Sly as a Fox

October 28, 2006

I wrote the following article yesterday and was intending to finish it today and possibly blog it. I was at the Rush Limbaugh website (Rush 24/7 is a paid subscription webpage) and saw the dialogue from him to Katie Couric and decided to include it after my comments (and signature) for the clarity that it offers. I saw that there was a link in the story that was subject to become inactive; so, I went to that page and copied it in its entirety. I have made no alterations except color, font, and point size here.

I also elected to leave what I wrote yesterday, before reading Rush’s comments, as they were so that you can see how far off that I was from what actually said. (I don’t think it was off at all; but you decide.)

All material below my signature file is copyrighted and the property of the owners; my reproduction there is not intended to violate any copyright laws and is used to clearly express the opinions of the authors’ therein; as well as to validate what I wrote following this (and above my signature file, inclusive.

From Ichabod Crane on 10/27/06:

Look, I don’t know if any of you have been listening to all the hoop-la about the controversy between Rush Limbaugh and Michael J. Fox but if you are then there is something you should know about it all.

First off, Rush never accused Fox of faking his illness; what he said was simply that he either was acting or had gone off of his meds for the commercial. It turns out, at least according to a source close to Mr. Fox, that he does go off his meds occasionally to make a point. If that’s the case, then Rush simple told the truth.

Insofar as ‘picking on’ a sick man, please, anyone who makes a political commercial is fair-game; maybe it’s more shameful to exaggerate one’s illness to make false accusations. What do you think about people, like Fox, who do that? What does that do for others who are sick once the public becomes aware that they’ve been lied to? Should sick people exaggerate their illness, either by acting or by going off their medication, at all? What would you think of a cripple to whom you had given money to if you saw him get up and walk at the end of the day?

The commercial that I saw (and the one that Rush commented on) did have a lie and several misdirections embedded in it besides Fox’s exaggerated condition, too. Should they be ignored because the messenger who stated them is sick? The guy Fox was endorsing seems to have voted against the very thing that Michael was promoting; that was the lie. That embryonic stem cells have only failed in every promising experiment done with them; whereas the two other kinds of stem cells (adult and umbilical cord blood) have proven an invaluable source of dozens, maybe hundreds of medical breakthroughs, ‘hot leads’, and outright cures, is part of the misdirection. Another misdirection is saying that ‘stem cell research’ is illegal, is so far over the top and is so fraught with deception that it is beneath contempt for someone, anyone, to declare it.

No stem cell research is illegal, none! There is a restriction on the use of Federal money for one of the three types of stem cell research going on; but even that is deceptive. President Bush is the first President to approve of federal funding for embryonic stem cell research! He is the only one to have done that! That is a fact! The only caveat he put on that was that it can only be done, with federal funding, on a finite number of existing lines of stem cells. That is all. The only restriction on any type of stem cell funding is for use with new lines of embryonic stem cells. That’s it! You’d think he was stealing your grandmother’s teeth!

I figured it out though, I think so anyway; anything that doesn’t promote abortion is simply not suitable for the loud-mouth liberals that seem to control the press. That’s right, if it doesn’t further the cause of abortion they don’t even want to hear it at all. I came to that conclusion (although I had been toying with the idea) when I was discussing it with a friend. I asked her where she thought ‘production quantities’ of embryonic stem cells would come from if there was ever a need for them. She hesitated but then implied that aborted fetuses would supply, at least some of, those needs. That was only after I suggested that a bounty or some sort of payment could be arraigned for young women to get pregnant just to have their fetuses harvested for that purpose. That’s when it hit me, clear as day.

The reason that LML (Loud-Mouthed-Liberals) do not want to even acknowledge the existence of other types of stem cells, why they don’t want to acknowledge that President Bush has furthered their cause, that they don’t want to acknowledge that other types of stem cells are succeeding in making breakthroughs, that embryonic stem cells have heretofore always ended with teratomas and other disastrous conclusions, that they don’t want to acknowledge that embryonic stem cells are a distinct type of stem cell, is that they need to have a buffer argument if and when “Roe v Wade” ever comes up to be overturned. They don’t care about cures or medical breakthroughs at all; all they care about is the continuation of abortion!

I don’t know where Michael J. Fox stands on that issue but I suspect that he is being used by the LML to further their cause and to further it at any price.

Clearly abortion is a controversial issue; but do even those in favor of it want to be bamboozled to accomplish their aims? Should people be lied to on one issue to further another? Hell people, if the American people want abortion to remain an ‘on demand’ item on the medical menu, why does it have to be lied about? Why can’t the issue go before the voters of the country and let them decide what is right for the country, once and for all time? Why do the LML need liberal judges to make laws when the Constitution clearly says that is our job (via our elected, not appointed, representatives) to make them?

Whenever you hear a loud argument about illegal stem cell issues, don’t hear ‘stem cells’ - hear abortion and you’ll be closer to what is being shouted about. There is no debate, no argument, no vote, just rabid screaming and subterfuge over stem cells/abortion. That’s what it’s about; that’s what it’s always been about! Stem cell research in all but the very narrowest definition is going on and is federally funded, all the time.

Just one more thing to make my case: if this research was so promising then why isn’t there private money coming in hand-over-fist? None of it is illegal at all, none of it, and the profits for a breakthrough or cure would be enormous! Where is that money? Why aren’t private parties funding it? The answer to that question is simple: There is no future in embryonic stem cells, period.

;->

Best regards,
Ichabod Crane

There is a virtuous fear which is the effect of faith, and a vicious fear which is the product of doubt and distrust. The former leads to hope as relying on God, in whom we believe; the latter inclines to despair, as not relying on God, in whom we do not believe.Persons of the one character fear to lose God; those of the other character fear to find Him.--Pascal

Veritas vos LiberabitGod Bless America

>>>>


-----------------
End of Ichabod Crane’s original work.

Begin Rush Limbaugh’s transcript:.
-----------------

Rush’s E-mail to Katie Couric

October 26, 2006

Thanks, Katie, I’ll try to make it simple:

I believe Democrats have a long history of using victims of various things as POLITICAL spokespeople because they believe they are untouchable, infallible. They are immune from criticism. But when anyone enters the POLITICAL arena of ideas they forfeit the right to be challenged on their participation and message.

I have not met Mr. Fox, do not know him. I have admired his work in film and TV and his appearances on Letterman were howlers. I have nothing personal against him. But I believe his implication that only Democrats want to cure disease(s) is irresponsible (as I believed about John Edwards assuring voters Christopher Reeve would walk if only John Kerry were elected). I think this is ultimately cruel and gives people who suffer these terrible afflictions false hope.

As of now there is NO EVIDENCE that embryonic stem cells even hold promise, while other approaches, such as adult stem cells, already have yielded results. Michael’s TV spots mislead and misinform on this. (You might ask him about the gene therapy research at a Chicago hospital which has produced encouraging results on Parkinson’s patients. A VIRUS is inserted in the gene, which is then inserted in the brain. The Michael J. Fox Foundations has committed $1.9 million to further research on this...story from earlier this month.) 1

I did NOT mock or make fun of Mr. Fox. I have seen him many times on TV but never have I seen him as he appears in the ads. I read from his own book that he will not take his medications before certain appearances (Senate, 1999) in order to illustrate the ravages of Parkinson’s, which I understand and applaud. So the concept of manipulating meds has been stated by Mr. Fox, which is what caused me to question his appearance in his ads.

He is stumping for Democrats, in the political arena, and is therefore open to analysis and criticism as we all are. His suffering is NOT fair game and I am sorry if people drew that conclusion about my comments, but I believe this happens precisely because NO criticism of victims is ever allowed, at all, which as I say is the Democrat strategy in putting them forward.

*Note: Links to content outside RushLimbaugh.com usually become inactive over time

-----------------
End of Rush’s transcript. All text is unaltered from the original as it appeared on the Rush 24/7 website except for choice of font and point size.
-----------------

[Because links may become inactive, I have included the data pointed to, unaltered, below:]

1 (From the link in the story above: )

From Monsters and Critics.com

Health News

Parkinson’s treatment reduces symptoms

By UPI

Oct 11, 2006, 19:00 GMT

CHICAGO, IL, United States (UPI) -- Researchers at Rush University Medical Center in Chicago have said a new Parkinson’s disease treatment reduced symptoms by 40 percent.

However, researchers said the test only involved 12 patients and may have been affected by the placebo effect, the Chicago Sun-Times reported Wednesday.

Further tests of the gene therapy method could solidify the treatment as the first known to slow, halt or possibly reverse damage done by the progressive disease. Treatments are currently available to relieve symptoms of the illness, but do not stop the disease from progressing.

The procedure features two nickel-size holes drilled into the top of a patient’s head by a brain surgeon. A virus containing the desired gene is then inserted into the brain using a needle, and the virus carries the gene to the brain cells. The cells are then instructed by the gene to produce a protein that protects and regenerates cells that make dopamine.

The results were announced at a meeting of the American Neurological Association in Chicago. The Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research has donated $1.9 million for a follow-up study.

Copyright 2006 by United Press International

© Copyright 2003 - 2005 by monstersandcritics.com.

This notice cannot be removed without permission.

-----------------

End of transcript from www.monstersandcritics.com

For what it’s worth, Ichabod Crane has never been to this site prior to reading this article and has no idea of the owner’s ideology.

-----------------