| NYT | 0 | |
| Miami Herald | 0 | |
| Don Surber | 0 | |
| AP | 0 | |
| WaPo | Obama Urges Groups to Stop Attacks [on Dems who oppose ObamaCare] |
0 |
Audacity of Truth
"Change" You Can Believe In:
"Nixon didn’t try to do that. They couldn't control (the media). They didn’t try. [...] What the hell do they think we are, puppets?"
- Liberal opinion writer Helen Thomas, describing the Obama admin's penchant for heavily scripting public appearances & press conferences - 7/1/09
Washington Post writes about Rush’s statements on MJ Fox ad, but doesn’t note that he apologized “bigly” for his remarks later in the show
(SCROLL to the bottom for an important update)
Yesterday afternoon I blogged about the Michael J. Fox ad running in Missouri in which he passionately called for government funding of stem cell research in a show of support for Senator Jim Talent’s opponent demagogue Claire McCaskill. McCaskill currently has a three point lead over Talent in the latest poll.
In that same post, I talked about the controversy surrounding Rush Limbaugh’s comments on yesterday’s program where he said he thought that Fox might have either been off his medication or ‘acting’ in the ad because of the way he looked. I labelled the comment that Fox might have been ‘acting’ disgraceful, but also pointed out that as far as not taking his medication before appearing the ad, that it wasnt’ wrong to speculate on this, because Fox had admitted in his 2002 memoir Lucky Man that he had done just that before his testimony in front of a Senate subcommittee.
Today, the Washington Post has a write-up about Rush’s comments, but it omits an important detail: Rush’s apology, which I included in my prior post on the topic. Rush said:
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.
While I was diappointed at Rush’s suggestion that Fox would be ‘acting’ out symptoms of Parkinson’s disease (as far as I’m concerned, that type of talk adds nothing to the debate), I’m also disappointed with the Washington Post for failing to do the research they were supposed to do on finding out whether Rush later amended or apologized for what he said. For goodness sake, the man’s website had the transcript so it’s not like they had to do a lot of digging.
To let the WaPo know how you feel about their incomplete reporting, contact them: letters@washpost.com or ombudsman@washpost.com
Update I – 8:06 PM: I just pulled up the article and see that it now mentions that Rush later “backed away” from his comments. That was not in the article before.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Trackbacks
46 Responses to “Washington Post writes about Rush’s statements on MJ Fox ad, but doesn’t note that he apologized “bigly” for his remarks later in the show”
Comments
Blogads
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of ST's advertisers, nor do their opinions necessarily reflect ST's. Stats
Then brad, I say you’re a jerk. There, that was easy!
This has been some great reading after a long day at work. Thanks guys
BTW, everyone, I’m in the middle of composing a new post on all this, so don’t think I’m slacking off on blogging tonight
Severian at 9:58 am had a post about private industry. Thats a fair, though I think incorrect, criticism.
Yeah, never let the individual or the private sector do something that government can do less efficiently and worse, eh?
You shall have no god other than government…sheese.
FYI – I deleted an earlier comment made by stoo at his request. I don’t want anyone who saw it thinking I deleted it for no reason.
Sister Toldjah deleted my last comment at my request, as I was in the process of typing my question to Brad while he was being told to go away. It would be unfair to ask a question in those circumstances — and appear cowardly. I was doing chores away from my computer while all this back and forth was going on, and missed my chance.
I would like to thank Sister Toldjah, and all of you commentors that took up my side of the argument while I was away from the computer.
I was typing my explanation of that, ST.
I obviously type too s l o w.
Severian, you’ve missed a key point in these debates. The reason why the private sector is not investing in stem cell related research is because the law prevents them – Michael J Fox is not asking for the public to bear all the costs of stem cell research – he’s asking that the Missouri law be consistent with, not more stringent than, the Federal laws in allowing this research at all.” Please everyone, for truth’s sake, understand the issue.
Severian, again.
Rush Limbaugh violated laws when he illegally purchased prescription drugs – and deceived those that cared. Michael J. Fox did not violate any laws when he reduced his medication, and did not attempt to deceive anyone.
This is an easy distinction to make. The more difficult question is whether garnering sympathy to influence a voter is ethically acceptable, even if it’s certainly legal. Even if we can’t answer that question, doesn’t everyone know much more about Parkinson’s and stell research than you did a week ago? Doesn’t this only further inform your vote?
Well, Sue, I do believe you’re wrong, there is no law preventing stem cell research. Can you give me a citation or link proving that there is a law preventing embryonic stem cell research? And what, this research can only take place in Missouri? My understanding of states rights is that the people of the state can set certain laws to reflect the character of the state’s populace, and they need honest information, not BS and lies, in order to be able to do that. And actually, I knew plenty about Parkinson’s and stem cells a week or month ago, not all of us have our heads in the sand all the time, some of us actually have an interest in the world and what’s happening in it.
And if Rush violated laws, why did the Florida DA’s office not press charges and take him to court? Guilty even if proven innocent since he’s a conservative commentator, is that the story you’re telling?
Sue incorrectly stated, “The reason why the private sector is not investing in stem cell related research is because the law prevents them”
This is factually false. We understand that you believe it. Maybe it’s time you change your source of info. Do the due diligence of finding out if your accusation is true.
Sue asked, “Doesn’t this only further inform your vote?”
Not if false assertions of Talent and Steele’s positions are made.