Limbaugh attacks Michael J. Fox

[Bobbo539]

I just did, and my statement stands. The thread devolved into a discussion of Parkinsons, Stem Cell Research, and the intention of the add.

But Rush's original comment was purely speculation on his part that came out true. How on earth can anybody take offense to this? The statement he made was not malicious, rather just a statement of opinion. Im serious when I say this, it seems like the left can call any Republican any name and 1000 others come behind blindly chanting.

You don't have to like Rush, but to jump on him for this original statement is rediculous.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I hope I've made this clear with enough examples.

[/ QUOTE ]

Most of your examples are irrelevant. I've already admitted limbaugh was wayyyyyyyy out of line on a lot of those. Limbaugh's overall message is indefensible, and I think we can agree on that. My single argument is Limbaugh's single sentence referencing Cardin's vote against a stem cell bill. The only debate is left to whether or not Michael J. Fox supported that bill that Cardin shot down. If Fox was for that stem cell bill then I am right and you are wrong. If Fox was against that bill then you are right and I am wrong.

It's the difference between calling someone a blatant liar and a cherry picker. End of story.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why in the world would Fox be against that bill along with Cardin? Anyway, we don't really know what Mr. Cardin believes about stem cell research IMO. If Mr. Cardin's vote against the bill in question truly indicates a position that is opposite of what Fox's position is and Fox believes that the bill in question is essential in finding a cure for Parkinson's then I think Fox's actions are indefensible.

My guess is that Cardin doesn't have a strong opinion either way and probably hasn't done his homework but could be convinced otherwise. If my guess is accurate then I think Fox deserves the benefit of any doubt about his intentions.

[wacki]

Why in the world would Fox be against that bill along with Cardin?

exactly.

adios, I think we are on the same page.

[tehox]

[ QUOTE ]
I just did, and my statement stands. The thread devolved into a discussion of Parkinsons, Stem Cell Research, and the intention of the add.

But Rush's original comment was purely speculation on his part that came out true. How on earth can anybody take offense to this? The statement he made was not malicious, rather just a statement of opinion. Im serious when I say this, it seems like the left can call any Republican any name and 1000 others come behind blindly chanting.

You don't have to like Rush, but to jump on him for this original statement is rediculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

No it did not come out true.

[Grey]

[ QUOTE ]
My single argument is Limbaugh's single sentence referencing Cardin's vote against a stem cell bill. The only debate is left to whether or not Michael J. Fox supported that bill that Cardin shot down. If Fox was for that stem cell bill then I am right and you are wrong. If Fox was against that bill then you are right and I am wrong.

Although I'm nit picking, it's the difference between calling someone a blatant liar and a cherry picker. End of story.

[/ QUOTE ]I'm sorry, but no. Limbaugh is a blatant liar. Not a cherry-picker.

He said, again "Every one of his ads is run for the benefit of a Democrat, even in Maryland, where the Democrat beneficiary of the Michael J. Fox ad voted against exactly what Michael J. Fox advocates in the ad.”

That did not happen.

Again, for reference, watch the ad which I have linked above. Fox is not advocating looking into ways to avoid destroying embryos during research. That's what Cardin voted against.

Fox is advocating complete (the "most promising") embryonic research. You know this with 100% certainty because he mentions Bush's and Steele's opposition to it. Bush and Steele did not oppose the bill Cardin voted against.

It is a blatant lie.

[Grey]

[ QUOTE ]
Why in the world would Fox be against that bill along with Cardin?

[/ QUOTE ]Because it is a sell-out. If it were passed it would take away a great deal of the urgency that the public feels right now to get full research done. With 75% of America on your side it is only a matter of time before Fox gets everything he wants ... but he might not if the Republican's sham bill was passed.

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]
... but he might not if the Republican's sham bill was passed.


[/ QUOTE ]

Sham bill? If non-destructive embryonic stem cell harvesting is possible then you are way out of line here.

[Grey]

Well it isn't is it.

Let's say there's a 50% chance of being able to do embryonic researh without destroying embryos (which are all already slated to be destroyed btw). Let's say it will take 4 years of federal funding to make that discovery. I'm probably being generous here on both counts.

Looking at how, even with dominant majorities of Republicans in the House and Senate, we almost got a veto-proof majority to support funding of embryonic stem cell research, and it currently being a very good political issue for Dems (a research study recently showed that Republicans who viewed the Fox ad became 10% more likely to prefer a Democrat as their representative), and considering the overwhelming public support that it has, it it very likely that we will either get a veto-proof majority soon, or Bush will cave on the issue in order to get something else he wants. This is likely to happen in less than 4 years.

So, on the one hand Cardin had the option of possibly starting full research now, and almost assuredly starting it in the next few years.

or

Starting it years from now (maybe, if it becomes possible to do it without hurting embryos) and killing any chance of it being done immediately as the issue fades from the public eye.

He made the morally superior choice.

Now admit Limbaugh is a blatant liar.

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]
Well it isn't is it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Point me to a peer review journal that debunks the promise highlighted in the journal I posted. If we can bypass the destruction of embryos in relatively short time I so no reason why we should not attempt to develop that technology.

Whether or not ESC research happens now, and is retracted once this tech is developed, is a side issue.

[Grey]

[ QUOTE ]
Whether or not ESC research happens now, and is retracted once this tech is developed, is a side issue.

[/ QUOTE ]No it is not because funding research into trying to not destroy the embryos would kill any chances of ESC research happening soon. You can't get both. Cardin had to make a choice between the two and he made his choice. At least he probably had to make a choice between the two.

At the worst he may made a political miscalculation (and I don't think he did). Not a morally wrong choice. Unless you think destroying embryos that are already going to be destroyed is morally wrong.