Missouri’s Jim Talent: Your typical heartless and cruel conservative

Posted by: ST on October 23, 2006 at 4:51 pm

Well at least that’s what you’d think if you saw actor Michael J. Fox’s campaign ad for Talent’s opponent Claire McCaskill, where he pushes for government funded stem cell research.

I’ve no issue with Fox. He suffers from Parkinson’s disease (which is very apparent when you watch the video as he apparently didn’t take his medication for a day [or more?] to show what Parkinson’s is doing to him) and feels extensive stem cell research, funded by the government, might cure others who suffer fro Parkinson’s and other diseases. He’s gone to Capitol Hill several times to lobby for government funding of stem cell research. I also don’t believe, as some do, that Fox was “exploited” – he knew what he was doing when he signed on to do the ad. My issue is with McCaskill, who is once again demagoguing an issue by shamlessly toying with the emotions of voters in Missouri.

She did it before using a tactic Democrats are infamous for using: the race baiting tactic. Here’s what she said before a group of St. Louis elected Democrats back in September:

“George Bush let people die on rooftops in New Orleans because they were poor and because they were black.”

The Senate race in Missouri is a tight one right now, with Talent and McCaskill nearly tied as per the latest Rasmussen poll, so I guess she’s pulling out all the stops in an effort to defeat Talent, and doing what desperate Democrats do when they want to win elections: paint Republicans as a bunch of heartless, selfish (and racist) thugs who don’t care about helping the sick and the needy. It’s disgusting, and just one more on a long list of reasons why Claire McCaskill shouldn’t be elected to serve in the US Senate.

Update: John Amato at Crooks and Liars posts an email from a reader who alerted him to some comments Rush made on his program today about Fox:

“I stated when I saw the ad, I was commenting to you about it, that he was either off the medication or he was acting. He is an actor, after all.”

The emailer (named Doug) wrote:

Rush Limbaugh today accused Michael J. Fox, actor and Parkinson’s Disease victim, of deliberately going off of his meds to appear on camera with exaggerated symptoms of his disease for dramatic effect. Fox appeared in a recent Clair McHaskill (D-MO) Senate campaign ad, touting the need for stem cell research. Limbaugh even goes so far as to accuse Fox of faking his symptoms all together.

These emails claim Fox has admitted in interviews that he goes off his medication.” A tireless search of the Internet produces no such record of any interview, or any statement in which Fox has ever admitted or even suggested that he ever goes off his Parkinson’s treatment at all, let alone for the purposes of shaking it up for the television audience.

He conducted a “tireless search” and couldn’t find anything? It took me all of five minutes to find a quote from Michael J. Fox from his 2002 memoir Lucky Man, where he admits to making a “deliberate choice” to appear before a Senate subcommittee back in 1999 without medication. Via an excerpt from the book posted on the MJF Foundation for Parkinson’s website (emphasis added):

Snippets of my testimony were featured on several of the nightly news broadcasts. One line in particular from my prepared statement got a lot of play: “In my forties, I can expect challenges most people wouldn’t face until their seventies and eighties, if ever. But with your help, if we all do everything we can to eradicate this disease, when I’m in my fifties I’ll be dancing at my children’s weddings.” 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.

I’ve no problem with this, as you can talk about the effects a disease has on someone all day long – seeing the effect it has on sufferers of it is more powerful, and I can understand why Fox would do this. So it wasn’t wrong of Rush to speculate that Fox was off his medication, because Fox has admitted to doing that before. I watched a documentary about Fox several weeks ago where either he or a friend of his (can’t remember which) talked about (him) appearing before that Congressional subcommittee without his medication. I was moved to tears seeing what he was going through.

As far as Rush’s suggestion that Fox may have been “acting”, well, that’s a quote I want to see in context, but I’m not sure even in context that that part of his quote couldn’t be labelled disgraceful. I’ll check the transcript later this evening.

Update II: Just checked Rush’s site. Here’s what he said in context (emphasis added):

Now, people are telling me that they have seen Michael J. Fox in interviews and he does appear the same way in the interviews as he does in this commercial for Claire McCaskill. All right, then I stand corrected. I’ve seen him on Boston Legal. I’ve seen him on a number of stand-up appearances. I know he’s got it; it’s pitiable that he has the disease. It is a debilitating disease, and I understand that fully. Just stick with me on this.

All I’m saying is I’ve never seen him the way he appears in this commercial for Claire McCaskill. So I will bigly, hugely admit that I was wrong, and I will apologize to Michael J. Fox, if I am wrong in characterizing his behavior on this commercial as an act, especially since people are telling me they have seen him this way on other interviews and in other television appearances.

[...]

I must share this. I have gotten a plethora of e-mails from people saying Michael J. Fox has admitted in interviews that he goes off his medication for Parkinson’s disease when he appears before Congress or other groups as a means of illustrating the ravages of the disease. So lest there be any misunderstanding, we talked about a half hour ago of the commercial that’s running for Claire McCaskill featuring Michael J. Fox on what appears to be when he’s off his meds. I have never seen him this way and I stated when I was commenting to you about it that he was either off his medication or acting. He is an actor after all, and started hearing from people, “Oh, no, I’ve seen him on TV this way, this is how the disease has affected him when he’s not on his medications.” Then the e-mails started coming in saying he’s admitted not to taking them in certain circumstances so as to illustrate how the disease affects people. All of which I understand, and I’m not even critical of that. Parkinson’s disease is hideous.

[...]

So let there be no misunderstanding about this. I stand corrected, did not know and had never seen Michael J. Fox in the way I saw him in this commercial for Claire McCaskill. But people have and have seen him say in interviews that he doesn’t take his medications when he wants to make an impression to show people just how horrible the disease is. And it’s true of all Parkinson’s patients. At some point the medication will not work, and the condition will become permanent, and there’s nothing pleasant about it. It’s one of the most frustrating diseases one can have. Pope had it. It’s not pleasant in any way, shape, manner, or form, nor did I mean to implicate that one could easily act it out for the purposes of a commercial.

Better.

BTW, here’s the ad:

Others blogging about this: Dean Barnett, Lorie Byrd, Anchoress

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Trackbacks

  • The Political Pit Bull trackbacked with VIDEO: New McCaskill Stem Cell Ad Released
  • 46 Responses to “Missouri’s Jim Talent: Your typical heartless and cruel conservative”

    Comments

    1. brad says:

      what does rush know about taking meds per doctor’s orders?

    2. - Ok. Lets be clear here. Fox’s physical ailments are a tangible personal problem, of the worst kind. Fox is a very chrismatic figure, well known for his movies, TV, and personal appearences. It’s pitiful to see him this way, particularly remembering him in his youthful years, and his lively upbeat unique mannerisms, and excited exhuberant style. It was his hallmark, totally crushed under the heel of this merciless desease. All of that is true. It’s equally true that he would want to campaign tirelessly for what he believes is the best course to stopping, and possibly eventually curing, this monsterous ailment.

      – That may or may not have anything to do with reality. Compassion is a wonderful thing, but doesn’t mean it indicates your idea’s are correct, or even a better waay to accomplish things. Compassion is just what it says. Compassion. It does not comprise of wisdom.

      – When I see something like this I’m reminded of all the caterwalling from the Left when Bush appeared at ground zero for political ad’s, punctuating the attack and loss of 2700 people. Both sides do it, and whether or not its right of wrong is a matter of personal conscience, and I think beside the point. What really matters is, is it helping anything or anybody. I don’t know. I’m not a doctor. I am a scientist, and I’ve seen all to often how agenda’s can distort and drive things off in the totally wrong direction.

      – Compassion for compassion’s sake can be just as misleading as any other emotion. Better that cool accurate thinking is the basis for anything as important as the lives of our citizen’s. That to me is a far better form, and use, of compassion.

      – Bang **==

    3. Shelley says:

      You’re not from Missouri, I’m assuming, or you wouldn’t be writing about McCaskill and Fox considering the daily mailings sent from the Republicans showing photos of the elderly implying that McCaskill let them down when she was state auditor.

      Republicans are getting desperate.

    4. I think you better check your link, because it didn’t back up your assertion.

      Mine, however, do back up the assertion that McCaskill is desperate. Next?

    5. - You see ST – It’s not about helping anyone. It’s about winning, pure and simple.

      – Bang **==

    6. Baklava says:

      I just saw the ad and read Hugh Hewitt’s take.

      Claire will lose now.

    7. Baklava says:

      I’m sorry. That was Dean Barnett’s take on Hugh Hewitt’s blog. Dean Barnett for those who don’t know has cystic fibrosis.

    8. Drewsmom says:

      Its sad, I feel for Fox and hope I never get the disease, but I get horrible anxiety attacks, its nobody’s fault and I guess I could blame Bush for not doing more research on the brain for my disorder, but to stop taking meds to prove a point is a stretch.

      We all know the disease is dibilitating, like many others, cancer is horrible and the research is going on and progress is being made and ADULT STEM CELLS work just as well as as embryonic and embryonic research is being done on a daily basis, so whats the point? **==

    9. forest hunter says:

      “Implying Bush stopped stem cell use, Fox doesn`t mention that medical science clearly states that stem cells WILL NOT be able to address Parkinson`s disease or spinal paralysis. Doctors still cannot *grow* nerves across damaged or cut nerves; period, end of story!

      This is a gross misuse of a serious illness for pure political purpose.”

    10. Severian says:

      Bush did not stop stem cell research, there is no law in the US prohibiting stem cell research using embryonic stem cells. Bush just did not fund it with tax dollars. And therein lies the rub, the liberals and Democrats, but I repeat myself, anyway, they are of the belief that if government doesn’t do it nothing will ever happen. They put all their faith in big government. The facts are, as things stand today, embryonic stem cells are not the panacea they claim, their use has shown numerous problems, particularly with the formation of tumors and cancers. Adult stem cells have proven, at present, far more useful. And private industry is free to spend as much on embryonic stem cell research as they want. If they are that promising, the free market will take care of it, as any company that comes up with a cure for something will get rich on it.

      This is another case of the left wanting the government to throw tons of money down a hole based not on the potential for real progress but based on ideological, pro-abortion, pro-big government beliefs. It’s an issue only because it’s an “Us vs. Them” issue to the left. But then, look at DDT, global warming, etc. The left loves using junk science to try and force political change.

    11. benning says:

      That’s not the Michael Fox who apperas in sitcoms and such. Although he definitely has a lot of frenetic movement when he’s on TV, it’s nothing like what he’s doing in that ad. That is a man off his meds. I understand why. He’s showing what the disease does. That’s fine. But it’s being done in the cause of a mirage. ESCR will not fix Michael Fox.

      If he’s smart, he’ll look into the Adult SCR. That’s where he may find relief or cure. McCaskill is a disgrace, but she’s simply following the Democratic Party Playbook.

    12. Leah A says:

      Could we get something straight.

      There is no question to be asked about whether or not Mr. Fox didn’t take his medication in order to heighten his symptoms. A “serious” question, you mindless thugs keep asking, without making any serious attempt to answer it.

      Despite your use of it to blog, you are unable, apparently, to use the internet to discover facts you might find disconcerting.

      The view we have of Michael Fox in the ad is made possible by his meds; if he were off his meds, he would probably be in a state of frozen repose.

      I’ll say no more because you, your commentators, and those who have linked to your post, to add their own calumny to the discussion, are beneath my personal contempt.

      This has nothing to do with your political position on federal funding of stem cell research; you are welcome to have contrasting views to those of Mr. Fox. Or to mine.

      It is the perpetual impulse to malign your opposition on the most personal of levels, irrespective of the facts, which is at issue here.

      Here’s a thought: check your facts first, next time, before you offer your suspicions.

      Why I have even bothered, I really don’t know; some tiny hope some of you have preserved, beyond your own completely legitimate, even if I disagree with them, political views, a shred of humanity

    13. Thanks for today’s example of the typical “I’m an enlightened liberal, you’re a stupid insenstive conservative, and I can’t be bothered to ‘educate’ you” attitude we’ve come to loathe and detest from liberals today. It is people like you who cheapen, not strengthen the debate, with your “damn, if only you were a liberal like me you’d have a clue” treatment of anyone who disagrees with you.

      If you’d have actually READ my post instead of (likely) reading someone else’s interpretation of it, you’d see VERY CLEARLY that I was not maligning Michael J. Fox – I, in fact, stated specifically that I had no issue with Fox and what he was doing. My issue with was with race-baiting we’ll-cure-all-diseases types like Claire McCaskill.

      And there *was* a question to be asked as to whether or not Fox was taking his medication at the time he filmed the ad. The emailer at C&L made it a point to not only quote what Rush said about Fox, but to further allege that he himself (the emailer) had done “tireless research” and found no instances of Fox admitting to deliberately appearing before Congress without taking his medication to demonstrate the effects that Parkinson’s was having on his body. The record on that needed to be corrected, and I did just that. I also commented that I understood why Fox would have done that before his Congressional testimony, as sometimes visuals are more powerful examples than words alone, and would have no issue if that’s what he did with the ad he filmed for McCaskill (and now Cardin).

      Save your pious lectures for your own side, because the despicable way you guys have been acting lately and the stunts you’ve tried to pull just go to show how low you guys will stoop when you’re desperate to return to power.

    14. sanity says:

      I do not fault Fox at all, and showing what this disease is really like off medication is a good idea.

      Fox most likely sees this as more to do with bringing attention to the disease and trying to find a cure than being political.

      That being said, McCaskill reminds me of what Edwards did during his campaign for president:

      We will do stem cell research,” he vowed. “We will stop juvenile diabetes, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s and other debilitating diseases. America just lost a great champion for this cause in Christopher Reeve. People like Chris Reeve will get out of their wheelchairs and walk again with stem cell research.”

      I have no problem gettig the word out, getting people o know what these diseases are really like and have them get behind a way for a cure.

      BUT, I find it dispicable when it is used for a campaign, like edwards used above. I can bet you he had no more concern about finding a cure than what socks to pick out the next morning. It was a way to increase his support.

      While I have no problem with what Fox is doing, I do have ap roblem with it being in the polital arena, because of the variances of feelings of republican or decmocrat, the information he tries to put out and get people to notice will be dulled or subjected to how either side feels about the particular candidate they are stomping for.

      And that is just not good for his cause.

      If he would have done this as a solo act, not stomping for any particular candidate and not been on his meds to showthe world what this disease is really like, I don’t think there would be this discussion and more people would attracted to his position for his cause because he is not linked to any particular candidate or “side”.

    15. Karl says:

      I will fault him for deliberate manipulation, at least to a small degree.

      In my case however, I would be satisfied with a simple disclaimer.

      If he showed the ad and told people something to the effest of“this is my quality of life without the medications and treatments that research has yielded and with more help my life would be even better” I would have more respect.

      But as my blog notes, I fault the whole system more for latching onto him as their sympathetic spokes-victim due to his star appeal.

      If we have compassion for the disease, it shouldn’t take a high profile victim to stir it up.

    16. Jim S says:

      You excuses for conservatives are hilarious. The claims that embryonic stem cells will never lead to a cure for anything are more asinine than anyone who really claims that they’ll cure everything. Adult stem cells are at this point, over 40 years after their discovery and the start of research on them still quite limited in what they do and their flexibility to apply to other systems of the body other than that which they come from. Embryonic stem cells have only been being researched for 8 years. The “facts” that severian cites are nothing but talking points from the God’s Own Party.

      Also, for those who whine that Talent shouldn’t be being attacked for supporting Bush’s policy of just not funding embryonic stem cell research (That’s what it’s descended into being for all practical purposes.), Talent cosponsored Brownback’s bill to completely ban embryonic stem cell research, S. 1899. He only backed off from that position when the political penalties from it were becoming clear.

    17. Baklava says:

      OK then Jim….. It’s nice to have an opinion. But you seem to think your’s is….. better? SO…. What are your credentials in the field? I’ll freely admit I don’t have any. I’ve only studied the issue on and off for a few years and it seems to me that embryonic stem cells COULD lead to something but the disingenous way it is debated (exampled by what you just did) is how Democrats and the drive-by discuss the issue and they don’t do the issue good service (same as you). Casting aspersions doesn’t advance the debate one iota. Not one.

    18. Baklava says:

      From Rush’s show today (addressing Jim’s misinformation):

      RUSH: Let me explain to you, ladies and gentlemen, what’s going on in my home state that has made this whole stem cell debate so controversial there, and it is typical of the Democrats in this country and the left who can only succeed by misleading. Here’s the history in Missouri. For four years, legislators in Missouri have tried to pass a simple ban on human cloning, something that neighboring states to Missouri have done. It’s a one-page piece of legislation, a one-page bill. It has never passed. It says that “somatic cell nuclear transfer,” that’s cloning, “will be a crime in Missouri. Somatic cell nuclear transfer is the scientific term for cloning, the same method used to clone Dolly the sheep.

      The other side makes hysterical claims that this bill would criminalize embryonic stem cell research and put patients in jail, and both claims are utterly false. Today in Missouri, there is a constitutional amendment called Amendment 2, and it calls itself the ‘Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative.’ McCaskill favors it. Senator Talent opposes it. Amendment 2 is misleading in that it appears to put stem cell research in the Constitution and to ban human cloning, but the fine print creates a right to do somatic cell nuclear transfer, cloning, which is the scientific term for cloning, the same method used to clone Dolly the sheep.” Now, The Amendment 2 proponents are using Michael J. Fox and trotting out other people with sick relatives to try to convince Missourians that there will be no cures for their diseases without Amendment 2, which is a cloning amendment that has nothing to do with stem cell research.
      The truth is, all stem cell research is legal today in Missouri. Jim Talent does not seek to criminalize it, as Michael J. Fox asserts in his television commercial. Stem cell research is legal today in Missouri, it is happening at universities across the state. The truth is Amendment 2 would put human cloning in the Constitution. Now, the Michael J. Fox ad says that Talent wants to criminalize research, and this is false. It is already legal and it’s already happening. Senator Talent and other opponents of Amendment 2 are not touching stem cell research in any way. What they want to do is stop human cloning from becoming a new right in the Missouri Constitution, and so they have named the pro-cloning bill the stem cell research and cures initiative so that people will go to the polls on November the 7th and think they’re voting for stem cell research, which is already legal.

      There is more to this story. But you get the jist.

    19. Baklava says:

      OK. A little more from Kathryn Jean Lopez (K Lo):

      quotes Princeton professor Robert P. George, who sits on the president’s bioethics commission, and he says this: “I have great sympathy for Mr. Fox and other victims of Parkinson’s and similarly horrible diseases. I understand how desperately he hopes for a cure for what afflicts him and so many others. I have seen members of my own family suffer, and I too want to hasten the day when the great engine of science conquers the diseases that cause so much suffering. But the fact that Mr. Fox is a victim is not a license for him to mislead or manipulate the public.

      DO you have higher credentials that this Princeton Professor there Jim?

    20. Baklava says:

      Powerline has a video with actors including Patricia Heaton (who I love) against ammendment 2 in Missouri.

      The more I read the more Jim has been determined to be misinforming us…

    21. Severian says:

      Yeah Jim, it doesn’t matter that adult and umbilical cord stem cells have proven more likely to solve these problems then embryonic stem cells, the government has unlimited money! It grows not on trees, but on taxpayers, so what the hell, let’s not attempt to assign limited resources to those research areas most likely to yield results, like I said, money is unlimited. When we need more, we’ll just go squeeze a few more rich bastards, who obviously got their money on the backs of the proletariat. After all, business is totally incapable of deciding where the most efficient place to do research is because they make profit off it, and if they have a product they’ll make profit. That means they won’t dump the kind of money down a hole that we think they should, it takes government to really piss money away on something useless, and damn it, that’s a Democrats job! And if we destroy human life in the process, and a large number of people find that morally and ethically offensive, well, to hell with them. They’re all right wing religious zealots anyway, to the camps with them!

      That seems to sum up your opinion.

    22. Jim S says:

      Baklava,

      First, though I’m now in the computer field my first major in college was biochemistry. I made no disingenuous claims concerning embryonic stem cell research. Read again. I made no claims about cures being close or any other exaggerations. I pointed out that we have only been researching ESC for one-fifth the time of adult stem cells.

      There is no one on George Bush’s panel that is not completely opposed to embryonic stem cell research on a religious basis, whatever their other qualifications including being at Princeton. The ones who didn’t follow that belief are long gone from frustration at being ignored and their replacements were carefully screened for ideological purity. As for Rush’s claims, well, he lied. That’s what Rush does. The Missouri “anti-cloning” bill he cites is specifically designed to outlaw the primary technique needed to cause cells to reproduce for the purposes of research. While this can also be used to do things like producing Dolly, the current proposal going to the voters specifically bans the use of the technique for any attempts to reproduce human beings, which is after all what most people think of when they think of the word cloning, which is not the same thing scientists think of.

      In addition he lies about the content of the ad. Fox clearly uses the past tense of Talent attempting to outlaw ESC research, referring to Talent having co-sponsored Brownback’s bill in the U.S. Senate to completely ban it in the United States with Senate bill S1889 (I believe that was the number in either 2001 or 2002.). Talent only backed off of that position when it became obvious that it was hurting him politically.

      I am making no attempts to mislead anyone. That job is more than ably handled by Sister Toldjah, Rush, Bush, Dobson, Severian and others who lie about science and legislation. In addition for you to criticize me for casting aspersions considering the ideological company you keep with Severian and Sister Toldjah is hypocritical in the extreme.

    23. Baklava says:

      Jim S judged, “The ones who didn’t follow that belief are long gone from frustration at being ignored and their replacements were carefully screened for ideological purity.

      uhuh. If I were there I would’ve picked people who had the common sense to prioritize what government should spend on and leave this sort of SPENDING up to the private sector. Unfortunately I would’ve been hammered by the drive-by legacy media for being a religious zealot and judged by people like you whether or not it was the case. I’m a conservative but not a zealot but I DO understand and sympathize with the viewpoint that it would be snuffing out life to do such research on new lines of embryos. I’m SORRY you disagree but you do not have to be so MEAN with your judgmental outlook of people…. acting like we don’t “care”.

      Jim funnily wrote, “In addition he lies about the content of the ad.

      We all see the ad Jim.

      Jim wrote, “I am making no attempts to mislead anyone. That job is more than ably handled by Sister Toldjah

      We disagree. The job is beig handled by leftists like yourself…. because you can’t stand our views?

      Jim cast more aspersion by saying, “In addition for you to criticize me for casting aspersions considering the ideological company you keep with Severian and Sister Toldjah is hypocritical in the extreme.

      Whatever….. I think you don’t “care”. I no longer see you as “well intentioned” until you at least admit that conservatives can “care” also. That’s the mirror treatment.

    24. Jim S says:

      Severian,

      I did not say any of the things you ascribe to me. Not one. And your first sentence is a lie. As I did say, the field of embryonic stem cell research is a young one and nothing has really been proven yet for good or ill. As far as business doing this research, they won’t do it. The level of research being done at this point has no promise of commercial viability for such a long time that it operates outside of the acceptable time frame of publicly held businesses. In addition this research would lead to treatments, not drugs and the pharmaceutical industry doesn’t do treatments. It’s not their field. So exactly what business is going to do that research? You are the one claiming that these businesses exist. Tell me which ones they are.

      And yes, the people who oppose this research are almost exclusively basing it on their religious beliefs and trying to make certain that everyone pays the price for their ideological convictions whether they share them or not. But I don’t believe in camps for anyone. I have no doubt though that you will post another rant in response equally lacking in facts or anything I actually post.

    25. Baklava says:

      Jim wrote to Severian, “And your first sentence is a lie

      Sev’s first sentence was, “it doesn’t matter that adult and umbilical cord stem cells have proven more likely to solve these problems then embryonic stem cells, the government has unlimited money!

      I learned that adult stem cells including umbilical have 72 uses and embryonic have 0. So that part of his sentence is true. The other part was sarcasm as the government of course doesn’t have unlimited money.

      Jim S wrote naively, “So exactly what business is going to do that research?

      While I don’t know the business names, there are places who provide treatments. If I ask you Jim what the Japanese word for treatment is but you don’t know it does that mean it doesn’t exist? Of course not. But if there wasn’t a Japanese word for treatment I’m sure it’d be religious people’s fault the way you are coming across in your posts. Powerful judgmentalism case you have going on there.

      Jim S wrote, “the people who oppose this research are almost exclusively basing it on their religious beliefs

      That’s your opinion. I’m one who is basing it on priorities, the constitution, and my desire to see government stop expanding and not just slow down SPENDING but maybe see it stay the same for the next decade. Besides defense spending (because that has been reduced over the last 3 decades from 50% of spending to 20%) what would you take away from the American people to spend the money on “embronic” stem cell research as that is the one you are so worked up about.

      Jim S wrote, “make certain that everyone pays the price for their ideological convictions

      Yes. because we are mean and you “care”. It can’t possibly just be a simple disagreement. You must cast aspersions again.

      Bully Meanie Jim — see mirror.

    26. Severian says:

      Gee Jim, where’s that crybaby icon when you need it, ah there it is – :((

      Why is it that all the pseudo-science pushers are all in the computer field? You, a guy named Aghast, the modelers who push global warming nonsense packaged as science? I honestly think that computer science teaches too much reliance on mental masturbation and looped code and not enough on reality and practical aspects. Too many models and processes that are divorced from reality.

      If we cut through all your BS, we see the traditional leftist rant. Pharmaceutical companies are evil short term profit motive bastards who won’t work on a cure if they can’t sell a drug (I bet you’re one of the types who believes that they have a cure for AIDS but are evilly repressing it so they can sell tons of antiviral meds). Republicans and their supporters are all religious fanatics who stomp on science for fun and because Jesus told them to. It’s governments job to spend billions on things that offer little to no benefit just because money grows on taxpayers, yada yada yada…:-@:-@:-@

      For your information, I personally have no moral or ethical problem with embryonic stem cells. I know it must shock you, but there are a lot of Republicans and conservatives like me. I’m an atheist, not a Bible thumper, but I also happen to think that people who do have strong ethical problems shouldn’t just be thrown under the bus. I just happen to know a thing or three about real science, since that’s how I make my living, and don’t think the government is made of money to piss down a hole.

      I notice that you whine and cry, but don’t provide any solid info on the wonderful benefits shown by embryonic stem cells. And besides the evil pharmacutical companies, there are plenty of private funded organizations and trusts, liberal as hell, and tons of colleges that can do this research and can fund it without it coming out of my taxes. But then, to people like you, government is the alpha and the omega, you worship government the same way others do God. Embryonic stem cell research is not illegal, get that, NOT ILLEGAL. So, go back to school, finish that biochem or whatever degree and knock youself out. Or would you have to sacrifice that good paying computer job, and you’d rather the government tax the hell out of someone else to pay for it.

      Half truths, distortions, misrepresentations, and lies, as we’ve come to expect.

    27. Severian says:

      Hey, I’ve got an idea. I am just positive I can cure just about anything by having nekid women rub all over me. It’s not been studied very long, so it must have tons of unseen potential. I need $100,000,000 in government grants to adequately study this. What? You don’t want to fund it?! What are you, some moralistic, uptight reiigious fanatic! I’ll make a commercial, showing me with this hideous problem that makes part of my anatomy just rigid as can be, and it won’t go back to normal until I get the nekid women treatment. How dare you call me an opportunist! How dare you say I’m misleading and manipulating, have you no heart? Are you all just selfish, vicious, and heartless people with no soul? How can you stand in the way of this promising research and still look in the mirror at yourselves and sleep at nights?!?!

      8-|

    28. Jim S says:

      Baklava, if you wish to defend Severian’s lies try again. Go away and take some courses in logic and the scientific method and try again. Just because something that has been being researched for 40 years has results that aren’t matched by something that has only been being researched for 8 years it does not prove anything about the long term potential of the one that hasn’t been being studied as long. That is the truth. You and Severian are both lying through your little teeth and you both know it. Severian isn’t bright enough to actually do any competent science or he would have recognized the logical fallacy that he is taking part in promoting. The fact that the majority of people opposing ESC oppose it because of their religiously based opposition to abortion is one that everyone knows, but you deny it in order to defend the BS you spew. In other words, you lie about this too. Do you tell the truth about anything? If you do it couldn’t be proved by the posts either of you have made here.

      Severian, if you’re a scientist you are quite probably the worst one getting a paycheck for it in the U.S. But of course given the other lies you post I doubt you are one. You certainly don’t post anything that implies even indirectly any comprehension of basic logic. You BS us with “I notice that you whine and cry, but don’t provide any solid info on the wonderful benefits shown by embryonic stem cells.”. In fact what I did was reasonably point out that you can’t expect results to already exist from a field that we’ve barely begun to research. You, of course, with your staggeringly brilliant scientific mind couldn’t understand that. Since you can’t understand that I think anyone with a brain would realize that you are not in fact a real scientist who comprehends anything about the scientific method or the nature of scientific research. Since you lied about that I am forced to assume that you’re lying about everything else as well. I haven’t seen anything posted by you or Bakky that indicates any thoughts outside the bounds defined by James Dobson, the RNC and Rush Limbaugh so forgive me if I assume that you are in fact not an atheist but are in fact a Bible thumper because you show the same level of intelligence. Don’t like what I said? Tough. Prove me wrong by keeping a civil discourse instead of lying about people who point out your logical fallacies.

    29. Severian says:

      Jim S – :((:((:((:((:((

      More BS Jim, more useless drivel, more whining about everyone else, no defense of spending tons of government money on a technique that is not yielding promising results, more feeling that only government can do anything, yada yada yada yada…:-@:-@:-@

      Go back to your alter of big government, read a few global warming fantasies, you’ll be feeling right as rain in no time.

    30. Severian says:

      er, altar, not enough coffee yet.

    31. Severian says:

      BTW Jim, the things that come shining thru from your latest rant are that you are a bigot who hates religious people, particularly Christians, and that you believe everything should be done by government not by the private sector. I’m an atheist, and I don’t even begin to approach your level of vitriol or hatred for Christians, you’ve got a real bigoted intolerance problem there. And don’t go breaking your arm patting yourself on the back for being sensitive and caring enough to spend every last dollar that’s not your own to solve a problem. There’s no limit to the amount of other people’s money you’re willing to spend in order to feel good about yourself.

      Got it, understand, thanks for the glimpse into the mind of the left.

    32. Baklava says:

      Jim wrote an opinion, “Just because something that has been being researched for 40 years has results that aren’t matched by something that has only been being researched for 8 years it does not prove anything about the long term potential of the one that hasn’t been being studied as long.

      Jim. That is your opinion. There is NO WAY to claim that Sev lied. Sev wrote an opinion. I agree with him and so do people in the field. The condescension and accusation of lying isn’t necessary and doesn’t help the debate.

      Jim accused, “You and Severian are both lying through your little teeth and you both know it.

      No. We are stating an opinion just like you are.

      Jim cast aspersions writing, “Severian isn’t bright enough to …

      Is that necessary Jim? I’m thinking you are not very nice.

      Jim asserted, “The fact that the majority of people opposing ESC oppose it because of their religiously based opposition to abortion is one that everyone knows,

      That’s what the press (drive-by legacy media) says. Sev and I are two examples of people and there are other people I know who aren’t basing their opposition on religious reasons. But it isn’t a strong argument for you to dismiss religious people either.

      Jim wrote, “I haven’t seen anything posted by you or Bakky that indicates any thoughts

      Well….. are you deserving of more? You have repeated your 8 year versus 40 year message. But mostly called people liars and made disparaging remarks.

      Jim without looking in the mirror wrote, “Prove me wrong by keeping a civil discourse instead of lying about people who point out your logical fallacies.

      My post was more civil than yours I believe.

    33. Severian says:

      Jim is doing the tried and true debating tactic of attempting to move the argument sideways Bak. Deflect away from the topic at hand, so you don’t have to justify or provide a rational explanation of your opinion, but rather try and make the debate about the tone of your opponents, how mean they are, etc. It’s part and parcel of what our beloved ST has just blogged about with respect to the MJF “controversy.” It’s common, but it doesn’t play well here, we have seen it too many times, and I think it’s getting less and less effective as more and more people are getting fed up with it. Jim is, at the heart of it, upset that we can parse his arguments to get to the kernel and don’t get blinded by the chaff.

      Rather than provide a rationale as to why government should fund a less than promising technology (liberals are always willing to spend other people’s money), or why valid ethical concerns (valid to more than just religious zealots) should be ignored, he instead tries to make this about how mean his opponents in the argument are.

      Well, Jim, here’s a free bit of advice for you. Stop sitting there with a runny nose complaining about how the evil Republicans won’t pay for government to wipe it for you, and get off your butt and wipe it yourself. Take some time and money, do some research, and find out which universities are leading the way in ESC research. Give them some money, create a non-profit (only please, don’t take 80% of the till for “administration” as so many “charities” do), setup a dot org web site, push it, get the blogs (if you’re serious and sincere about it, both right and left blogs will support it), collect donations, manage them, find a couple or three researchers and support them, and above all monitor their progress to make sure they aren’t just blowing your money, look for results. In other words, take responsibility for it yourself if you want it done, that’s the beauty of this country, self-starters are respected here, and no one will try and stop you, remember, ESC research is not illegal.

      I suspect that Jim prefers the “liberal” way, show you care by spending other people’s money, but wouldn’t raise a finger to do it on his own. You can surprise us Jim, and earn our respect, by doing something other than complaining.

    34. Jim S says:

      This is my last post because frankly, neither one of you are worth wasting any more of my time. Is ESC illegal now? No. Has the Republican party attempted to make it illegal at both the federal and state levels? Yes. In fact the main reason for Missouri Amendment 2 which Talent opposes is that his Republican allies in the state legislature have tried every year for the last six years to make it illegal. There are private research institutions who won’t invest any more money in Missouri to expand their facilities because of the threat of those facilities suddenly becoming illegal. There are researchers who will not come to these facilities to work because they could move, get established and suddenly not be able to do their work. The constant threat of it being rendered illegal at the federal level has caused more development to take place overseas instead of the U.S.

      Bakky, what I said is not simply an opinion. This is the debating tactic of the ignorant right, to claim that if a fact or basic logical argument is put forth, claim it’s just an opinion. It’s not simply my opinion. Refute it logically or admit that you’re wrong, one or the other. Don’t just claim it’s only one person’s opinion. But that would require logic, something neither you nor Severian are capable of comprehending as you’ve both proven over and over again.

    35. Ok, everyone, debate the ISSUES not each other’s personalities or this thread will be closed.

    36. PCD says:

      Jim S,

      Don’t let the hit you where the good Lord split you on your way out.

      Amendment 2 writes into the Missouri Constitution the right to clone humans. Be honest for a change. You haven’t been here and liars are found out quickly here.

    37. Severian says:

      When you manage to come up with something other than opinion stated as fact, and back that up with references Jim, then you will be worth paying attention to. Until then, all your complaints are just more liberal whining and obsfucation. When you address the fact that the amendment in Missouri is a back door run around that guarantees the right to perform human cloning, not guarantee the ability to do ESC, they you may be worth debating. When you address the fact that you seem to see no problem in government continuing to increase the amount of money it spends regardless of ethical issues or practical things like potential for progress in a reasonable timeframe, instead of hiding behind insults, then perhaps there will be some room for discussion. When you decide to not call anyone who doesn’t automatically want to spend tons of taxpayers money on dubious research (both ethically and benefit wise) a Bible thumper, that is, decide to debate the issues honestly and not mischaracterize your opponents as stereotypes, then you might be worth paying attention to. These are the issues you’re dodging.

    38. Severian says:

      Oh my PCD! You said “good Lord!” You must be one of those hideous right wing Bible thumpers! How dhast you say such a thing! =))

    39. Baklava says:

      English 101 teaches how to distinguish opinion versus fact. Just because you believe it to be true doesn’t make it fact.

      Judgment calls no matter how much evidence you have are always opinion. We stated 0 (zero) versus 72 as our evidence on what we are basing our opinion on. Jim stated 8 versus 40 years (leaving out the fact that the last decade has been the most advances in the field and technology thereby equalizing some of the 40 versus 8. Jim repeats it more adamantly and ignores our statements of fact on which we base our opinion and then calls us “liars”. Nice.

      Thank you ST for letting us address what opinion versus fact is and the basis for all of our opinions.

      We are here through your gracious patience and efforts. @};-

    40. Ryan says:

      In the end this comes down to the basic liberal vs conservative debate – spending. We’re already pumping money into this here in CA and how much would you like to bet that 10 years from now the results of that spending will be nil? And then the liberal arguments will be along the lines of, “Well, we just aren’t spending enough of your money on this. If we put x billions more into it, why, then we’ll get results!”