Steeler

I think my post, Beatnik's, and Ferris's are pretty much on the same page, Strag.

__________________

Kerostasis

I know its much more fun to talk about the "attack-the-messenger" syndrome, but did you hear the part where Rush actually addressed the issues raised by the ad?

He didn't attack Fox as a way of deflecting attention from the issues. He attacked Fox because Fox was deflecting attention from the issues. Very different.

Of course, you're probably not willing to hear this, but I'll try anyway. Lets start with the quote from your news article: Well, yes, thats what the Ad says, but its not actually true. Missouri already conducts stem cell research! Imagine that! And Talent has no intention of halting that. He simply doesn't want to allocate federal funds to certain types of stem cell research.

There are many other types of research already ongoing to combat Parkinsons. For example, the Michael J Fox Foundation just allocated $1.9 Million to a Gene Therapy treatment for Parkinson's that is showing good promise. Yes, thats the same Foundation run by the man in the ad, blasting Talent for wanting to halt Parkinson's research.

__________________

Beatnik

Federal research dollars is precisely what the issue is all about. And the "certain types of stem cell research" comprises the majority of all stem cell research.

Since religious zealots have halted federal funding of study of most embryonic stem cell lines, this is a significant issue. No one made the claim that the lack of federal funding halts all research, just the vast majority of research.

__________________

Kerostasis

See? Now that Michael J Fox is out of the way, we can actually discuss the issue, instead of saying "oh look how bad he's jerking! Talent must be evil to want that to continue!"

I happen to disagree with you on this issue, but I'll confess myself not sufficiently educated to hold the field on my own. But you are aware there is substantial amounts of ongoing stem cell research that is not Embryonic Stem Cell research, right?

__________________

leejo

That's about as fair as characterizing all people who support embryonic stem cell research as baby-killers. If you want to have an honest conversation about an issue you might not want to start the discussion by insulting everyone who disagrees with you. So I'm told. Repeatedly.

Why do you assume that federal funding is the critical missing link here? Seems to me that lack of federal funding for limp-dick-itis hasn't slowed that r&d down at all.

Steeler

Limp-dick-itis is largely pharmacuetical research, which has ample private funding. Stem cell (embrionic or adult) is pure science largely funded by public grants and other programs. Ask anyone in the field and you'll find that a dearth of government interest in any pure science field means not a lot gets done in a given year.

__________________

Beatnik

LOL OK you assume I don't want to have an "honest conversation" about issues. Because I typically try to skew actual data to fit some pre-determined outcome(???) Feel free to link to any previous discussions where I manipulated actual data to distort any conclusions. Irregardless, it doesn't quite sound like my Modus Operandi, but hell, I'll bite.

While I admire the term "limp-dick-itis" (and plan to apply it to my friends who might hesitate against the 4th shot of Jagermister this Halloween weekend), we will examine the effects of a lack of federal funding on stem cell research...

More to come when the devilish daylight rouses me...

If you're so inclined, feel free to believe that I'm interested in manipulating actual data to prove some point. But rest assured that data (as opposed to Truthiness) is in and of itself what I use as evidence of my "position(s)" (and have consistently challenged others to cite). Like my students, I'll challenge you to call Bull**** on anything I've asserted, given sufficient citation of relevant data invalidating my position (even the position that "Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot"). Lacking any such citation(s), I'll rest assured that mine is in fact the correct position.

And to be perfectly clear, if any meaningful data indicates otherwise, I'm more than willing to concede any assertion I have made. Otherwise, it's all rhetorical limp-dick-itis.

Again, getting back to the lovingly titled thread, Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot. Prove me wrong.

__________________

CingularDuality

You guys seem to be done with this, but I just had to chime in and point out that this is absolutely wrong... I've got a couple of close friends that have Parkinson's and they get the shakes when they don't take their meds.

It doesn't change the fact that Rush is a buffoon...

__________________

Become a supporting member! -- Shop at the Tactical Market!

Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

leejo

No, I assume that you said that religious zealots killed federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research.

I didn't say that and I didn't mean to imply that.

OK

I'm not so inclined.

OK. But it's a silly position. It's like getting red in the face arguing about whether or not Michael Jackson is a freak. I don't think Rush Limbaugh is an idiot, but he is fat. I've never listened to his show and I'm not interested in listening to his show, but I enjoy watching people get so worked about him. He's the Barbara Streisand of the right. So what?

No. Keep shaking your fist at that fat stupid cloud as long as you like!

Steeler

Just so we can close the book on at least one topic in this thread:

__________________

leejo

Well if he said it, it must be true!

Unfortunately he said it to Katie Couric, so no-one will know.

Steeler

Isn't that how we got to this thread? If Limbaugh wondered aloud about it, it must be true? For someone who claims not to listen to his show, you put a lot of faith in him. Your response is, dare I say, "interesting." Telling. Revealing, even. And all that that coyly implies.

__________________

leejo

O'Reilly's take on the whole thing

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,225913,00.html

Pretty decent chat.

leejo

Where did I say I put any faith at all in Rush Limbaugh? I have no reason to believe or support him or Michael J. Fox.

As far as the rest of your post, what's your point?

Edit: You know, MJF is on record as saying that he didn't take his meds before testifying before the Senate:

It seems to me that Limbaugh took the bait, but it's perfectly reasonable to question Fox's behavior in this ad, and a little odd to condemn the question, given what Fox wrote about his prior decision not to take his medicine in order to manipulate public perception.

He had done it before. Is it beyond the pale to wonder aloud if he had done it again? I don't think so.

leejo

Good news for Alex P. Keaton (and his wife)!

And the cases of Parkinsons would go through the roof!