Shocking Michael J. Fox Ad in MO Senate Race

Not at all Zeke. There were several links I could have used, but since it seems the only source idiots like you and Fenian will believe is dubious centers of information like CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN and Wikipedia, I figured I use a link you could all feel comfortable with.

Just trying to help y'all out.

 

You're officially a fucking retard.

 

The thing is, "Charlton Heston announced again today that he has Alzheimer's" is actually a joke. There is a punchline -- people with Alzheimers are forgetful so that's why he announced it more than once.

Now, you can say that's mean or whatever. Fine.

Rush's attack on Michael J. Fox was mean, spiteful, completely out of his ass and wrong to boot.

So they don't seem really equal to me.

 

That's cheap and wrong.
It also was heard by (I"m guessing) about 250 people, and it doesn;t come from a guy who's been busted a half-a-dozen times for being a lying fraud, and it doesn't come from a guy who's also a drug-addled sex tourist with his own "medications" problem. So, while I take your point, I don't think the two situations are comparable.

 

First off, Birdscribe, you are operating under an incorrect premise. You are assuming (like you Libbies do) that I am oppossing ESC on moral and religous grounds.
I am not.
I am opposing ESC based on medical grounds. There is no proof that ESC's will ever be a viable form of treatment. The cells are still too early in the development stage to be 100% sure that they will perform as expected once implanted. There simply is no way to throw the so-called "on-off" switch on ESCs.
The ASCs are easier to control and are producing results already. Why throw away millions, if not billions, of dollars of hard to acquire research money on voodoo science? Why not spend that money on improving to benefits already found in ASCs?

That is the basis of my opposition to further ESC research.

As for posting a link on the Far East results on ESC implantation. I will look around and see if I can find a link or ask where the info can be found outside of the web and relay that info to you as soon as I can.

 

Jack -- Here's where I get the idea from:
few Christian authors directly opposed the round Earth:


Cosmas Indicopleustes' world picture - flat earth in a Tabernacle.Lactantius (245–325) called it "folly" because people on a sphere would fall down.
Saint Cyril of Jerusalem (315–386) saw Earth as a firmament floating on water (though the relevant quotation is found in the course of a sermon to the newly baptized, and it is unclear whether he was speaking poetically or in a physical sense);
Saint John Chrysostom (344–408) saw a spherical Earth as contradictory to scripture;
Diodorus of Tarsus (d. 394) also argued for a flat Earth based on scriptures; however, Diodorus' opinion on the matter is known to us only by a criticism of it by Photius.[14]
Severian, Bishop of Gabala (d. 408), wrote: "The earth is flat and the sun does not pass under it in the night, but travels through the northern parts as if hidden by a wall".[15]
The Egyptian monk Cosmas Indicopleustes (547) in his Topographia Christiana, where the Covenant Ark was meant to represent the whole universe, argued on theological grounds that the Earth was flat, a parallelogram enclosed by four oceans.
At least one early Christian writer, Basil of Caesarea (329–379), believed the matter to be theologically irrelevant.[16]

Different historians have maintained that these advocates of the flat Earth were either influential (a view typified by Andrew Dickson White) or relatively unimportant (typified by Jeffrey Russell) in the later Middle Ages. The scarcity of references to their beliefs in later medieval writings convinces most of today's historians that their influence was slight."

To be fair, there is a lot of debate on this. However, the remarkable thing about this, your very first cite, is that, if the Wki entry is correct, then your contention that "everybody believed the world is flat," is, well, wrong.

 

Well, Scribe, ESC kills embryos, and liberals kind of consider that recreation.

 

And if Clooney had stopped at that, it would have been taken as a joke. But it is his own explanation later that damns him as a cold-hearted SOB making fun of a person with a terrible disease.

Read all of it, don't take something out of context to make your point.

 

We have achieved the universal string theory of dumbassery.

 

So you are saying that Rush Limbaugh is a cold-hearted SOB, I take it?

 

I think most people found Rush's mocking of Fox's gestures offensive. Fox has a handicap for Christ's sake. And poor Rush wanted understanding when his drug addiction/rehab were made public?

Face it, America: Rush Limbaugh and others like him don't give a damn about people who struggle. They just like insulting them.

 

Scribe:

Still waiting for an answer over on your "libs" thread.

Take your time. Think of Rush, and the words will come.