Michael J Fox - Human Shield

[jillian]

LOL. What has it to do with anything? It is an emblem of hypocrisy proudly worn by the partisan. It's okay to pretend that taking one thing out of context is wrong, while taking another out of context is okay because it supposedly makes another "look bad"...

Stem cell research isn't a partisan issue..... or at least it shouldn't be. It's a health issue. And unless you're a dittohead, why on earth would you assume that Rush's statements that were aired weren't a synopsis as opposed to something "out of context". Seems your response is the one that's partisan.

Now, I don't listen to Rush... But I do know that 30 seconds of 3 hours isn't going to give anybody an idea of what he was saying and that often what he says can be taken out of context.

If you don't listen to Rush, how on earth would you assume that what he says is taken out of context? I figure it's perfectly in keeping with every other statement he's ever made that's been proven to be a lie. Just a quick story... I once heard him make a comment about how Kofi Annan said that "Israel uses undue force" and how that was the "only country" he described that way. Now, I'm no fan of Kofi Annan and I am very pro-Israel, so I was interested. Then I heard the whole speech. In fact, Israel was the only country he described with those exact words, but there were at least another half dozen countries which he described similarly and worse, which Rush conveniently omitted because he wanted to spew about Kofi Annan and the UN. So I wouldn't worry too much about defending him. He's fairly useless.

Ask Patsy Schroeder and her, "Rush wants his mother to eat dog food!"

Wouldn't know or care anything about that. Nor is is particularly relevant to the issue of stem cell research and Rush's absurd statements.

 

[Annie]

Stem cell research isn't a partisan issue..... or at least it shouldn't be. It's a health issue. And unless you're a dittohead, why on earth would you assume that Rush's statements that were aired weren't a synopsis as opposed to something "out of context". Seems your response is the one that's partisan.

If you don't listen to Rush, how on earth would you assume that what he says is taken out of context? I figure it's perfectly in keeping with every other statement he's ever made that's been proven to be a lie. Just a quick story... I once heard him make a comment about how Kofi Annan said that "Israel uses undue force" and how that was the "only country" he described that way. Now, I'm no fan of Kofi Annan and I am very pro-Israel, so I was interested. Then I heard the whole speech. In fact, Israel was the only country he described with those exact words, but there were at least another half dozen countries which he described similarly and worse, which Rush conveniently omitted because he wanted to spew about Kofi Annan and the UN. So I wouldn't worry too much about defending him. He's fairly useless.



Wouldn't know or care anything about that. Nor is is particularly relevant to the issue of stem cell research and Rush's absurd statements.

I'm not a dittohead. I do wonder why though, with stem cell experimentation legal, there is such a blather about it? We don't need the federal government funding it. I believe CA and some other states are helping to fund their universities, but if it has 'such promise' I've no doubt that Eli Lily and Pfizer are on it.

 

[jillian]

I'm not a dittohead. I do wonder why though, with stem cell experimentation legal, there is such a blather about it? We don't need the federal government funding it. I believe CA and some other states are helping to fund their universities, but if it has 'such promise' I've no doubt that Eli Lily and Pfizer are on it.

onedomino explained it well. I'm not going to restate what he did.

 

[no1tovote4]

Stem cell research isn't a partisan issue..... or at least it shouldn't be. It's a health issue. And unless you're a dittohead, why on earth would you assume that Rush's statements that were aired weren't a synopsis as opposed to something "out of context". Seems your response is the one that's partisan.

So far, you are striking out. I couldn't care less what Rush thinks about Stem Cell research. I have my own opinion on that subject. We'll start by the fact that I donated both umbilicals from my 2 bio-kids to stem cell research projects at CU in CO....

However I do know what "out of context" is and have seen his remarks taken seriously out of context often enough (reading transcripts to find the truth) to realize that they very often are in a way that appears to make him look worse than he is.

If you don't listen to Rush, how on earth would you assume that what he says is taken out of context? I figure it's perfectly in keeping with every other statement he's ever made that's been proven to be a lie. Just a quick story... I once heard him make a comment about how Kofi Annan said that "Israel uses undue force" and how that was the "only country" he described that way. Now, I'm no fan of Kofi Annan and I am very pro-Israel, so I was interested. Then I heard the whole speech. In fact, Israel was the only country he described with those exact words, but there were at least another half dozen countries which he described similarly and worse, which Rush conveniently omitted because he wanted to spew about Kofi Annan and the UN. So I wouldn't worry too much about defending him. He's fairly useless.

I explained the "out of context" remark above. I haven't assumed anything, 30 seconds of a 3 hour show can be nothing other than taken out of context.

Wouldn't know or care anything about that. Nor is is particularly relevant to the issue of stem cell research and Rush's absurd statements.

However, it is relevant to pointing out hypocrisy. Those who protect others by casting the 'out of context' stone shouldn't be doing a rock-block on others doing the same from the other side.

 

[Annie]

onedomino explained it well. I'm not going to restate what he did.

That's cool, how long ago though? The pages have added up.

 

[jillian]

That's cool, how long ago though? The pages have added up.

Post 45. This should get you there if I did it right.

http://usmessageboard.com/forums/showpost.php?p=496144&postcount=45

 

[CharlestonChad]

Your very un-clever take on RedState's name is tasteless and offensive, and if I were a mod, I'd at a minimum, give you a warning for it.

opinion noted

 

[Annie]

Your very un-clever take on RedState's name is tasteless and offensive, and if I were a mod, I'd at a minimum, give you a warning for it.

I did and edited all the references I could find.

 

[Annie]

Post 45. This should get you there if I did it right.

http://usmessageboard.com/forums/showpost.php?p=496144&postcount=45

Thanks. Seriously, I disagree, for the reasons I stated. If there is hope for stem cell research, which for the most part appears true though NOT for embyonic, private investors will line up. Then again, like CA, the states can do themselves. Not EVERYTHING should be at the federal level. Truth is folks, the government is not the source for squat, YOU are.

 

[no1tovote4]

Thanks. Seriously, I disagree, for the reasons I stated. If there is hope for stem cell research, which for the most part appears true though NOT for embyonic, private investors will line up. Then again, like CA, the states can do themselves. Not EVERYTHING should be at the federal level. Truth is folks, the government is not the source for squat, YOU are.

I would also donate to a private organisation doing moral research. Umbilical stem cells are one excellent source.

 

[Kagom]

I had to listen to Rush LImbaugh for two months straight. It was more than enough to make my head explode.

 

[jillian]

Thanks. Seriously, I disagree, for the reasons I stated. If there is hope for stem cell research, which for the most part appears true though NOT for embyonic, private investors will line up. Then again, like CA, the states can do themselves. Not EVERYTHING should be at the federal level. Truth is folks, the government is not the source for squat, YOU are.

Why are you claiming that there's no hope for embryonic stem cell research? Every reliable scientific source says there's great hope there, although not necessarily for alzheimer's disease.

And I disagree for the reasons onedomino referenced. He's telling it straight up... without any religo-babble.

 

[Annie]

Why are you claiming that there's no hope for embryonic stem cell research? Every reliable scientific source says there's great hope there, although not necessarily for alzheimer's disease.

And I disagree for the reasons onedomino referenced. He's telling it straight up... without any religo-babble.

I don't think I wrote one word of 'religo-babble.' While I usually agree with onedomino, in this case I do not. The federal government should not be the source of this funding. Now if you wish to speak to 'energy alternatives' which actually could impact our security, I'll listen.

 

[Stephanie]

I had to listen to Rush Limbaugh for two months straight. It was more than enough to make my head explode.

I felt the same way listening to Randi Rhodes from Airhead Amer,
in just ten minutes.....

 

[jillian]

I don't think I wrote one word of 'religo-babble.' While I usually agree with onedomino, in this case I do not. The federal government should not be the source of this funding. Now if you wish to speak to 'energy alternatives' which actually could impact our security, I'll listen.

I wasn't accusing you of religo-babble, though all of the objections to embryonic stem cell research stem from that (issues of who's going to pay aside).

I disagree about the role of government in this instance.

I also happen to agree that alternative energy sources and conservation are a security issue. So I'm with you there. Wasn't the topic at hand, though.

 

[Annie]

I wasn't accusing you of religo-babble, though all of the objections to fetal stem cell research stem from that (issues of who's going to pay aside).

I disagree about the role of government in this instance.

I also happen to agree that alternative energy sources and conservation are a security issue. So I'm with you there. Wasn't the topic at hand, though.

Nope, I do not object to the research, as long as they are not killing babies to get the embryonic stem cells, for instance those from placenta or miscarriages. As for mature stem cells, no objection at all. Still do not think the federal government should be funding the research for this or breast cancer, or prostate cancer, or alzeimer's, or lupus, etc. The government is to protect the country, not each individual. The states may decide it's in their interests, certainly city, counties, townships, etc can. Universities, many of which get 'blanket grants for medical research' from the feds can. You get my drift.

 

[Jennifer.Bush]

come on i love rush and i heard it on the radio on monday i was shocked on how wrong he was. i support stem cell research

 

[onedomino]

I'm not a dittohead. I do wonder why though, with stem cell experimentation legal, there is such a blather about it? We don't need the federal government funding it. I believe CA and some other states are helping to fund their universities, but if it has 'such promise' I've no doubt that Eli Lily and Pfizer are on it.

I was wondering where you were on this topic. Your objection is fiduciary? Most of the objections to embryonic stem cell research I have read in this thread are religious. Federal involvement is necessary because, as I have mentioned elsewhere in this thread, embryonic stem cell research is very long-term, with unknown results, and costs billions of dollars. Other than a state like California, no other agency can fill that role besides the Feds. Who knew that bone marrow transplants would work until that technique was researched and developed 40 years ago? There is nothing on Lily's website about any kind of stem cell research, adult or embryonic. Why? The profit potential is not quick enough for Wall Street. Do not expect an economy dominated by the equities market to take big, long-term risks, with shareholder money. There are only four links on Pfizer's website that even mention stem cells. None of the articles pertain to research of any type on stem cells. We know the reason why. The payback, if it comes, is a long way off. Shareholders don't like that kind of corporate spending. California’s $3 billion dollar program is over ten years. Remember the Republican dominated House and Senate passed a bill for funding embryonic stem cell research. Bush on 4 September, either pandering to religious extremists or actually believing it himself, used the only veto of his Presidency to kill Federal funding of embryonic stem cell research authorized by a Republican Congress.

 

[no1tovote4]

I would prefer that the Congress actually work out a set of Genetic Research guidelines before they started funding it...

 

[jillian]

I would prefer that the Congress actually work out a set of Genetic Research guidelines before they started funding it...

It's not the job of Congress to set scientific guidelines on behalf of the religious right.

No thanks.