Rush Limbaugh: Michael J. Fox exaggerated illness effects in Dem. TV endorsement

Ladewig

I lost an avatar bet.
Joined
Dec 4, 2001
Messages
28,828
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102400691.html

Conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh today attacked actor Michael J. Fox for inserting his halting voice into the U.S. Senate campaign in Missouri, suggesting Fox was "acting" in a commercial where he's shown shaking while endorsing the importance of stem cell research.

"He is exaggerating the effects of the disease," Limbaugh told listeners today, encouraging them to go online to watch Fox's commercial, which first aired Oct. 21 in St. Louis during a World Series game. "He's moving all around and shaking and it's purely an act."

[snip]

"This is really shameless of Michael J. Fox," Limbaugh said. "Either he didn't take his medication or he's acting."

Yes, shameless is the exact word that came into my mind after reading this story.
 
And if he wasn't acting? Would that change Limbaugh's stupid mind? If not, what's his point?
 
Rush Limbaugh knows about being off drugs so he must be correct, oh wait...

Shameless and Limbaugh go together like sage and onion.

What a creepy small minded man he is.
 
And ironically, Fox is doing a political ad for Democrat MD Senate candidate Michael Steele who voted against Stem Cell research.

Go figger!

Fox was off his meds, intentionally.
 
If you really want to consider how sick this is, just remember...

Rush gets paid to say stuff like this. His contribution to the national discourse can be measured in negative numbers, yet he makes more money than anyone on this forum probably does. Thinking about things like this trigger more anger than my mind is able to process, so I just block it out, I guess. I can't dwell on things like this or my head will simply explode.
 
And ironically, Fox is doing a political ad for Democrat MD Senate candidate Michael Steele who voted against Stem Cell research.

Go figger!

Fox was off his meds, intentionally.
Steele is the Republican candidate. Fox is doing a commercial for the Democrat, Ben Cardin. I don't know how Cardin has voted on stem cell funding, but the level of factual accuracy of what you've posted so far doesn't inspire much confidence.

Go figger!

Is it fair to say you're off your meds?
 
And ironically, Fox is doing a political ad for Democrat MD Senate candidate Michael Steele who voted against Stem Cell research.

Go figger!

Fox was off his meds, intentionally.

There was a vote about about stopping stem cell research? When what was the bill number?

Also Michael Steele, is a Republican.

Are you talking about this MD Steel? I think it's highly unlikely Fox (other than Fox news) is doing an add for him, maybe against? Do you have a source? Or should we assume it's Fox news? They have been saying really bad Republicans are Democrats for a few weeks now.

Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele profusely apologized yesterday for comments linking stem cell research to Nazi experimentation, but the offhand analogy could undermine what had been a concerted effort by the Republican to run for the U.S. Senate as a moderate "bridge" between Democrats and Republicans in his left-leaning state

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/09/AR2006020902540.html
 
You are right, all, it was Ben Cardin. Steele is the Republican.

S. 2754

Yet the point remains, only the name is changed.

:)
 
I'm reading Jamie Whyte's "Crimes against logic" (as recommended by someone in this forum) and boy are Rush Limbaugh's statements prime examples of fallacies.

Whether or not Michael J. Fox is acting, what you see in the ad is a very realistic show of Parkinson's (both my grandmothers suffered and died indirectly from this). Therefore it is totally and utterly irrelevant whether or not the specific case is real or acting. It makes absolutely no difference to the reality of the situation and Rush Limbaugh should shut his ruleeighting face.

In other news, there ought to be a way to imprison GWB for vetoing against stem cell research. One has to go back to the first half of the last century to find a bigger crime. That willfully ignorant fool.

....and I was in good mood not 5 minutes ago...:mad:
 
Last edited:
You are right, all, it was Ben Cardin. Steele is the Republican.

S. 2754

Yet the point remains, only the name is changed.

:)

Cheers for the bill number :)

I think Cardin has generally been very vocally for Stem Cells research.

In fact what he voted on was "Session 2, roll call 380: On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass Alternative Pluripotent Stem Cell Therapies Enhancement Act" Santorum wanted to change the bill and Cardin voted agains the change, not the bill. The changes were designed to stall the bill in the house.

So it's not at all acurate to say he voted against Stem Cell research, he voted agains a ploy by the Republican house.
 
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102400691.html



Yes, shameless is the exact word that came into my mind after reading this story.


What got left out of this story is the part where Rush was called by a number of listeners and after reconsidering, abjectly apologized... but added that Fox is STILL using his illness to shill for a political position on a controversial research area that has never shown any promise to help Parkinson's. What Fox was doing... and I heard the ad... was making the claim that Parkinson's would somehow be miraculously cured if only stem cell research (leaving out that he was talking about ONLY embryonic stem cells) would be allowed.

Further, the ad Fox did does not CLARIFY the issue... that it isn't about DOING stem cell research, but about FEDERAL FUNDING for stem cell research. There is no evidence that the companies who are doing the stem cell research NEED additional funding. (Further, if I were a research center working on stem cell research, I would not accept federal funding... and all of the convoluted regulations and restrictions that go along with it... if it were offered!)

The federal government is NOT known for efficiency in handling money, and the notion that certain diseases will never be cured unless the government funds the research is bogus.

ADULT stem cell research IS being funded by government funding, btw. I still don't agree with it, though.. the govt is a poor accountant.
 
In other news, there ought to be a way to imprison GWB for vetoing against stem cell research. One has to go back to the first half of the last century to find a bigger crime. That willfully ignorant fool.

It is indeed crazy because it benefits nobody. The best explanation I can think of was an article I read once in the NY Press (by Mark Ames?) espousing a theory that blue collar people intetionally vote for crazy, incompetent politicians that could wreck the country Dawn Of The Dead, style, because they figure they'll be unhappy in secure prosperity and in disaster, but at least the "beautiful people" elites will be unhappy in disaster, too. That's the best explanation I can think of for why the masses elect folks who do things like refuse to fund ways to cure diseases.
 
You are right, all, it was Ben Cardin. Steele is the Republican.

S. 2754

Yet the point remains, only the name is changed.

:)
S. 2754 is a Senate resolution. Cardin is a member of the House. The related House resolution H.R. 5526, Cardin voted No, meaning against the position to derive human pluripotent stem cell lines using techniques that do not knowingly harm embryos.
 
I'm reading Jamie Whyte's "Crimes against logic" (as recommended by someone in this forum) and boy are Rush Limbaugh's statements prime examples of fallacies.

Whether or not Michael J. Fox is acting, what you see in the ad is a very realistic show of Parkinson's (both my grandmothers suffered and died indirectly from this). Therefore it is totally and utterly irrelevant whether or not the specific case is real or acting. It makes absolutely no difference to the reality of the situation and Rush Limbaugh should shut his ruleeighting face.
And the fact Michael J. Fox did not take medication that controls his conditions quite well just to show, what, that it's bad to have this condition? There might be a cure, there might not be a cure. Frankly I think this critisism is accurate.
In other news, there ought to be a way to imprison GWB for vetoing against stem cell research. One has to go back to the first half of the last century to find a bigger crime. That willfully ignorant fool.

....and I was in good mood not 5 minutes ago...:mad:

The President did not veot stem cell research, he vetoed FEDERAL funding of it. Please find some real things to be angry about.
 
And the fact Michael J. Fox did not take medication that controls his conditions quite well just to show, what, that it's bad to have this condition? There might be a cure, there might not be a cure. Frankly I think this critisism is accurate.


The President did not veot stem cell research, he vetoed FEDERAL funding of it. Please find some real things to be angry about.

Actually, he was the first president to PROVIDE federal funding of it. It was just restricted to existing lines.
 
Actually, he was the first president to PROVIDE federal funding of it. It was just restricted to existing lines.

Also, ADULT stem cell research is getting a LOT of federal funding. It's fully supported by Republicans in Congress and the Administration.
 
If I remember right from a commentary on Michael he intentionally did not take his medication for his testimony before congress on stem cell research. I'm a bit torn on this strategy. It seems a bit of an appeal to emotion though I can see his desire to do so. It is true that the only issue is funding.
 
If I remember right from a commentary on Michael he intentionally did not take his medication for his testimony before congress on stem cell research. I'm a bit torn on this strategy. It seems a bit of an appeal to emotion though I can see his desire to do so. It is true that the only issue is funding.

I'm torn by it, too, but I can see the plus side of WHY he would do it.

On the other hand, embryonic stem cell research has not yet shown ANY promise to "cure" Parkinson's or any other brain disorder. There has been some success in some diseases with ADULT stem cells, but the more undifferentiated embryonic stem cells are showing a seriously nasty tendency to produce brain tumors instead of help.

I'm really suspicious of the "pie in the sky" pushing embryonic stems cells research is getting when there's been better results with the adult stem cells. I smell an ulterior motive that has nothing to do with funding research.
 
And the fact Michael J. Fox did not take medication that controls his conditions quite well just to show, what, that it's bad to have this condition? There might be a cure, there might not be a cure. Frankly I think this critisism is accurate.

Are you saying that his medication is so good that he doesn't show any sign of the condition itself when he takes it? Is he being silly for speaking out for research that could help cure him someday, just because his current medication is adequate for the time being? I don't think there's any reason to assume he intentionally worsened his appearance to gain any more pity than he was already getting.

But I think we'll both agree that his time would have been better spent on another Teen Wolf movie. I mean come on, the guy's just faking it, he needs to get back to work! Back to the Future 4 isn't gonna make itself.
 
If I remember right from a commentary on Michael he intentionally did not take his medication for his testimony before congress on stem cell research. I'm a bit torn on this strategy. It seems a bit of an appeal to emotion though I can see his desire to do so. It is true that the only issue is funding.

Holy crap! He did?! What a dick!

Well Grammatron, my foot tastes delicious.

I'll never look at Family Ties the same again.
 
What got left out of this story is the part where Rush was called by a number of listeners and after reconsidering, abjectly apologized...

He apologized on his website, I do consider it to be an abject apology:

"All I'm saying is I've never seen him the way he appears in this commercial for Claire McCaskill," says Limbaugh. "So I will bigly, hugely admit that I was wrong, and I will apologize to Michael J. Fox, if I am wrong in characterizing his behavior on this commercial as an act, especially since people are telling me they have seen him this way on other interviews and in other television appearances."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/10/24/politics/main2121910.shtml

Still, you are right in that the story quoted in the OP did not cover the apology. I was not aware of the apology when I posting the original link.
 
He apologized on his website, I do consider it to be an abject apology:


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/10/24/politics/main2121910.shtml

Still, you are right in that the story quoted in the OP did not cover the apology. I was not aware of the apology when I posting the original link.

Understood :). However, the apology on the web site is a transcript... the apology above was on the air with millions listening. Whoever wrote the above story would have known about it if he/she was listening 10 minutes later. This gives me the impression that Whoever reporter only listened long enough to catch some dirt, or DID hear the apology and ignored it. Given how some reporters feel about Limbaugh, I would not doubt that it was the latter.
 
Last edited:
In other news, it is probably the most powerful campaign ad I have EVER seen:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMliHkTDHaE

Yeah. Too bad it's about "pie in the sky". I'm starting to think that someone has swindled Fox into believing that embryonic stem cell research is the one and only possibility for a cure for Parkinson's, when that has never been shown at all. It reminds me of that 2004 where Steve Reeves was supposed to get up out of his wheelchair and start walking if only embryonic stem cell research was federally funded. Hokum.

It might well happen some day, but there's no such evidence now, which makes both of these campaign ads hokum.
 
Yeah. Too bad it's about "pie in the sky". I'm starting to think that someone has swindled Fox into believing that embryonic stem cell research is the one and only possibility for a cure for Parkinson's, when that has never been shown at all.
Where in the ad did you get the notion that it was about "Pie in the Sky," and what evidence does it provide that Fox has been swindled?
 
If you really want to consider how sick this is, just remember...

Rush gets paid to say stuff like this. His contribution to the national discourse can be measured in negative numbers, yet he makes more money than anyone on this forum probably does.

Rush OWNS the network he broadcasts on, HE is his own boss, and he says that no one on earth has enough money to pay him to say anything he doesn't already think.

His contribution to the national discourse can be measured in negative numbers,

Rush has 10,000,000 regular listeners who seem to think he makes a POSITIVE contribution...

yet he makes more money than anyone on this forum probably does.

... and he makes more money that most medium-sized countries, never mind the people on this forum.
 
Where in the ad did you get the notion that it was about "Pie in the Sky," and what evidence does it provide that Fox has been swindled?

Show me the scientific papers that prove that new nerve tissue has been grown from embryonic stem cells, or that embryonic stem cell implants have ever done anything but produce tumors.

Almost ALL of the hype concerning stem cell research is just that... hype. It is VERY promising, and in fact there HAS been some impressive regenerative medical treatments to come out of ADULT stem cell research, but the claims being made for embryonic stem cell research funding is for political purposes and are completely unfounded.

Besides, this debate is about FUNDING of embryonic stem cell research, not the research itself, and that is the MAIN place where the ad is deceptive.

George Soros and the Hollywood Left with their multiple billions in buying power could privately fund all the embryonic stem cell research they want. Restrictions in the US? So what... build a research lab in, say, Mexico.
 
Last edited:
Where in the ad did you get the notion that it was about "Pie in the Sky," and what evidence does it provide that Fox has been swindled?

... and then there's this little item via the National Review Online

Celebrity Parkinson's disease victims such as Michael J. Fox and Michael Kinsley regularly tout ESCR as the best hope for a cure of their disease. Indeed, the Washington Post recently published a Kinsley rant on the subject in which the editor and former Crossfire co-host denounced opponents of human cloning as interfering with his hope for a cure. Yet as loudly as Fox and Kinsley promote ESCR in the media or before legislative committees, both have remained strangely silent about the most remarkable Parkinson's stem-cell experiment yet attempted: one in which researchers treated Parkinson's with the patient's own adult stem cells.

Here's the story, in case you missed it: A man in his mid-50s had been diagnosed with Parkinson's at age 49. The disease grew progressively, leading to tremors and rigidity in the patient's right arm. Traditional drug therapy did not help.

Stem cells were harvested from the patient's brain using a routine brain biopsy procedure. They were cultured and expanded to several million cells. About 20 percent of these matured into dopamine-secreting neurons. In March 1999, the cells were injected into the patient's brain.

Three months after the procedure, the man's motor skills had improved by 37 percent and there was an increase in dopamine production of 55.6 percent. One year after the procedure, the patient's overall Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale had improved by 83 percent — this at a time when he was not taking any other Parkinson's medication!

That is an astonishing, remarkable success, one that you would have thought would set off blazing headlines and lead stories on the nightly news. Had the treatment been achieved with embryonic stem cells, undoubtedly the newspapers would have screamed loudly enough to be heard. Unfortunately, reportage about the Parkinson's success story was strangely muted.

Please note the success of ADULT stem cell research with Parkinson's.

So WHY is Fox pushing for a non-existant "cure" from EMBRYONIC stem cells that has never materialized? I love him as an actor and would hate to think that HE is the one doing the swindling here, so I prefer to guess that he DOESN'T KNOW about the successes with ADULT stem cells. So who is using him?
 
Last edited:
If I remember right from a commentary on Michael he intentionally did not take his medication for his testimony before congress on stem cell research.
Holy crap! He did?! What a dick!
One would hope that a proclamation of dick-edness would be based on something a tad bit more substantial than a vague IIRC from an anonymous persona (no offense Randfan) on the internet.
 
From Big Dick Cheney claiming that the insurgency has elevated simply to adversely affect the upcoming elections against the Republicans to this fat, buttcrack DJ claiming that an actor is "enhancing" the symptoms of his terminal disease for the same reason - I just can't believe these people!

What ever happened to the Compassionate Conservatives? They must have gone the route of the Dodo bird and the Unicorn. :(
 
One would hope that a proclamation of dick-edness would be based on something a tad bit more substantial than a vague IIRC from an anonymous persona (no offense Randfan) on the internet.
No that's fair.
 
Does the federal government fund cancer research, even if there is a slim chance of a particular area of research bearing fruit? How about off the wall AIDS research? Does the government fund that?

This strange talk about the government is not against stem cell research, but is only against funding it, sounds grossly disingenuous to me. As if not funding research that has the potential to cure people of horrible diseases is not a bad thing.

It is starting to make me mad. And I am pro-life.
 
Does the federal government fund cancer research, even if there is a slim chance of a particular area of research bearing fruit? How about off the wall AIDS research? Does the government fund that?

This strange talk about the government is not against stem cell research, but is only against funding it, sounds grossly disingenuous to me. As if not funding research that has the potential to cure people of horrible diseases is not a bad thing.

It is starting to make me mad. And I am pro-life.

I know, and the worst part is that the hoo-raw over EMBRYONIC stem cell research "pie-in-the-sky" is deep-sixing REAL news about incredible successes in ADULT stem cell research, as noted in the op-ed that I linked above.
 
That is very exciting news.



How is something going to materialize if it is blocked at every turn?

Embryonic stem cell research isn't "blocked". It just isn't being funded by the federal government. It IS being privately funded. And there are some restrictions in the US. But it IS going on UNrestricted in other countries.

WHY must research be done in the US and be funded by the government, or else it just dosen't exist?

BTW: Please note that the op-ed talking about the incredible success with the test with ADULT stem cells was written in April of 2002. Why wasn't this on the news??? Why doesn't everyone on earth know about this success?
 
Last edited:
Does the federal government fund cancer research, even if there is a slim chance of a particular area of research bearing fruit? How about off the wall AIDS research? Does the government fund that?

This strange talk about the government is not against stem cell research, but is only against funding it, sounds grossly disingenuous to me. As if not funding research that has the potential to cure people of horrible diseases is not a bad thing.

It is starting to make me mad. And I am pro-life.
I am very, very, pro-stem cell research. That said, I think there is a big difference between not funding research and being against research. Government could move to halt such research. I have no idea how successful they would be at that and I will concede that funding is a significant factor but it isn't the only one. There are in fact private firms that are moving forward with stem cell research by funding it themselves.

Let's just be accurate. I think that us beubg fair and not disingenuous.
 
I would not call him a dick if
a)he disclosed that he went off his meds
and
b) his meds are so expensive that the average sufferer cannot afford them.
In the show I watched, which I believe was on E Entertainment Chanel, he made it clear that he went off of his meads to demonstrate the effects of Parkinson. Let's be fair here. The effects are real and no medication can permanently stave off the disease. If a cure isn't found Michael will experience these symptoms more and more.

I think an argument can be made that Fox's motivations were good and perhaps fair. Like I said, I'm torn.
 
It reminds me of that 2004 where Steve Reeves was supposed to get up out of his wheelchair and start walking if only embryonic stem cell research was federally funded. Hokum.
I have to admit that if Steve Reeves had hope of a cure in 2004, it would truly be a miracle, since he died in 2000. Those stem cells would have to have come from the sweet baby Jesus embryo himself in order to raise the dead!

This is the Steve Reeves you're talking about, right?
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom