(Michael J) Fox blasts Bush stem cell veto

[sabra]

http://breakingnews.iol.ie/entertainment/story.asp?j=189878700&p=y898794x6

Fox blasts Bush stem cell veto

Actor Michael J Fox has slammed George W Bush's decision to veto US government funding of pioneering studies into stem cell research.

...

Back to the Future star Fox, who suffers from Parkinson's Disease, is outraged Bush went against American public opinion that scientists should be allowed to try and find the cure for many diseases using the cells from nearly 400,000 embryos currently in storage.

He said: "I regret the loss of five years when real progress could have been made, and I find it frustrating that the president would use his first veto of his time in office to thwart this research. It just seems a shame to me.

"I am respectful of those who oppose this research and their reasoning for it, but they do represent a minority.

"I think that to make a choice to protect millions of cells that are going to be destroyed over protecting millions of living and soon-to-be living human beings and citizens of this country… it's hard to get around that.

[graywarrior]

1. The most powerful nation on earth is currently in the dark ages.

Bush sucks.

[lebkuchen]

7. In what way is the US "powerful?"

Iraqis are kicking US butt right now, and the Afghans are gaining ground. Thanks to Bush, and Israel, it's easier to recruit someone for Hezbollah than it is the US army.

Five years of Bush "leadership" has left the US an anachronistic "has been" when measured against its peers in just about any category, so it should come as no surprise that its leader would veto laws advancing medical research/advances.

[muryan]

18. Whereever you are getting your military info from

I'd like to find out, because it seems just a little bit off.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

33. which part?

Iraqis are kicking US butt right now,

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2406622&mesg_id=2406622

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2403318&mesg_id=2403318


and the Afghans are gaining ground.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2406678


Thanks to Bush, and Israel, it's easier to recruit someone for Hezbollah than it is the US army.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=2381009

[graywarrior]

22. There's always a challenge at DU.

[givemebackmycountry]

37. That's what makes us so great!

We argue, we bicker, we suggest alternate ways to see a story or situation.
No, lock step thinking here.

Remember they hate "nuance".
They think it's a sign of weakness.
It is they that are weak.

Weak, and extremely dangerous.

[LA lady]

2. Bill Gates

Maybe we can hit Bill Gates up for a few hundred million!

[ChazII]

24. or Warren Buffet

[JohnnyLib]

3. A good man speaks

and will keep on. Kudos to M. Fox.

[Skittles]

29. yes

I'm going to make a donation to his foundation

[retread]

4. Disagree with the "...respectful of those who oppose..." part. They would

be burning witches if they had their way.

[chelsea0011]

5. Agreed. This is state policy based solely on religious belief.

A fanatical fundie group should never run the country.

[colorado_ufo]

34. Such irony.

Many people were afraid that, if John F. Kennedy were elected, that the Pope would run the country. They were entirely wrong.

Now here we have this fundamentalist, who has set our nation back more than a century and worse, clouded its future.

A large portion of the electorate (not necessarily a majority!) must bear the burden of blame for placing this hugely unqualified individual in the presidency. Where were people's concerns when Bush ran for the highest office in the land, thumping his Bible? All I can remember hearing from so many is, "I'll vote for him because I think he is a real Christian!" or "He really lives what he believes!" What happened to the educated concern whether someone with unalterable views would truly serve the will of the majority? Or serve at all? If Bush only seeks to commune with his Heavenly Father, this may be commendable from a spiritual view, but such a person is not suited for public office in a democracy.

Even Jesus said, "Render unto Cesar what is Cesar's, and unto God what is God's."

[jobycom]

6. I don't want to sound like I'm exploiting such a beloved actor for

political gain, but if more people saw what FOx is going through now, and understood what stem cell research might be able to do, I think there would be more sane opinions on this issue.

It's unconscionable that such basic medical research becomes partisan. Both parties should fund this without a second's thought, and enjoy a rare good night's sleep knowing that for once they did an unarguable good. But some evil conservatives have to pander to the religious right, brainwashing them with lies and pretending there is some moral aspect to the research. It's the same thing the evil bastard Reagan--may he roast in his eternal hell-- did with AIDS. A horrible disease that everyone should unite against, and Reagan makes it into a religious and political issue and blocks funding to fight it in its earliest stages, when it could have maybe been controlled.

I won't smear all Republicans on this, because some support the funding, but there are some Republicans so evil they don't deserve freedom on this great planet. They ought to find another planet, one as bleak and lifeless as their souls.

[TrueFunkSoldier]

8. To all of those who say that voting doesn't matter...

...Lil' Dumbya has given all of us a reason to head to the polls this November. He has done nothing but created a mockery of this great country. Everything he has touched has been a dismal failure.

I just hope the machines aren't already rigged...

[pfitz59]

28. Is your sig line undoctored?

First time I saw the event! What a dill weed!

[Straight Shooter]

9. The irony here is that I believe M.J. Fox turned many youths to the GOP.

It was that ridiculous sitcom in which he starred as a very savvy, self-confident, intelligent if sometimes too sarcastic, business-oriented little Republican. His parents, played by Michael Gross and Meredith Baxter-Birney, (I think), were liberals and were always being made to look like doofuses.

I can't remember the name of the show, but it sure made being a Republican look like the smart, hip thing to do. (Maybe Reagan was president at the time, and I'm sure that contributed to the increasing numbers of young Repubs in the GOP, with his hypocritical "morning in America.")

No, I sure don't blame Fox; he was only playing a role. It's just ironic, that's all, in the same way it was ironic that Christopher Reeve, having played a spectacular Superman, had nearly all his physical powers taken away.

==========

Michael Fox knows that stem cell research will be available to him via other countries. It's good to see him speaking out on behalf of all those who do not have access to the media as he does.

[oregonjen]

10. Family Ties

I think that the parents were not made to look stupid. At least, that is how I remember it. Actually, it was the parents' job to give Alex more balance to his right-wing views.

[mcscajun]

11. The show was "Family Ties"

and it originally was supposed to focus on the liberal parents and their problems dealing with raising an unexpectedly Republican son.

Naturally, like many sitcoms, the focus shifted to Fox's breakout character, Alex, in much the same way as the focus "Happy Days" shifted to the breakout character of Fonzie. Unfortunate in the former case, surely.

[MrPrax]

17. Thanks for the Memories...

Family Ties...

Good old Reagan era pap...like the Cosby Show.

[Lorien]

20. I read the opposite when watching Family Ties

Fox's character was the buffoon; he had framed photos of Nixon in his bedroom, for chissakes! I was a teenager when that show was popular, and I remember laughing at the absurdity of Alex Keaton's beliefs; it all seemed like satire to me, and my friends felt the same way. The producers of that sitcom are every bit as liberal as the parents were portrayed to be.I think that looking back on it from a modern perspective it may not seem like satire, because RW buffoons like Alex Keaton are now abundant in our society. But I honestly don't believe that anyone was swayed by that sitcom to join the GOP-more were probably prone to scoff at it's shallow greed instead.

[Lautremont]

21. I agree with you on that.

The liberal beliefs of the parents always won the day on that show, and the little twist at the end almost always involved the Fox character modifying his RW beliefs in favour of some bit of progressive wisdom brought by the parents.

Kind of a clever way to counteract the political climate of the Reagan years, actually - uphold the family values "father knows best" thing, but make the father's values liberal. They had their cake and ate it quite comfortably.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

27. excellent observation. n/t

[tanyev]

25. That's what people like us thought when we watched the show.

But it's very possible that people who loved Reagan and all the right wing stood for might have interpreted the show differently.

Heck, I think it couldn't be more obvious that George W. Bush is a buffoonish moron, but there are lots of people who see the same news reports I do and think it reflects a warm, caring, decisive leader.

[Rose Siding]

12. Dana and Christopher Reeve would have had something to say, too.

http://img.photobucket.com.nyud.net:8090/albums/v668/maryscottoconnor/MORE%20mlw%20PIcs%20II/Christopher-Reeve-s-Widow-Has-Lung-.jpg

I miss them and I'm very glad to read what Mr Fox had to say.

[Olney Blue]

26. I miss them too. They would have spoken out.

[pookieblue]

13. good quote:

<<"I think that to make a choice to protect millions of cells that are going to be destroyed over protecting millions of living and soon-to-be living human beings and citizens of this country… it's hard to get around that.">>

[UrbScotty]

14. "Fox blasts Bush veto"

I never thought I'd see that headline (except with Michael J. Fox).

[Cha]

15. Bless his heart!

I was wondering how this would hit him..bush is evil and so are all his devil worshipping followers.

[htuttle]

16. I've come to the conclusion that Mojo Nixon was wrong...

Michael J Fox DOES have some Elvis in him after all.

[sueragingroz]

19. MJ Fox

^
|
|
|
|
Canadian ;)

Edited to add: http://www.parkinson.org/site/pp.asp?c=9dJFJLPwB&b=100132

[FightingIrish]

23. It's another tragic case of one country left behind.

Whether you buy into the fantasy of the pious president or not, he is clearly in the wrong to use religious dogma to subvert the wishes of the majority. This is broken democracy. Think how many candidates have pledged to keep their religion out of our government. This cynical pretender to the throne makes no bones about imposing his morals, or at least the morals that got him enough votes to steal two elections, on the will of the majority. The hypocrisy is too obvious to waste any time discussing it. All he has done is reinforce his solid claim to the title of Worst President Ever.

[leesa]

30. Hey, he's too busy slaughtering people in the name of Christ to care

about you, Michael.

[Clyde39]

31. He HAS to appease is "compassionate" base

That is obviously the most important thing to him....not the lack of humanity he wears on his sleeve. Hard to fathom such craziness!

[bertha katzenengel]

32. Good for him. I just wish he hadn't said "but they do represent a

minority." Any thinking RWNB can retort, "yes, but the minority must be protected from the tyranny of the majority."

This isn't necessarily a case where majority rule can win -- as Twig just proved, for now. This is a case where common sense and science must win.

[Laha]

35. Ugh..

Any thinking RWNB can retort, "yes, but the minority must be protected from the tyranny of the majority."

That's a vile reply that I wish was heard much less.. Their idea of 'protecting' their minority, is by protecting their perceived idea that the only way we can treat them fairly is to obey their dogmatic bullsh*t.

That's just like some fanatic calling for the murder of my fellow homos and then acting as if his freedom is being trampled on when told that incitement to violence is actually kind of illegal.

The hypocrisy is so frustrating because it seems so willing on their part. All I can see is an inartfull twist on the good reasoning of why minorities should be protected.

[robbedvoter]

36. From "protecting" to "imposing their will on" there's a long way

When a minority is twarting the will of majority, that is called a dictatorship. Or tyranny.