Rush Limbaugh Accuses Michael J Fox of exaggerating his disease!

[westsider]

You can't be serious...MJF is a party hack...if you don't think he is party affiliated, you are out there

Michael J. Fox did an ad for Arlen Spector, the Republican senator from Pennsylvania, in 2004 ... that hardly makes him a Democratic Party hack.

[75center]

Keith Olbermann is OUT THERE. Different side to the same coin as Rush.

[scooterbob]

I, for one, am not advocating that he get a "free pass".

 

By the same token, it would be nice to see Limbaugh debate the position taken by his targets, as opposed to ridiculing and mocking them, based on his own ignorance of their medical condition.

 

Than again, since Limbaugh wasn't able to just shout Michael M. Fox down, or cut off his microphone, he is forced to either debate the point, or resort to character assasination.

 

We see which route he chose....

 

 

Frances

 

 

From your posts, I believe we can conclude that your position is at least somewhat based upon your dislike of Limbaugh. I think that this is also true with several of our other posters.

 

I am sorry Fox has Parkinson's Disease. I hope he does well. However, I think it is reasonable for Limbaugh to question his political ad in regard to substance. Regardless of how Limbaugh handled it, he would be criticized by those who dispise him and by those who seek to gain votes from Fox's commercial. They did the same with Reeves a couple of years ago. These efforts are long on emotion and short on facts.

 

Under the circumstances, just how do you guys think Limbaugh should have handled it. Please remember, from both directions. Surely, no one thinks Keith Olbermann is any less objective than is Limbaugh. However, we hear few complaints about his nightly one hour tirades. Of course, that may be because no one watches him and Limbaugh has a very large audience. Politics is hardball and no one gets a break. Some whine and some don't. If Fox isn't prepared for this, maybe he better stick to television acting.

[Birdsfan]

You can't be serious...MJF is a party hack...if you don't think he is party affiliated, you are out there,...

 

And I want to say he is one of the best actors of my generation and veerry underrated IMO...loved everything he did, especially Back To The Future...

He may be affiliated with a party -- most people are. But in this situation, he's simply trying to do what he can to cure his disease and many others. Nothing more. Ask yourself this: If Michael J. Fox (huge celebrity) wanted to do the bidding of the Democratic party, would he not have gone after a much bigger fish?

 

 

 

And you need to be careful with the personal comments please.

[letabrotherspeak]

They can't.

They can't as in private companies?

Bottom line, embryonic stem cell research has proven to be a bust. Presently there is not one single solitary therapy in the works from the use of embryonic stem cell research.

The most promise has been in the adult stem cell research.

[shooter]

He may be affiliated with a party -- most people are. But in this situation, he's simply trying to do what he can to cure his disease and many others. Nothing more. Ask yourself this: If Michael J. Fox (huge celebrity) wanted to do the bidding of the Democratic party, would he not have gone after a much bigger fish?

 

And you need to be careful with the personal comments please.

 

I agree that Fox's main interest is curing his disease but I disagree on the "bigger fish" comment. The Senate seat in Missouri is one of 5 or 6 hotly contested seats which will determine who controls the Senate. They also have that stem cell/cloning issue on the ballot. In an election year that isn't a presidential election year that's about as big as it gets.

[shooter]

............ Some whine and some don't. If Fox isn't prepared for this, maybe he better stick to television acting.

 

I have heard and read numerous people whining and complaining but from what I can tell, Fox himself has said very little. I very much agree that Fox should be prepared to take the heat.

[H]

When Fox entered the political arena, he opened himself up to the heat that comes to all with a political agenda. He, regardless of circumstance, willingly opened the door and entered. It is fair game to question the veracity of his effort. He deserves no free pass whatsoever.

 

 

This is what I find despicable about the state of political dialogue in this country. If someone makes public their stand on a controversial issue, he is immediately vilified and/or has his integrity questioned as a tactic to discredit his position.

 

The ironic thing is, as was pointed out on MSNBC tonight, Limbaugh's remarks have done far more damage to the Republican cause than he could have possibly foreseen (even without half his brain tied behind his back). The video of him flailing about as he criticized Fox on his show are getting a lot of national airtime.

[Fastbreak]

That's exactly the stance Limbaugh is taking.

I don't recall defending Limbaugh, nor have I diminished M.J. Fox. My point is that the veracity of a statement is independent of the personality making it. I realize this is a foreign concept in today's culture, but there is a thing called the truth, and it is not inflated nor diminished in relation to the stature of the personality speaking it. Conversely, a lie is not made more truthful simply because it spills from the lips of a revered celebrity or a sympathetic personality.

[Birdsfan]

This is what I find despicable about the state of political dialogue in this country. If someone makes public their stand on a controversial issue, he is immediately vilified and/or has his integrity questioned as a tactic to discredit his position.

 

The ironic thing is, as was pointed out on MSNBC tonight, Limbaugh's remarks have done far more damage to the Republican cause than he could have possibly foreseen (even without half his brain tied behind his back). The video of him flailing about as he criticized Fox on his show are getting a lot of national airtime.

Well said! All this partisan grumbling is really pointless. The real issue was Rush accusing him of faking his illness for "political" gain. It isn't about whether Fox should or should not have done the commercial.

[westsider]

Keith Olbermann is OUT THERE. Different side to the same coin as Rush.

Who is lauding Olbermann here? I simply pointed out that the video of Limbaugh mimicing Fox was shown on his show.

[westsider]

I don't recall defending Limbaugh, nor have I diminished M.J. Fox.

I didn't accuse you of either.

My point is that the veracity of a statement is independent of the personality making it. I realize this is a foreign concept in today's culture, but there is a thing called the truth, and it is not inflated nor diminished in relation to the stature of the personality speaking it.

I agree, but as Francis Bavier eloquently stated, there was a way for Limbaugh to challenge Fox's ad ... with facts. Instead, he chose to point an accusing finger at his motives and actions and showed a remarkable insensitivity to Fox's condition.

 

I rarely agree with Limbaugh, but I don't lambaste him and others simply because share a different opinion than myself. Limbaugh deliberately chooses to belittle those that disagree with him and question their motives, and he deserves disdain for that. The same goes for Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity and their ilk.

[Booge]

He may be affiliated with a party -- most people are. But in this situation, he's simply trying to do what he can to cure his disease and many others. Nothing more. Ask yourself this: If Michael J. Fox (huge celebrity) wanted to do the bidding of the Democratic party, would he not have gone after a much bigger fish?

 

 

 

And you need to be careful with the personal comments please.

 

You still don't get it that he IS doing the bidding of the Democratic party.

[Booge]

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_102506/content/fox_is_not_infallible.guest.html

 

All right, people are asking for the cite, that's c-i-t-e. This would be Michael J. Fox, an excerpt from his book "Lucky Man" June 1, 2002. Here is what he writes regarding his appearance before a Senate appropriations subcommittee hearing in Washington on September 28th, 1999: "I had made a deliberate choice to appear before the subcommittee without medication. It seemed to me that this occasion demanded that my testimony about the effects of the disease and the urgency we as a community were feeling be seen as well as heard. For people who had never observed me in this kind of shape, the transformation must have been startling," as it was for me when I saw the commercial he was running in Missouri, because I had never seen him that way before, ever, and I got numerous e-mails from people saying he had said that he does this: goes off the medication to illustrate the ravages of the disease to people and so it's in his own book, that he admits doing this.

Now, Kathryn Jean Lopez at National Review Online has a story on their website today: "Doc Hollywood on the Campaign Trail; What Michael J. Fox learned while on Spin City," and in it she quotes Princeton professor Robert P. George, who sits on the president's bioethics commission, and he says this: "I have great sympathy for Mr. Fox and other victims of Parkinson's and similarly horrible diseases. I understand how desperately he hopes for a cure for what afflicts him and so many others. I have seen members of my own family suffer, and I too want to hasten the day when the great engine of science conquers the diseases that cause so much suffering. But the fact that Mr. Fox is a victim is not a license for him to mislead or manipulate the public.

 

"The truth — the whole truth — must be told. Those politicians who, for political gain, have run these ads in which the truth is distorted and people are misled deserve the most severe of reprimands. Win or lose, they have brought upon themselves disgrace." That, ladies and gentlemen, is my whole point: "that Mr. Fox is a victim is not a license for him to mislead or manipulate the public. The truth -- the whole truth -- must be told. Those politicians who for political gain have run these ads in which the truth is distorted and people are misled deserve the most severe of reprimands. Win or lose, they have brought upon themselves disgrace." That, ladies and gentlemen, is my whole point. "Mr. Fox is a victim is not a license for him to mislead or manipulate the public. The truth -- the whole truth -- must be told. Those politicians who for political gain have run these ads in which the truth is distorted and people are misled deserve the most severe of reprimands. Win or lose, they have brought upon themselves disgrace."

 

That is happening to Claire McCaskill in Missouri today. Ben Cardin in Maryland are both disgracing themselves by exploiting the suffering of this disease in the effort to politicize it and to make it appear to voters in their states, Missouri and Maryland, that voters for -- well, let's put it this way: Making it appear that their opponents, Jim Talent in Missouri and Michael Steele in Maryland, are for Parkinson's disease because they are opposed to research which would cure it. Nothing could be further from the truth. I can't emphasize this enough. Embryonic stem cell research in Missouri is legal, and it is ongoing, and nobody wants to criminalize it. To the phones we go. This is Carol is it San Diego. You're up first today. It's nice to have you with us.

[scooterbob]

Boys, can we all agree that the whole thing is nothing but politics. Fox did what he did for, now be honest, political reasons. Limbaugh reacted for political reasons. The media makes a mountain out of a molehill (the dispute, not the disease) for political reasons (the media doesn't seem interested in William Jefferson's "iced" $50,000 which really is far more important than what an unelected radio broadcaster says or doesn't say). And, we post for political reasons. It's all political.

 

If the commercial were in support of Republicans the media would have ignored it (the ad with Suppan, Warner, Sweeney, et als. is far more factual but it gets only "lip service") and Limbaugh would have supported it and insisted that the contents were true. If Fox had taken his medicine, the commercial would have been a mundane plug for a candidate with the usual overriding play on words and misstatements. His apparent condition on camera is what made the commercial notable and surely everyone will at least agree it that was planned for a purpose. The words were not meant to be as important as the picture. How can anyone doubt that? That is how politics works in this day and age. Chalk one up for whichever Democrat came up with the idea.