Skip to main content

Michael J. Fox was on This Week with George Stephanopolous earlier today. First of all, three cheers to this guy. He has the cash to spend the rest of his days in luxurious, secluded retirement surrounded by loved ones, instead of becoming a lure for the vicious smears of right-wing media. He's been doing it for years with style, class, and infectious humor. Here, Fox responds to Rush Limbaugh who said in part "When you start telling them that there's a cure ... You are creating a false hope scenario. And that is cruel."
Video and transcript at Crooks and Liars --MJ FOX:  What is crueler, to not have hope or to have hope?  And it's not false hope.  It's a very informed hope. I mean, it's hope that's informed by the opinion of our leading scientists, almost to the point of unanimity that embryonic stem cells, because they're pluripotent, because they have the capacity to be anything ...  

I don't want to get too corny about it, but isn't that what that person in harbor with the thing is about, hope? And so to characterize hope as some kind of malady or some kind of flaw of character or national weakness is, to me, really counter to what this country is about.

What ever irrelevent side issue the GOP is creating out of thin air today, I can safely predict for most of you reading this, regardless if you're a republican, democrat, independent, or apolitical: During your life, someone you know and love deeply, a parent, a sibling, a child, a friend, a spouse -- there's a good chance it will be you -- is going to die a long, lingering, dehumanizing, painful death from a disease or injury that Embryonic Stem Cell Research holds great promise to treat. In fact, most of us will have to witness this several times, before it's our turn.

These blastocytes, about 100 cells or less, ten times smaller than the period at the end of this sentence1, are going to be thrown in to a medical waste dispenser, or used for research. President Bush used the one and only veto of his entire miserable term to date on a bi-partisan Bill that would have saved a few dozen blastocytes out of hundreds of thousands from destruction, and marked them for life-saving research. Bush did this solely to retain the votes of a small minority of Americans and against the will of the great majority of the rest. He did it knowing full well it would not save a single human life, and that it could well cost the lives of millions.

Here I speak purely for myself and not for Michael J. Fox: In my view, that veto will not be overridden, and this great nation will be held hostage to these bug-fuck-crazy neoconservative extremists, as long as there is a Republican Majority in Congress. It's really that simple.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 02:18 PM PST.


Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Speaking of hope (50+ / 0-)

    of hope, if you've already experienced the emotional roller-coaster of watching helplessly as a loved one struggles and, finally, succombs to such a condition, you understand all too well the brutality of what I'm talking about, and you know the importance of hope. If you haven't, I hope you never do.

    Get out the Vote: Vote for Change, Vote for Life.

    Read UTI, your free thought forum

    by DarkSyde on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 02:17:40 PM PST

    •  The list is so long... (25+ / 0-)

      I lost both of my parents to diseases for which embryonic stem cell research holds tremendous promise.  Obviously with a family history like that, I feel I have a significant personal stake not only for myself, but my siblings, and my kids, in this issue.

      The GOP has put the brakes on progress for years, in their pandering to the base.  Praying for my parents, or me, or my children will change nothing.

      Research can and will.

      All Spin Zone : Progressive Politics Writ Large

      by Richard Cranium on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 02:21:25 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  cheaper, faster, save more lives than stem cells (0+ / 0-)

        millions of children can be saved from death by diarrhea by providing clean water to the billions of people on earth who dont have it now. this would cost far less than stem cell research has already cost.

        of course very few of the children who die this most horrible terrifying death are not white. the desperation of the worlds poor helps drive down wages everywhere, increasing wall street profit. (so shhhh).

        You will lie to your grandchildren when they ask what you did to prevent climate change.

        by Peter Pan on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 05:52:08 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  woops (0+ / 0-)

          very few of those on earth who die from dehydration are white

          damn we live in a racist country

          we are all one race

          You will lie to your grandchildren when they ask what you did to prevent climate change.

          by Peter Pan on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 05:54:00 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  At last, a non-controversial title. (29+ / 0-)

      This is simple. My Dad died of side-effects of treatment to cope with the effects of MS. When someone like Steele hides behind his sister's disease to pretend that he isn't standing in the way of research for a cure, he is despicable. When Rush Limbaugh ... well, acts like Rush Limbaugh, he is despicable.

      And there are things we can do to fight it, right now, until Tuesday.

      OH15: IN: Kilroy for Congress. OUT:Deborah Pryce

      by BruceMcF on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 02:23:24 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Very deceptive and nasty ad (8+ / 0-)

        When someone like Steele hides behind his sister's disease to pretend that he isn't standing in the way of research for a cure, he is despicable.

        This Steele is trying to dodge the issue.  Here is the story.

        Lt. Governor Michael Steele has started airing a new ad featuring Steele's sister, Monica Turner, who is a physician and who also suffers from multiple sclerosis. She is also the ex-wife of boxer Mike Tyson.

        In the ad Turner criticizes Democrat Ben Cardin for using an ad featuring actor Michael J. Fox, who suffers from Parkinson's Disease.

        "He (Cardin) is using the victim of a terrible disease to frighten people all for his own political gain," Turner says in the ad.

        Turner goes onto say that her brother supports stem cell research.

        A spokesman for the Cardin campaign calls the Steele ad "deceptive and hypocritical."

        The ad does not mention Steele opposes federal funding for stem cell research using human embryos. 


        •  Family Values (0+ / 0-)

          So his sister wasn't above marrying insane rapist Mike Tyson for the money and fame. Now she's lying for her power-monger brother to deprive others with her disease of hope of a cure.

          What a disgusting Thanksgiving dinner that family must have had.

          "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

          by DocGonzo on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 07:23:22 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, So Simple (0+ / 0-)

        even A BIG FAT SIMPLETON like RUSH LIMPBALLS ought to get it.  

    •  the faces of those who choose hope (10+ / 0-)

      I strongly recommend the diary "Stem cells, the right to life and Huntington's Disease: Two Personal Stories" that is currently scrolling off the recent list.  

      Cato come back gives us a tremendously personal glimpse into two families who I guarantee you will mean a lot to you.  And the diarist makes the excellent point that for these families, when they are praying to God for help, they are praying for the cures that will emerge from the kind of research that Republicans would choke off.

      Both of these strong mothers found strength in God.  And both of them prayed for cures through the hope of stem cells.  For them, the 'life' of a cluster of cells versus the 'life' of their families is a 'no brainer'.
      Just because someone is 'religious' doesn't mean that his/her concept of 'right to life' is the same concept as the pope's 'right to life'. This election could be God answering their prayers.

      •  Thanks for the recommend! n/t (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Jon Kyl
        Incompetent, Bush's lapdog

        by Cato come back on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 03:06:27 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  I suggest (4+ / 0-)

        they support science and leave god out of it.  Not meant to be a nasty comment, but as a scientist, I'd put my hopes on science rather than a religious belief.

        •  as a scientist as well (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          I've got to say it's a long road ahead before the understanding of basic stem cell biology that we learn from research will be able to inform medical treatments -- but it is the best road we've got

          I think it's fair to say, though, that when it comes to stem cells there is no conflict between science and god.

        •  Not God (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          pearlegates, cen

          But their attempts to impose their warped religious views on others. nevermind that their view is causing innocents to suffer, nevermind that they can't even agree at what point in life a "person" is defined, nevermind that they gladly support the killing of humans, especially "other" humans the can claim their "God" disapproves of, nevermind that once a person is brought into this world they cease caring for it, avoiding all responsibility for the welfare of the baby.
          These are sick, evil people who deliberately avoid the teachings of Christ, and use the Bible to foist their hate & ignorance on the rest of the world. And, in their hate, in their own twisted, tortured minds, they  cannot see the goodness of a person like MJF, and what their sick beliefs are doing to real people. They are warped, sorry excuses for humans.

          •  IMO (0+ / 0-)

            They are warped, sorry excuses for humans.

            Actually, I believe that many of them have given up any right to be considered human beings at all. Their behaviour is so inhuman that perhaps the kindest thing to do would be to shoot them like the rabid animals that they are.

        •  I assume you are talking about the 'god' (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          in my diary.

          Putting hope into the science was exactly my point.  I was further saying that religion does not exclude the scientific aspect of 'cures'.

          In a logical sense:

          Intelligent people who believe in a god that answers prayers do not automatically exclude science as the answer to those prayers.

          Let's say that I am thirsty, I am religious, and I pray for water.  A woman comes along who knows the science of the area and where water could be found.  She digs a well in a place that science tells her would be the most likely water basin and she finds water to give to me.  

          I could believe that my god helped her to amass this knowledge and sent her to me in order to save my life.  Science and religion are not necessarily exclusive of each other.  A belief in a god does not demand dismissing science.

          It is absurd to think that we need to get god out of the way before we can convince people to vote for science and democrats.  Many religious people are praying for science to cure their loved ones.  

          It is just a matter of understand the 'right to life' of real working breathing living human beings is more important than the 'right to life' of a clump of cells.  I think a lot of religious people understand that choice.

          But if they keep voting republican, they are supporting a power structure that will not live up to their hopes -- whether their hopes are in god, science, or both.

          Jon Kyl
          Incompetent, Bush's lapdog

          by Cato come back on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 05:45:01 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Bush dashed my hopes for a cure... (9+ / 0-)

      ...with a single stroke of his VETO pen. I have diabetes. I must take a pill and insulin shots every day of my life. If I do not I WILL DIE!
      Thanks to Michael J. Fox and all of the un-named fighters for stem cell research. I may never see a cure in my lifetime but maybe one day...just children and grandchildren will.

      Change the course--change the Captain. Change the crew. But save the ship!

      by ImpeachKingBushII on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 03:34:50 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Diabetes here too (4+ / 0-)

        I've been a type-I diabetic for ~20 years. When I first learned about stem-cells -- long before they became a political issue, mind you -- I thought to myself "Finally there is real hope for diabetics!"

        Diabetics have already seen some progress thanks to stem-cell research, although you'd never know this from listening to our media and politicians. However, we've only begun to scratch the surface. I hoped to see more significant progress in my lifetime for my sake, but that seems increasingly unlikely, thanks to Bush and Republicans. Still yet, even if I never see anymore benefits of this great research, there is still great hope for future generations to avoid the problems that I, and hundreds of millions of others like me, have had with diabetes.

        The arguments against stem-cell reseach are ludicrous and, quite frankly, just plain silly. While we debate stem-cell research, people will die that could've been saved and corporations will move their operations over seas, where stem-cell research has, and will continue, to proceed without our participation and without the boost it would give to our economy.

        Democrats -- Progress for the Working Class

        by rogun on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 04:28:25 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Don't lose hope (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Stem cell research will be funded by the government again, and hopefully soon.  Your day will come!

        In the meantime, at least there's Harvard's stem cell initiative.  So progress is being made, albeit so much more slowly...

    •  bug-fuck-crazy neoconservative extremists (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Amen, brother, amen.

  •  the fact that Fox has avoided..... (34+ / 0-)

    all the easy remarks he could make about Rush shows how to be a good human.  I think my favorite part is when he talks about the respect he has for people on the other side of the coin.  It is an honest respect.  You don't see that too much these days on either side.

  •  Good comment, DS. (23+ / 0-)

    Once you get more than a few dozen cells in that blastocyst, they exponentially start losing humanity...

    so that by the time that blastocyst is 19, he can be tossed away in Iraq.

    The most poignant interview this week was the mother being interviewed about the death of her son in Iraq and watching Bush's "I feel your pain" speech.  She said, "He doesn't know what it is like staying awake nights waiting for an email or call.  When his daughters are in Iraq, he'll know how I feel."

    Nuf said.

    Enough about me, let's talk about you. What do you think of me? Janis Ian, "My autobiography"

    by captainlaser on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 02:22:31 PM PST

  •  I completely (14+ / 0-)

    agree. Michael J. Fox deserves applause for his actions.  I can only hope that people will listen to him and to the many others speaking out for embryonic stem cell research.

    Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear. William E. Gladstone

    by Clairegg on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 02:24:03 PM PST

  •  Fox is eloquent (24+ / 0-)

    Fox sounds eloquent and inspiring, especially compared to what the right-winged jackasses have said in response to him. In a way, he symbolically represents the choice that voters have this year: a choice between those who aspire to change the system for those less fortunate, vs. those who engage in mean-spirited pettiness in the name of religious fanaticism and corporate greed.

  •  Druggie would say anything at this point... (6+ / 0-)

    he'd sell his own grandmother to dope dealers to remove his giant fungus covered foot from his own fat mouth.

    Yeah... why try to find a cure for Cancer at all? Isn't  that just giving people false hope? Better we all just sit at home like Druggie and shoot up and then tell everyone we were praying about it. Right? That's how we should find the cure for Cancer?

    Hillbilly heroin and prayers we lie about?

    Nobody should listen to a drug addict. It's not smart to listen to a drug addict. The fact that you actually have to tell Republicans that says something to me... it says that since half the stock traders on Wal Street are coke fiends and since all of them are Republicans...

    maybe now we're getting around to the real reason Republicans seem so mentally deranged. Becuase it's the drugs talking.

  •  As far as I'm concerned, Fox is beyond reproach (20+ / 0-)

    in so many ways. Limbaugh, well, he's beyond contempt. But that goes without saying.

    This whole thing is a non-issue anyway. When these people who are so concerned about science murdering babies start protesting in vitro fertilization, then I'll believe they're serious about this killing of unborn life. Until then, they're a bunch of hypocrites who have discovered one more issue to use as a publicity stunt.  

    We're blues people. And blues never lets tragedy have the last word. -Wynton Marsalis

    by paluxy1945 on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 02:29:42 PM PST

  •  today vs yesterday (14+ / 0-)

    Aren't we all grateful that today's republicans weren't in charge when penicillin was invented?  Or how about the polio vaccine?  They would have definitely tried to intervene there as well.  

    There should not be one doctor today that is brave enough to call himself a republican.

    Republicans are not a national party anymore.

    by jalapeno on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 02:30:03 PM PST

  •  Ask them: (8+ / 0-)

    If the building is on fire, and you've got one trip back inside left in you, which do you save:

    • The box of 200 (or 2000) blastocysts in the fridge?
    • Or the one three year-old in the other room?

    Hats off, kudos, all praise to Michael J. Fox, who just may yet win a Democratic majority in the Senate for us.

  •  Obviously stem cell research (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kitebro, ladybug53, possum

    doesn't hold out any hope for Rush Limbaugh's deafness, which he achieved through his addiction to oxycontin, thus having to have a cochlear implant.
    He'd be the first in line were stem cell be able to help him.

    His attitude to this really makes one want to wish evil on a person, which I won't do, but I do believe in Karma!

  •  These Republicans should be cast out (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ladybug53, sundancekid11, possum

    just based on Schiavo alone. Super majorities of Americans want government out of their end of life matters and their reproductive matters.

    Chris Wallace with FOX to Harold Ford:"If you win aren't you afraid you'll aid liberals?"

    by LandSurveyor on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 02:33:58 PM PST

  •  Fox is great (14+ / 0-)

    Basically echoing everything everyone has said, he is not backing down from the right wing attacks, and is doing it with such class. Sam Seder said it best(with regards to cries of exploiting MJF's condition): The GOP cannot stand for the public to see the real life effects of their policies. You can apply that to a lot of what they have done, and especially to stem cell research.

    "To be fair to Rush, prescription drug use is his only area of expertise" -Keith Olbermann

    by jj32 on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 02:34:44 PM PST

  •  Yes, this IS simple. (3+ / 0-)

    Vote Dem!

    It's THAT simple.

  •  How Ironic: (6+ / 0-)

    A man who played the cool young conservative, Alex P.  Keaton, and supported Arlen Specter on this very issue is now villified by the very people his character inspired.

    Oh humanity!
  •  If we allow these religious luddites to control (7+ / 0-)

    we will not have much of a civilization.

    In an American Lit class I was teaching last the very religious students were deeply upset by Emerson's "nature". When did Emerson become too controversal for an English class?  This really upset me. Accept Jesus as your personal savior or nothing you say is of value, according to these students. Thank goodness they don't know my personal religious values.

    fact does not require fiction for balance

    by mollyd on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 02:37:41 PM PST

  •  Missouri issues (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ladybug53, possum

    Stem cell research is important.

    But isn't global warming also important?   Especially in drought ridden Missouri?

    Why haven't the Dems in Missouri chosen to make this a big deal too?    

    People need to start realizing the connection of global warming to droughts.     Perhaps after a bad decade, they'll start to change their minds.

    Dems must be ready for this change of thinking.  If we are, we can pick up farmer votes that have always been Red.


  •  I've been waiting (14+ / 0-)

    all day for someone to post a comment (because I don't know how) about Michael J. Fox's appearance on This Week.

    I was in tears watching him so eloquently talk about the ravishes about this disease and the need to help other people. What's wrong with having a little hope, he asked when George S. told him that some people said he was giving people false hope. Yeah, I thought -- "The Audacity of Hope." It sure beats waiting around to just die.

    After the segment went off, it took me a few minutes to get up. I sat there thinking how some people could be so hateful. Then I thought, If Limbaugh would wake up tomorrow morning, with some god-awful incurable disease, I wonder how he would feel. Do these people really believe the hatred that spews from their ears? The likes of Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, O'Rielly and so many others--how an they look themselves in the mirror?

    The country is so divided because of these kinds of people. And the sad part of it all, they are making millions selling this kind of snake oil to the sheep that so readily follow them.

    I still can't get MJFox out of my head today. I pray that the candidates he supports win this election -- not just for the stem cell research, but for the sake of the good people in this country.

    God help us all.

  •  I cast my vote and make my pledge (9+ / 0-)

    For science. For the future. For hope. For my fellow humans. For America. For my nephew and all the children of the world. For reason. For reality.

    The Republicans need to be defeated because they have proven themselves to be a danger to all those things. Their obsession with the accumulation of money and power has created a crisis, not just for America and all Americans, but for the entire world. It's too late for nearly 3000 members of our armed forces and too late for the tens or perhaps hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who are dead because of what this president and the rubberstamp GOP did.

    The Iraq is as much a crime against decency and as senseless and stupid as the attacks of 9/11 were. The GOP war against the Constitution of the United States is nothing short of treason. For the sake of a tomorrow that's free of people like Bush, Cheney, Hastert, Rove and the Neocons, a concerted effort on the part of all Democrats is needed.

    To victory!

    It's the beat generation, it's be-at, it's the beat to keep, it's the beat of the heart, it's being beat and down in the world and like all time low-down

    by Splicer on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 02:42:33 PM PST

  •  Lawrence E. Harrison in his book, (4+ / 0-)

    "The Central Liberal Truth," talks about the things that identify cultures that are either "Progress-Prone" or "Progress-Resistant."

    Social Behavior in a Progress-Resistant Culture:
    (1) Rule of law/Corruption – Money, connections matter; corruption is tolerated

    (2) Authority – Centralized: unfettered, often arbitrary

    (3) Role of elites – Power and rent seeking; exploitative

    (4) Church-state relations – Religion plays major role in civic sphere

    (5) Gender Relationships – Women subordinated to men in most dimensions of life

    Sort of reminds one of the Bush view of America doesn't it?

    He says that in "Progress-Prone" cultures:

    (1) People believe they can influence their own destinies (otherwise known as HOPE)
    (2) The culture promotes the Golden Rule.  

    If you don't have an earth-shaking idea, get one, you'll love building a better world.

    by hestal on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 02:44:47 PM PST

    •  I believe both of those worlds coexist (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      hestal, vernonlee

      simultaneously in America which is why both sides try so hard to control "the message". I do know this: It's real easy to lose your grasp of a situation and even lose your ability to assess a situation because our political environment is so "message based" instead of issue based.
      Ken Mehlman was on NPR the other morning discussing the importance of knowing consumer information about the citizenry. Do you think he wants this knowledge to cater to them? Or does he want the information so he'll know how to lie to them?

      Chris Wallace with FOX to Harold Ford:"If you win aren't you afraid you'll aid liberals?"

      by LandSurveyor on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 03:05:04 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  His true class (4+ / 0-)

    lies in two things: first, his courage and humility in calling for the needed research.  Second, his willingness to discuss this hugely important topic maturely in the face of those who trivialize and denigrate its importance.  Every righteous cause should have such a warm and humane proponent.

    you learn something new every day, if you're paying attention

    by jhop7 on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 02:45:02 PM PST

  •  Love The Sentiment Of What Fox Said (8+ / 0-)

    And so to characterize hope as some kind of malady or some kind of flaw of character or national weakness is, to me, really counter to what this country is about.

    So much of conservative arguments against activist government is really quite cynical. Their's is not a "can-do" attitude. What Fox is talking about here is a rhetorical goldmine for progressives.

    Good Government. Traffic Lights Aren't All That Weird. Vote Democratic!

    by HL Mungo on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 02:49:22 PM PST

  •  I realize this is going to be a... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SLJ, DarkSyde

    ...very unpopular sentiment around here, but I think that if dKos is going to make the pretense of being a haven for libertarians, Democrats, liberals, and other pro-freedom/anti-fascist forces in the US, my position is one that should be considered.

    My essential point is this: I have a hard time justifying taxing the 30% or so of Americans who have moral objections to stem cell research to fund it. Even though they are wrong to think stem cell research is immoral, they still have the right to not be forced to fund research they view as immoral. I find it morally reprehensible to tax people at gun point to fund things they view as immoral and sinful. Imagine you were an evangelical Christian. How would you feel if you knew your tax money was going to "murder"?

    I realize evangelical Christians don't return liberals the favor when it comes to freedom (see gay marriage, abortion, flag burning, torture, wiretapping, habeas corpus), but if want to be intellectually honest, I feel we have to admit that public funding for research that a significant minority in this country views as murder is wrong.

    Russ Feingold for President!

    by Basil on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 02:53:31 PM PST

    •  I (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SLJ, matt2525, milton333

      think five percent of American would give a rat's ass if Bush hadn't mined the issue for political gold, and had instead carefully explained the facts to anyone with reservations. The Neocons created that 30%. It's the same flipping 30% that show up in every poll lately on the wrong side of the question.

      To wit, if some one doesn't like embryos being destroyed, then lobby against IVF. Lobbying against ESCR to save lives is like blaming the skate-board ramp building kid down the street for using some scrap wood from a construction site and calling him a tree murderer. It makes no sense at all.

      And for the hardcore, there's a simple solution inthe meantime: Don't use it. It works across the board. If someone thinks ranching is murder, don't eat meat or wear leather.

      Read UTI, your free thought forum

      by DarkSyde on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 03:06:11 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I'm not sure this is the appropriate test (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SLJ, milton333, Coherent Viewpoint

      You can find minorities of people who will find a moral objection to just about anything the government does.  There are people (i.e. Quakers, Amish etc.) who think any war at any time is immoral.  There are people who think all taxation is immoral.  If all it took was for someone to say they morally object to something the government does, then the government couldn't function.

      But what should be the appropriate way to take those views into account?

      Fortunately (or unfortunately, depending on your point of view) the framers of the Constitution, in their infinate wisdom, fretted about a "tyranny of the majority" and inserted devices into our system of government to make sure that strongly held minority views were represented.  Things like the Senate filibuster are designed to make sure that there is a mechanism for minorities to slow down or stop legislation.

    •  I have pondered this before (5+ / 0-)

      but I think the bottom line is that in a Democracy, it is majority rule. (or it should be, Bushco). Congress supposedly represents the majority. Your tax dollar is applied as the "majority" therefore dictates. You can't cherry-pick.

      Responding to the diary. I'm now watching a co-worker cope with the early stages of Parkinson's. It is heartbreaking, and this is NOT a person I particularly like or admire. Regardless, my eyes tear when I watch her trying to control her body. Imagine if this were a loved one.  I watch her, try to be helpful without embarrassing her, all the while thinking "damn Bush to hell."

      •  Majority Rule (0+ / 0-)

        In the south in the 50's, majority rule meant segregation. It's a delicate balancing act when it comes to funding unpopular programs or making unpopular laws. Sometimes, they just have to be done. We shouldn't look at stem cell research as popular or not, but whether it offers the chance for a cure or treatment. I have no doubt that for most of the opponents of this research are agonizing over a false message. Do they allow reasearch that might potentially find cures for horrible diseases and destroy babies along the way? Or do they save babies that might grow up to be the next Mozart or Einstein, but let people suffer with Parkinson's or ALS? Some inspired leadership on this subject would go along way toward breaking the impasse.  

        Do Pavlov's dogs chase Schroedinger's cat?

        by corwin on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 04:18:19 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  heh (12+ / 0-)

      under that argument, can I please have a refund for the Iraq war?

      The reality of our government is that you money is going towards ALL sorts of thing you may find morally reprehensible--like, for example, Karl Rove's salary, or flying the President to Indiana for a campaign rally, or illegal wars, or testing pesticide on children, or "faith based initiatives."  

      If we allowed people to "opt out" of specific uses of their tax dollars, that would literally cripple our government.

      And so, we pay taxes. And we must accept the good and the bad, and work every election to choose those who will spend our money according to our political/moral philosophy.

      •   ..."can I please have a refund for the Iraq war? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SLJ, Coherent Viewpoint

        I'd like a refund for what Bush and his cronies have done with my money on almost every issue you can name.
        They have NEVER been right and I want my money back for all of it, not just the war!

        I'm sick of calling them.
        I'm turning their account over to the collectors,

        Democracy is coming to the USA.

        "We're the people who live. They ain't gonna wipe us out. Why we're the people--we go on." -Ma Joad in "Grapes of Wrath"(Steinbeck)

        by Ma Joad on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 04:45:34 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Fine. Pay no tax - but get no benefits. (5+ / 0-)

      Let others who don't share their faith get on with the research.  The evangelical Christians can have an annual tax rebate paid to their nominated church of $11.89 each (or whatever tiny sum it would amount to). No problem with that.  

      But here is the deal: they must sgree to never use the resulting treatments this technology unlocks - to save their parents, their children, their siblings, their spouse - or themselves.  Not one of them, not ever.  It must become part of their faith, in the same way that Jehovah's Witnesses eschew blood transfusions.  The JW's search for bloodless treatment options has been a catalyst for research and development of bloodless surgery techniques.  

      If evangelical Christians want to fund their own medical discoveries to treat diseases and cure cancer without blastocytes, fine - I hope it leads to advances for the general scientific good.  But they should NEVER prevent a cure that might save the suffering of millions by utilising a tiny number of blastocytes.  

      The road to truth is long, and lined the entire way with annoying bastards.

      by Last Best Chance on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 03:30:00 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  So do you also believe (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RevJoe, SLJ

      people shouldn't be forced to have their tax dollars go to the Nastional Weather Service since its atmospheric measures will provide data scientists will use to support their annoyingly persuasive arguments about global warming?

      Or perhaps the CDC should have to pass the hat for funding, since some people think that AIDS exists as God's punishment for immoral behavior.

      You can't pretend that decisions affecting national policy are neutral.  They represent a choice between two options.

      In this case, by suggesting that people shouldn't be forced to pay taxes to support stem cell research, you are making a value judgment between two choices.

      You are privileging a minority's religious beliefs over someone else's quality of life.  Even the ability to have a life at all.

      How is someone's few moments of psychological comfort - probably a completely nonexistent element of their daily life once they leave the voting booth - to be compared with life-saving medical research that can affect the lives of millions now and yet unborn?

      That's a libertarian argument?

      The plural of anecdote is not data.

      by vernonlee on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 03:30:40 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  We're funding a damn war that 50% + (5+ / 0-)

      of Americans think is wrong.

      And some of us think what we're doing in Iraq amounts to war crimes and, yes let me say it, murder.

      So I think my tax money is going for murder. For an immoral war. A war with absolutely no hope of a good outcome.

      Unlike bush's war, embryonic stem cell research offers some semblance of a good outcome.

      Try that for intellectual honesty.

    •  Hmm. That's tough. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SLJ, milton333

      Try as hard as I can, I cannot imagine myself an evangelical Christian. So with me your hypothetical question is going to have to remain unanswered.

    •  No, I don't have to admit that!!! (5+ / 0-)

      I'm a vegetarian. I have a strong morally- and ethically-grounded belief that it is wrong to raise animals to then murder them and consume them. Our government is an active participant in that process. It spends Billions of dollars a year (directly or indirectly) supporting that practice.

      I'm a pacifist. I have a strong morally- and ethically-grounded belief that it is wrong to kill other people under any circumstances. I likewise believe that capital punishment is wrong. Our government spends Billions of dollars a month on policies that run directly counter to that belief.

      I'm an environmentalist. I have a strong morally and ethically-grounded belief that the collective actions of the human race are damaging to the delicate balance of this planet's eco-system. I find the level of species extinction that our society tolerates to be reprehensible.

      I could go on and on with similar statements about human rights, worker rights, corporatism, fair trade, and all sorts of other government policies that I have strong disagreements with. For each of those issues there is a significant minority of Americans that share my beliefs.

      Still, I don't get to opt out of paying taxes. In fact, I gladly and willingly pay my taxes. I fully embrace my role as a tax-paying member of society. I want to contribute to the greater good. I also believe that government is a necessary player in contributing to the greater good.

      Yes, part of my vision of an effective society is listening to minority viewpoints. To that end, ultimately building conensus, not winning a bare majority of votes, leads to sustainable policies.

      Nonetheless, part of being a member of a Democracy/Republic is agreeing to abide by the decisions of the Democracry/Republic. The power that netroots is showing--people-powered politics--is that people, you and I, can insist on a stronger voice in this process.

      Finally, the stem cell veto is about what science can be done at all, not just public funding. The intellectually honest approach is to use objective criteria, like a broad range of scientific evidence informed by open public oversight, to determine ethical approaches to allowable research and public funding priorities.

      Help Expand Dem House Control! Elect Mike Callaghan (WV-02)

      by SLJ on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 04:17:23 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  No. (0+ / 0-)

      ....I've heard that line of reasoning many times before.
      So, I ask, how many adopted children DO you have?
      They never do.
      Then they start deteriorating the quality of the discussion into just who and who should not be having s-  e-  x.

      If they want to be the s- e  -x police, they need to pick another venue, because I'm talking about government, not your bedroom antics, you closet perverts.

      End of discussion, as far as I am concerned. They don't have the intellectual honesty to admit that war is mass murder.

  •  hypocits (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mumon, Blue Waters Run Deep

    These guys make me sick!!! If they found a cure through stem cell research and it was one of their kids or family members they would be first in line.We need to have the scientists in charge not the uninformed psudo-christians.

  •  Steele (MD) was going on against ESC reserach (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ctsteve, Coherent Viewpoint, Ma Joad

    but couldn't answer what to do with the frozen embryos that weren't adopted other than say he'd make it "easier" to adopt 'em.

    But given that there's not enough incubators - uh, women who'd be surrogates - (irony alert for those who think I'm being sexist) to do this thing, it's purely immoral NOT to do ESC research on these blastocysts.

    "It's better to realize you're a swan than to live life as a disgruntled duck."

    by Mumon on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 02:57:41 PM PST

  •  Michael J. Fox should get a Nobel Prize (3+ / 0-)

    for teaching us all to look beyond our own comfort, our own needs, and our own self-interests.

    I would hope that at YK2, a Micheal J. Fox Humanitarian Award be created and given.

    John Laesch - soooo much better than the other guy

    by llbear on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 03:09:53 PM PST

  •  Rush Limbaugh - Viaggravating OxyMoron (0+ / 0-)

    Rush Limbaugh - Viaggravating OxyMoron

  •  Samll point.... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DarkSyde, cadejo4

    In my view, that veto will not be overridden, and this great nation will be held hostage to these bug-fuck-crazy neoconservative extremists, as long as there is a Republican Majority in Congress.

    Not to be overly pedantic here, but the people who object to stem-cell research are NOT the neoconservatives.

    •  Well (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      signalcamp, Coherent Viewpoint

      I'm not sure about that. Obviously, they're the ones who bear the repsonsibility for creating this issue, but I can't get inside their pointy heads. So, I'll give Bush the benefit of the doubt when he says it's a 'life and death issue' in his limited mind.

      I could perhaps clarify it to read 'bug-fuck-crazy neocons' or 'scheming cynical puppet masters with bat-shit insane rabid followers.' I'm good either way. But in the post, I chose to accept Bush on his word, which makes him more of a bug-fuck-crazy and less a scheming puppet master.

      Read UTI, your free thought forum

      by DarkSyde on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 03:31:59 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  You're right (0+ / 0-)

      Neoconservatives and social conservatives are two different beasties. The problem here is the social conservatives (Dobson, Robertson, etc.) not the neoconservatives (Wolfowitz, Podhoretz, Kristol, etc.)

      It's not a pedantic point at all. The neocons who profess to be Democrats, like Peter Beinart, will make a power grab for foreign policy within the Democratic party. Better know who they are.

      •  Democratic "neocons" (0+ / 0-)

        The neocons who profess to be Democrats, like Peter Beinart

        It would be hard to overstate just how wrong this view is.  Peter Beinart and other Democratic "hawks" are the furthest thing from a neoconservative viewpoint.  In fact, Beinart just wrote a whole book trying to lay out an argument for a liberal foreign policy that was in direct contradiction to the vision of the neoconservatives.

        This is an issue that really chaps my hide.  It is unhelpful and in fact idiotic to call any Democrat who takes even a mildly hawkish view of the uses of American power and call him a neoconservative.  Neoconservatives want to sideline the UN and other international institutions.  Beinart and others have written extensively about the continuing relevance of the UN.  Neoconservatives are unapologetic about American unilateralism.  Beinart's whole thesis is that only a foreign policy that exercises power in a restrained and judicious fashion will garner the support around the world needed to magnify American power.  The two world outlooks could not be more different.

        If you want to argue against what Beinart or other Democrats are saying, then fine - lay out an argument.  But if you're going to slap unflattering labels on people, make sure you know what the hell you're talking about.

        •  Mildly hawkish vs. shrilly hawkish (0+ / 0-)

          Well! While it might be hard to overstate the case, you've given it an admirable try. I can do no better than refer you to Frank Rich's review, published recently in the New York Review of Books, of Beinart's excerise in self-glorification. Here's a small excerpt:

          Beinart's hyperventilating over the threat of a supposedly resurgent left is a reminder of the habits of mind that led him to the mistakes this book wants to apologize for. Once again, worst-case logic has become a filter, preventing him from looking clearly at the evidence. Writing of liberal activists who blog at, he frets that "their idealism, and their outrage, is directed almost exclusively against the right."

          Just because Beinart's means are different (one would expect that), doesn't mean his ends aren't the same. You would do yourself, and the board, a credit if you would stop assuming people you disagree with are idiots. Leave that sort of shrill hyperventilating to Beinart.

  •  abc sucks (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ctsteve, Coherent Viewpoint, Ma Joad

    i`m  watching  world news tonight and it`s worse than fox.They are pushing a big republican comeback, that democrats have no plan and just basic gop propaganda.Even a segment with michael j fox was anti democratic.They make no bones  about their dislike of democrats.

  •  Timeliness? (5+ / 0-)

    Every time I hear the argument that the results of Stem cell research would not be felt for at least 15 years so we should not give people false hope I get so angry because it is such a 3 second attention span comment.  Should we avoid research on alternatvie energy because there won't be viable alternatives for at least 15 years?  should we stop searching for a cure for cancer because again it will be at least 15 years.  I have type 1 diabetes and the idea that there could be a cure at all not just 15 years is very appealing to me.  Even if it does not come in time to help me perhaps it could benefit my friends and family (future children) who would be more likely to suffer from the same disease.  I mean WTF these arguments are so flimsy it is appalling!!!

  •  Ignorance and arrogance (9+ / 0-)

    I work in the medical field (genetics) and recently attended a lecture by a research neurologist working on an experimental stem cell treatment for Parkinson's disease. What your readers may not know is that stem cell transplants are considered to have promising potential for treatment of Parkinson's because the neurological defect that causes the disease is confined to a very small region of the brain. This particular experiment involved injection of stem cells into the dopamine-producing region of the brain, the substantia nigra. Deep brain stimulation of the substantia nigra has been practiced for some time so the surgical pathway into the region is well-mapped.

    In its early stages Parkinson's can be quite difficult to diagnose, because several other conditions closely mimic the symptoms. So the patients in this study were chosen on the basis of severity of affectedness and lack of response to dopamine medications. Standardized metrics for the various symptoms were compared before and after and thus far the results have not been statistically definitive.  However, per standard safe practice, they began with a very small dosage and believe they saw a small effect, of perhaps marginal statistical significance. They plan to gradually up the dose to see if there may be a dose-dependent response.

    As for Limbaugh,  MJF charitably gave him a pass for his ignorance.  For his arrogance however,  he should be given no quarter... unless drawn and quartered.

  •  False hope? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    milton333, DarkSyde

    So is Rush saying everyone with hopes is fooling themselves? How about people who belive in god?

    "We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and by the depth of our answers." Carl Sagan

    by John3 on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 03:20:22 PM PST

  •  Darksyde + Hope = Lightsyde? (3+ / 0-)

    Anyway, good job.

    Whatever you do, don't vote for this scumbag:Jim Talent

    by muledriver on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 03:21:05 PM PST

  •  Bumpersticker I saw today (5+ / 0-)

    "The future belongs to whoever can give the next generation hope."

    If Democrats have a pre-911 view of the world, Republicans have a pre-July 4th view of the world.

    by chadlupkes on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 03:28:01 PM PST

  •  Stem cells (0+ / 0-)

    are important to the religious right, so important that they would reject the possibility of cures for people without hope, of course complete human beings like our military and any person outside our borders are fodder for the religious rights Jihad to spread democracy LOL and Christianity across the globe, the Crusades are back and America is the on the offensive, payback is hell and our hell is yet to come.

  •  FU Rush (0+ / 0-)

    Running Rush out of town in a new suit of tar and feathers would be too good for him.

    There must be a point when this trash-talking waste of space is compelled to shut his stupid piehole. Talk about shameless.

  •  Kos front-pagers, please keep... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    ...posting sets of volunteering and GOTV links in your diaries like you've been doing today.

    In fact, it would be good if we all posted these links at the end of our diaries, regardless of the topic of those diaries. It reminds lazy slobs like me that if we don't get off our asses and help, we're not going to win--and there are a lot of us well-meaning, but lazy, people out here who need to be guilted into volunteering over the next 10 days.

  •  What a Reversal! (4+ / 0-)

    "When you start telling them that there's a cure ... You are creating a false hope scenario. And that is cruel."

    You mean like, when the Bush League tells them we will surely win in Iraq, if only we continue to stay there?

    I'm sick of these motherf%&*ing Republicans in our motherf%&*ing Government!!!

    by AdmiralNaismith on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 03:41:43 PM PST

  •  Michael J. Fox (5+ / 0-)

    In case any prominent Democrats are paying attention, Mr. Fox has nicely demonstrated how to deal with these idiots:

    1. Stick to the facts.
    1. Don't back down.

    It's that simple.

    "...the big trouble with dumb bastards is that they are too dumb to believe there is such a thing as being smart." -- Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.

    by Roddy McCorley on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 03:46:50 PM PST

  •  the real issue... (3+ / 0-)

    ... is the War on Science, the War on Knowledge, the War on Reason, the War on Enlightenment, the War on Critical Thinking, the War on Objectivity, the War on Progress...

    these people must be stopped, or we will be consigned to the dustbins of history before our own eyes.  

  •  "Vile" and "Despicable" (2+ / 0-)

    Just caught Ann Coulter on Faux (my bad -- was trying to find the late NFL game and forgot it was on CBS this week).  She has, of course, just piled on MJF -- and all of us.  Said that this (MJF's ad) was just what was so "despicable" and "vile" about the left: that they do things like this that then shield them from attack.  Funny, I could have sworn that she was attacking, and having no problem doing so, but what do I know; I guess I'm just being shrill and angry.  

    Of course, as someone else wisely pointed out a few days ago in these comments, there is some truth to her point.  The right can only attack through character assassination, not on the basis of the merits, so if they are presented with someone opposing their views who is personally beyond reproach (e.g., MJF, 9/11 widows, Cindy Sheehan), they are denied their only avenue of attack.

    Question of the day: if stem cells serve as the basis for a cure for anorexia, will Ann avail herself of it?

  •  Michael has been a breath of fresh air ... (5+ / 0-)

    ... to people who are handicapped. I was most touched this morning (on the This Week interview) when he spoke of Hiding. I understand that people who are not accustomed to seeing handicapped people may at first be uncomfortable watching. But when they are hidden, it is  a loss for all of us. In each of them, there is a vibrant Person who just happens to carry a tremendous (sometimes life-threatening) burden. As a society, we have to see past the Disease to enjoy the Person. And as daulton commented above, it only takes a short while to do that.

    And, another note, I want to register my extreme outrage at the counter-ad (starring the pseudo Jesus Christ and Raymond's wife). To paraphrase, it says "California, $6 billion, no cure". I would say "Iraq, $400 billion, no democracy".

    •  I know what you mean (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      When I was at university, I had a dear friend who was confined to a wheelchair. He was born with with dwarfism, a malformed chest and spine as a result of the dwarfism, and a progressive weakening of his motor-neuron system, making it difficult for him to perform even the simplest thing like eating a meal or smoking a cigarette. Yet despite this, he had the highest IQ and smartest mind of anyone I have ever met, and was the most consistently cheerful person around me.

  •  A few details... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Great post, Darksyde, but if I may I'd like to make a few small corrections.  The word is blastocyst, not blastocyte.  And a human oocyte, or egg, is about the size of the period at the end of these sentences; a blastocyst is considerably larger, as it's quite a number of cells.  It's all relative, though, given the sizes involved!

    •  TY (0+ / 0-)

      I foot-linked you.

      Read UTI, your free thought forum

      by DarkSyde on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 04:04:42 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  How is... (0+ / 0-)

      the blastocyst considerably larger than the egg or zygote? It's only slightly larger in diameter, and that is only because it contains space without cells - the blastocoel.

      Think about it: if it's larger, where did the mass come from?

    •  the size of... (0+ / 0-)

      the period at the end of this sentence.

      <font size="+1">Or perhaps the period at the end of this sentence.</font>

      <font size ="+2">Or maybe the size of the period at the end of this sentence....</font>


      wow...look at all those potential jesus tears....

      Donald Driver for Wisconsin - Senate 2008 (Feingold for President)

      by Groper on Mon Oct 30, 2006 at 01:04:32 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Mr Fox is gentleman. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Blue Waters Run Deep

    I wish and aspire to handle myself with the grace and diplomacy that he has shown.

  •  My wife sula has said (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MrJersey, Blue Waters Run Deep

    that she would ask anti-stem cell politicians, 'would you be willing to pledge that in the future, if you or a member of your family get a disease for which a stem cell cure has been developed in another country , you will not get that cure for yourself or your loved one? Will you take the pledge, mr. Frist? Will you take that pledge Mr. Buchanan?' And so on.

    Would a government who lied to get us into a war, steal an election?

    by moon in the house of moe on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 04:12:16 PM PST

  •  A practical action: Monday in San Francisco (2+ / 0-)

    Reading these posts gives me hope. All of you give me hope. Michael J. Fox, well blessings on us all, what a mensch!

    Tomorrow, Monday, the stem cell research folks and John Garamendi (Dem candidate for CA Lt. Gov) are holding a press conference to discuss the very real threat posed my neo-conservative Tom McClintock. If you are within range of San Francisco around 12:15pm, grassroots/netroots presence will be much appreciated.

    Recommendations and comments will help keep this diary in the recommended list and maybe bring a few more of us into the city.

    Read about it here

    Every Vote Count! Who's Counting Your Votes?

    by CalifSherry on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 04:12:26 PM PST

  •  Rush Limbald is repulsive (0+ / 0-)

    What's wrong with Repubs? Hey, it's a free country, and one can certainly oppose stem cell research or anything else. But Repubs continue to show that they they lack any iota of decency. Rush's stunt is almost as disturbing as those phony Swift Boat ads. Rush and other radical rightwing absolutists would probably consider Republican Arlen Spector a lib, since he's not a con. But the fact that he supports stem cell research and Michael J. Box endorsed him, shows that it's not really a Repub-Dem issue. It's poetic justice that Dems take the House, which was swung to the extreme right since '94. In no GD way does the House represent government for the people.

  •  Rethug Push Polling Phoned us here in Maryland (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Blue Waters Run Deep

    Some group called "Common Sense" called about two hours ago at our home in Baltimore City.  My wife answered it and she went through with the poll.  

    She hung up when they asked, "Do you favor medical experimentation on unborn babies."

    Anybody know anything about "Common Sense"? Is it a front for Michael Steele?


    "Great men do not commit murder. Great nations do not start wars." William Jennings Bryan

    by Navy Vet Terp on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 04:16:34 PM PST

  •  Always a good idea (0+ / 0-)

    to provide the name of the diary when asking people to click through.
    Stem Cell Crisis in California...

    Every Vote Count! Who's Counting Your Votes?

    by CalifSherry on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 04:18:41 PM PST

  •  Harold Ford is Terrible! (0+ / 0-)

    OK, I confess.  I don't like Harold Ford for what he has done to CT Dems in the Lamont race.  I've said - and will continue to say - that he should keep his trap shut if he's not willing to support the candidate that CT Dems nominated.

    BUT, I'm watching Bill Maher (repeat from last Friday night) and Ford is on.  HE'S TERRIBLE.  I mean, he is such a panderer.  His positions are repuglican.  He has the 10 Commandents on the back of his business card?

    I understand that people in TN are desperate for anybody but Corker...but Ford?

    And then he just said that TN voters want change.  What the f*uck does he think CT voters want?  Not Lieberman!!

  •  Always a good idea (0+ / 0-)

    to id the diary you are asking people to click onto:

    ... especially when it's time sensitive and GOTV related Stem Cell Crisis in California

    Every Vote Count! Who's Counting Your Votes?

    by CalifSherry on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 04:21:11 PM PST

  •  very much accurate dark one (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Coherent Viewpoint

    and like blanche dubois we americans who have cousins with fast moving m.s. as i do or brother in laws with type 1 diabetes as i do will be have to come to depend on the kindness of strangers such as the europeans or the korean or israelis or whomever to bring some hope and eventually if we are lucky some cures....

  •  ignorance and narrow-mindedness (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    eleanora, Coherent Viewpoint

    Michael J. Fox totally exemplifies the wisdom of John Dalberg-Acton.

    There are two things which cannot be attacked in front: ignorance and narrow-mindedness. They can only be shaken by the simple development of the contrary qualities. They will not bear discussion.

    He is a model of human dignity in that interview.

    Essential funk: 'Indictment' by Antibalas

    by pontechango on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 04:22:40 PM PST

  •  Technical solution: single cell from blastocyte (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DarkSyde, Cato come back

     There is a recent article (in Scientific American maybe?) about pulling a single cell from a blastocyte very early on - at the eight or sixteen cell phase. It is a stem cell, not even the embryo is harmed in the process ... whee.

     Of course I'd hate to disconnect this lightning rod from the Christian Nationalist back Republican party's pointed little heads until well after 11/7 ... but ... hope.

    "Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise" - U.S. Constitution author and fourth President James Madison

    by Iowa Boy on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 04:22:59 PM PST

    •  Yeah (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Cato come back, WiddieDawg

      technically that would work, one would think. But then again, that assumes they're looking for a solution. I don't think they are, at least I don't think the politicos are. I think they're looking for a useful issue and the last thing they want is a solution of any kind.

      Read UTI, your free thought forum

      by DarkSyde on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 06:40:04 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  but it'll defuse it (0+ / 0-)

        When there are N+1 new stem cell lines and nobody at all can complain 'cause the blastocytes are still safely frozen this issue will be dead and gone. We all benefit, and religious fanatics have to find a new issue to froth at the mouth over :-)

        Now if we could only do away with that whole abortion business we'd be all set. I'm in favor of Roe v. Wade being overturned ... 'cause it'd be a direct right about ten days later via our Congress instead of being hid under this privacy thing from 1973. This would leave nothing for the Nuts and Loonies (Whitehouse description, not mine) to worry over except for evolution ...

        "Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise" - U.S. Constitution author and fourth President James Madison

        by Iowa Boy on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 07:57:29 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  another reason (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rogun, Coherent Viewpoint, drauz, jsyaruss

    Many of the scientists in this field have moved to Europe--Switzerland and Ireland have been the happy recipients not only of the scientists, but their labs that employ many highly paid professionals, and will benefit from the patents received.  That means the big Pharmas are following them and that's a big part of our economy.  Another example of multi-national firms knowing no patriotism by design.  

    Many of the scientists I knew in NJ complained that this administration not only stifled research, but made eventual FDA approval doubtful.  Another case of Bush's negative influence that will survive to haunt us even after he is gone.

  •  All of us (6+ / 0-)

    I spent today helping my mother (who is beginning radiation and chemo for lung cancer) take care of my father, who has Alzheimer's.

    My father was once a leading medical researcher. He was a bono fide genius. Today, all he can do is repeat, over and over: "I don't understand what's happening."

    I don't know whether embryonic stem cell research will ever yield a workable cure for Alzheimer's. But I do know that if there is even a remote chance, to throw that chance away in the name of ideology is criminal.

    My generation, the baby boomers, is taking care of elderly parents now. There are millions of us. Many are watching beloved fathers and mothers decline, hollowed out by this horrible disease.

    A pox upon George W. Bush and his veto, and Rush Limbaugh and his obscene mouth.

    All of us deserve the right to hope that things could get better.

  •  He was so awesome (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Coherent Viewpoint

    I couldn't help but start crying when he was talking about how many people with Parkinson's have to hide their symptoms so people won't think they are drunk or something.  It was so clear to any rational compassionate person that Michael J. Fox has CLASS and Rush is nothing but a cruel heartless son of a bitch!!

  •  In fairness, "neoconservative" does not really... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    imply conservatism on social issues.  If anything, the neoconservative movement is more liberal than the old guard conservatives on social issues, including stem cell research.  It's on foreign policy issues that neoconservatives show their truly dangerous strain.

    I agree with the sentiment completely.  I just would have use the term "conservative extremists" rather than "neoconservative extremists."

    •  I respectfully disagree: (3+ / 0-)

      neoconservatives now embrace social conservative causes, hugging them for dear life and nourishing them in fact, as evidence by their policies in that regard. There was a time when this was arguably not the case. That time is gone. QED.

      The reason I did not single out evangelical Christians or white EC's or whatever is because support there is split. But I think it's fair, when the undisputed political and ideological leader of the neoconservative movement, George Bush, hearts these policies and vetos bipartisan ledge that would reverse his decree, then the neocons are not liberal on ESCR, that they are in fact staunchly fundamentalist, no matter what their origins once were.

      "Libertarian neoconservatives" are a joke, an oxymoron, about as meaningful and coherent in ideology as a Jewish Nazi.

      Read UTI, your free thought forum

      by DarkSyde on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 04:53:06 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Either way, DarkSyde... (0+ / 0-) still deserve kudos for the best laugh I've had all day with the "bug-fuck crazy" descriptor for these neo/conservatives. ;)

        Just to add a little levity in what is otherwise a very sobering and thoughtful homage to MJ Fox--thanks for your article on his Stephanopolous appearance. My God, next to MJ Fox, Rush Limbaugh's smallness as a human being is only that more magnified.

      •  I guess it depends on how you define the term (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        As is so often the case in...well, anything.

        If you use the term "neoconservative" as a moniker applying to the members of the Bush administration and the policies of Bush, then I would certainly agree that "neoconservatives" are no longer true to their civil libertarian-leaning roots.

        I guess I associate the term more with the intellectual movement led by Jeane Kirkpatrick and other prominent members of the Reagan administration foreign policy establishment.  The key belief of those founders of neoconservatism was facilitating the universalization of democracy, sometimes (and oxymoronically) through the support of dictatorial regimes.  The idea then, as now, was that the greatest threat to universal democracy was not specific regimes, but rather specific political ideologies - Communism then and Islamic fundamentalism today.  They generally butted their heads out of economic policy (except free trade), and were pretty much completely silent on social policy.

        In my view, the Bush administration is not a "neoconservative" administration.  Rather, it is an administration which has generally adhered to neoconservative doctrine on foreign policy.  Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle were probably the only true neoconservatives in the Bush administration.  In my view, George Bush himself is certainly NOT a neoconservative, and I think most of the founders of the intellectual movement would agree.

        Again, it all comes back to how you define the term.  I tend to associate it more with the intellectual movement, and not with the Bush administration.

    •  How about (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      boofdah, AmericanRiverCanyon

      blind moralists vs humanitarians?

  •  Forget Rush et al - GOTV! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    boofdah, Crestingwave

    It's not even worth discussing Rush's arguments - he is indeed exemplary of the term "shill" that MJ Fox mentions in the video.

    Help get out the vote on 11/7!
     Unless all these silent nonvoters wake the f*** up and voice their opinions, we will continue to have our destiny as Americans determined by a hyperactive minority of wingnuts and xenophobic, fear-laden types.

    I have been absolutely shocked at the apathy and ignorance out there among the most affected as I work some phone banks and n'hood efforts.

    Look at Brazil's elections today - unlike here, in places like Brazil and India, the poor actually VOTE!  For better OR worse, their #s are at least represented.  Isn't that democracy???

  •  MENENDEZ hits back with VERY GOOD new AD! (0+ / 0-)

    take a look at that one - this is almost a really new take on the classic finances ad!

  •  Stephanopolous got Caviezel quote wrong (0+ / 0-)

    Caviezel did not say "You betray me with a kiss" in Aramaic. He flubbed his line. What he said was "the son of man with a kiss," which made no sense.

    The Aramaic word for "betray" was never spoken and doesn't appear in any transcript of his comment. I contacted an Aramaic scholar and blogged the story last Thursday.

  •  Errors (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    "These blastocytes, about 100 cells or less, ten times smaller than the period at the end of this sentence1, are going to be thrown in to a medical waste dispenser, or used for research."

    1. These are blastoCYSTS, not blastocytes.
    1. They are usually frozen and rarely thrown away, so your dichotomy is wrong. However, one should never mention freezing without mentioning the inescapable fact that freezing kills MOST of them. Thawing kills MORE. Therefore, fertility clinics kill embryos, which according to these hypocrites, is murder.

    DarkSyde, you should get the basics correct. Glaring errors like yours give our opponents a handle in a case in which their hypocrisy is spectacular.

    •  I did (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      hyperlink/footnote the post to someone who beat you to noting that. If I see a mistake myself, I consider changing it. It's unfair to change it after someone else pointed it out. It's both fair and serves accuracy to link their comment.

      In all honesty though, I don't know that I would call using the term blastocyte Vs blastocyst a glaring error if someone else did it, even if they should know better. Not on a political blog post promoting an interview on another site, and especially not when they've already noted it too boot by the time I came along and saw it. Nevertheless it's a fair observation. I actually do know the diff, but I was waiting for John to get the video up and I fell asleep. When I woke up, he had it up and I slammed the link up too fast. I should have been more careful.

      On the frozen thing, I've talked to people in the field and tons of these guys get thrown out. Statistically, the vast remainder are not going to adopted, they're headed for the waste basket sooner or later, I can show you a video of it happening. And even if everyone single one was thawed and implanted, which will never ever happen, storing them cryogenically for long periods is tantamount to destroying them as viable embryos.

      Read UTI, your free thought forum

      by DarkSyde on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 06:09:24 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  You're missing the point... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        "Statistically, the vast remainder are not going to adopted, they're headed for the waste basket sooner or later, I can show you a video of it happening. And even if everyone single one was thawed and implanted, which will never ever happen, storing them cryogenically for long periods is tantamount to destroying them as viable embryos."

        My point is that storing them cryogenically for five minutes kills the majority of them. You don't have to invoke long periods or whether they are adopted. If they aren't implanted right away, they are being killed wholesale. Period.

        I'm trying to help, DS.

  •  Steele: LIAR (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Cato come back

    I saw Michael Steele opposite Ben Cardin on Meet the Press today (running for MD-SEN). Steele fielded Russert's various questions and challenges with pretty solid spin, even including Steele's 2004 RNC keynote claiming "Bush is the standard bearer for my values", now saying merely he's a "proud Republican", but "Bush is just one man, he doesn't define me".

    But when questioned on embryonic stemcells as advocated by MJ Fox in the TV ad, Steele collapsed like a paper cup. He started lying about supporting stemcells, trying to act like voting against embryonic stemcell research funds wasn't being against the research. Almost pulled it off. But Russert got Steele to confirm that he's against the embryonic research, because they "destroy a life" in the embryo. Russert asked the next logical question, whether Steele's protection of these "human lives" extended to stopping the destruction of these embryos in their current, non-stemcell expiration for fertility clinics. Steele collapsed, spluttering about adoption, and showing he's too scared of backlash to say he'd shut down fertility clinics.

    Steele is just a hustler, quoting from a 30-year-old Republican playbook cooked up by thinktanks in fantasyland. Cardin didn't seem as smart, but he came across as consistent and with some integrity. I can't wait until Steele is just a memory. Though he'll probably run for MD governor, or maybe Senator in some other state where he can peddle his snakeoil.

    "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

    by DocGonzo on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 06:23:24 PM PST

  •  My grandmother had Alzheimer's... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Cato come back

    My mother has Alzheimer's.

    I'm 46 years old.

    Yeah, this one is a no-brainer.

    Yes, in fact, I do drive a Volvo.

    by KTinOhio on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 06:25:19 PM PST

  •  Fox should run for Congress. n/t (0+ / 0-)

    "When thought is too weak to be simply expressed, it's clear proof that it should be rejected." Luc de Clapiers

    by RudiB on Sun Oct 29, 2006 at 06:36:03 PM PST

  •  Can you please help me with a (0+ / 0-)

    scientific question?

    I have been reviewing some of your past diaries about abortion and blastocysts and have come across a few posters who have asked you a fairly straightforward question but I can't seem to find any substantive response on your part.  I do see some rather disingenuous attempts to get these people to leave, but never a direct and scientifically based reply.

    Let me summarize the question at hand and maybe you can either provide me with a direct response to a simple question or a pointer to where you have done so already:

    When, exactly, in the course of development from fertilized egg to adult human being, does someone actually become a full fledged human being who is entitled to all of society's protections with respect to their human rights, and what, exactly, is your scientific basis for asserting that point in the development cycle as when the transition from non-human egg/blastocyst/embryo to fully human individual actually took place?

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site