Toss on top of that Todd's grieving widow Lisa who wrote a book and copyrighted the phrase "let's roll", which she has licensed to Wal-Mart and sued Neil Young for using. Where is Ann Coulter when the Beamers are out and about dragging Todd's name out for political and financial gain? Where are the people who lambasted the "Jersey Girls" . I'll wait for an explanation as to why this is different. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
owl Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 Michael J. Fox is basically untouchable. To fuck with him is a bad idea, whether he's sick or not. Fox will always be the lovable scamp from Back to the Future, a perpetual kid, and to accuse him of faking a terminal disease is akin to berating a kid for using his imagination. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Atticus Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 you are insightful awwwwwww..... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Jules Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 Michael J. Fox is basically untouchable. To fuck with him is a bad idea, whether he's sick or not. Fox will always be the lovable scamp from Back to the Future, a perpetual kid, and to accuse him of faking a terminal disease is akin to berating a kid for using his imagination. I don't think he accused him of faking the disease. He said he was acting it up, which Fox has all but admitted to doing by not taking his medication before political appearances. Again, I'm not a Limbaugh fan, but let's keep context in mind here and think about what he was really trying to do with these comments. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
EL the Famous Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 [quote name='JUDE Quote Link to post Share on other sites
owl Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 I don't think he accused him of faking the disease. From the article (unnecessary emphasis mine): "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." Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Jules Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 From the article (unnecessary emphasis mine): Well, he doesn't use the word "fake". It really doesn't matter as I'm not trying to justify Limbaugh's comments. Sometimes I get too hung up on words and context when these kinds of debates arise. Fox is a smart guy and knows his symptoms can have an emotional impact on people, and therefore chooses to not take any steps to control his symptoms when he is in a political situation. This much is true, and he discusses it in his book. Limbaugh was trying to call him out on it, and went over the line to do so. That's all I got. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
John Smith Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 I don't think he accused him of faking the disease. He said he was acting it up, which Fox has all but admitted to doing by not taking his medication before political appearances. Again, I'm not a Limbaugh fan, but let's keep context in mind here and think about what he was really trying to do with these comments. Sorry, but if you listen to what the doctors are saying, and read what they have written you will see that he was not cutting back his medicine or skimping on it. Parkinson's disease, if he was not taking his medicine, would be causing his muscles to freeze up. The herky jerky motions are caused by a combo of two medicines. The shakiness and jerky movements are side effects not the disease. To imply that he stopped his medicine is to deny the real doctors who have comments about this numerous times today. Then again it has been said more than once reality has a liberal bias so if it fits your ideology better to ignore the truth, then go for it because no amount of truth will help you. This tlakign point of not taking his medicine is dead, it has been rebutted by real doctors and real Parkinson's patients. Limbaugh and anyone who actually still support what Rush said are just plain wrong and it sounds like they don't care because that alternate universe reality they live in gives them great comfort. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ikol Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 Talent supporting stem cell research is a far cry from supporting embryonic stem cell research. The embryonic stem cells have properties we do not understand. These properties somehow allow the cells to divide into different tissues. Scientists have long thought that learning about how this occurs could lead to cures for diseases. It might not too, but that is the point of research to find these things out. Adult stem cells will never morph into any other tissue, they are what they are and will not change. Actually, that's not true. Stem cells (adult and embryonic) by definition are undifferentiated. There are different limitations on stem cells. Some are capable of creating an entire organism. Others cannot form a whole organism but can form any tissue or multiple tissues. Adult stem cells cannot create an entire organism, but they do have the potential to differentiate into any tissue if properly stimulated. Besides you don't want embryonic stem cells. If they form in the human body, you have what is called a teratocarcinoma which is a type of malignant tumor. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Edie Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 Actually, that's not true..... Hi ikol Quote Link to post Share on other sites
EL the Famous Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 Hi ikol He's just droppin' some science to keep shit straight. Nothing wrong with that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ikol Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 Science? I thought stem cells were magic. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Jules Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 This tlakign point of not taking his medicine is dead. Michael J. Fox: an excerpt from his book called "Lucky Man" (June 1, 2002). Regarding an appearance before a Senate appropriations subcommittee hearing in Washington on September 28th, 1999. "I had made a deliberate choice to appear before the subcommittee without medication. It seemed to me that this occasion demanded that my testimony about the effects of the disease and the urgency we as a community were feeling be seen as well as heard. For people who had never observed me in this kind of shape, the transformation must have been startling..." Quote Link to post Share on other sites
EL the Famous Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 Doh! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Duck-Billed Catechist Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 "I sometimes do not take my meds before lobbying, but I was on them for those commercials." -MJF on the news last night, paraphrase. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted October 25, 2006 Author Share Posted October 25, 2006 Michael J. Fox: an excerpt from his book called "Lucky Man" (June 1, 2002). Regarding an appearance before a Senate appropriations subcommittee hearing in Washington on September 28th, 1999. That seems like a reasonable thing to do. Sure it's a cheap emotional ploy, but it's not a morally reprehensible thing to do. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
OOO Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 As Aristotle once told me, pathos is essential to a good argument. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jimmyjimmy Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 What's wrong with someone choosing to allow the effects of their disease to be displayed in public?"Normal" for someone with Parkinson's is different than "normal" for those without; ( yeah...NPR yesterday). I think it's pretty brave myself. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 Limbaugh thinks people with distasteful diseases should stay home so nobody has to see them. ...which reminds me of this classic: "If you've become a radiation mutant with a deformed hand, remember to close the window. No one wants to see that shit." Quote Link to post Share on other sites
John Smith Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 Actually, that's not true. Stem cells (adult and embryonic) by definition are undifferentiated. There are different limitations on stem cells. Some are capable of creating an entire organism. Others cannot form a whole organism but can form any tissue or multiple tissues. Adult stem cells cannot create an entire organism, but they do have the potential to differentiate into any tissue if properly stimulated. Besides you don't want embryonic stem cells. If they form in the human body, you have what is called a teratocarcinoma which is a type of malignant tumor. By your attempt at installing fear (teratocarcinoma) you are indirectly implying that stem cells lead to cancer and should be feared. We all had them at conception, we all have them now, we all do not have cancer, therefore your attempt at installing fear is not working nor valid. From the NIH: http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/scireport/chapter2.asp More: http://home.comcast.net/~john.kimball1/Bio...Stem_Cells.html From the University of Wisconsin-Madison research center: http://www.news.wisc.edu/packages/stemcells/facts.html#1 Stem Cell Research Home | University Communications | UW Home What are embryonic stem cells?Embryonic stem cells are undifferentiated cells that are unlike any specific adult cell. However, they have the ability to form any adult cell. Because undifferentiated embryonic stem cells can proliferate indefinitely in culture, they could potentially provide an unlimited source of specific, clinically important adult cells such as bone, muscle, liver or blood cells. How might embryonic stem cells be used to treat disease?The ability to grow human tissue of all kinds opens the door to treating a range of cell-based diseases and to growing medically important tissues that can be used for transplantation purposes. For example, diseases like juvenile onset diabetes mellitus and Parkinson's disease occur because of defects in one of just a few cells types. Replacing faulty cells with healthy ones offers hope of lifelong treatment. Similarly, failing hearts and other organs, in theory, could be shored up by injecting healthy cells to replace damaged or diseased cells. Why not derive stem cells from adults?There are several approaches now in human clinical trials that utilize mature stem cells (such as blood-forming cells, neuron-forming cells and cartilage-forming cells). However, because adult cells are already specialized, their potential to regenerate damaged tissue is very limited: skin cells will only become skin and cartilage cells will only become cartilage. Adults do not have stem cells in many vital organs, so when those tissues are damaged, scar tissue develops. Only embryonic stem cells, which have the capacity to become any kind of human tissue, have the potential to repair vital organs. Another limitation of adult stem cells is their inability to proliferate in culture. Unlike embryonic stem cells, which have a capacity to reproduce indefinitely in the laboratory, adult stem cells are difficult to grow in the lab and their potential to reproduce diminishes with age. Therefore, obtaining clinically significant amounts of adult stem cells may prove to be difficult. Studies of adult stem cells are important and will provide valuable insights into the use of stem cell in transplantation procedures. However, only through exploration of all types of stem cell research will scientists find the most efficient and effective ways to treat diseases. What are the benefits of studying embryonic stem cells?Pluripotent stem cells represent hope for millions of Americans. They have the potential to treat or cure a myriad of diseases, including Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, diabetes, heart disease, stroke, spinal cord injuries and burns. From the uNiversity of South Wales: http://embryology.med.unsw.edu.au/Notes/week2_10.htm You can read about the teratocarcinoma cells yourself. This is basic stuff that even the simplest of biology course teach. You would think a supposed pre-med student would know science and how it differs form talking points. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.