Wow Michael J. Fox's parkinsons is getting worse
- Thread starter jlarlee
- Start date
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
[quote name='dopa345']It's just tragic to me that health care policy and policy on funding scientific research are being decided by people who know almost nothing about it. It's funny that in this debate, neither side has brought out actual doctors or scientists to the forefront to comment on the matter.[/QUOTE]
You can substitute "health care policy...scientific research" with damn near anything, and still be right on the money.
My jaw dropped when I caught John Kerry talking about regression analysis on C-SPAN many moons ago. It's a disappointing sign of our expectations of politicians that it's an amazingly pleasant surprise when they show themselves to be informed.
You can substitute "health care policy...scientific research" with damn near anything, and still be right on the money.
My jaw dropped when I caught John Kerry talking about regression analysis on C-SPAN many moons ago. It's a disappointing sign of our expectations of politicians that it's an amazingly pleasant surprise when they show themselves to be informed.
Kayden
Banned
[quote name='dopa345']It's just tragic to me that health care policy and policy on funding scientific research are being decided by people who know almost nothing about it. It's funny that in this debate, neither side has brought out actual doctors or scientists to the forefront to comment on the matter.[/quote]
Haven't you ever had a job? The "best" policy is always decided by people that never have to carry it out.
Haven't you ever had a job? The "best" policy is always decided by people that never have to carry it out.
[quote name='Kayden']Haven't you ever had a job? The "best" policy is always decided by people that never have to carry it out.[/QUOTE]
Lol that is true as hell. I didn't think I could detest Limbaugh anymore but he has to prove me wrong by showing his inane tendencies again.
Lol that is true as hell. I didn't think I could detest Limbaugh anymore but he has to prove me wrong by showing his inane tendencies again.
[quote name='jlarlee']Lol that is true as hell. I didn't think I could detest Limbaugh anymore but he has to prove me wrong by showing his inane tendencies again.[/QUOTE]
What Rush fails to understand is that about 1% of the elderly population has Parkinson's so most people at least know of someone with the disease. He's pissed off a lot of people. I saw a patient the other day whose wife is very politically connected in Georgia and she is planning to start a grass roots campaign to boycott his sponsors.
What Rush fails to understand is that about 1% of the elderly population has Parkinson's so most people at least know of someone with the disease. He's pissed off a lot of people. I saw a patient the other day whose wife is very politically connected in Georgia and she is planning to start a grass roots campaign to boycott his sponsors.
How ironic.
Michael J Fox hasn't even read the Missouri Amendment 2
http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/story?id=2613377&page=2
Stephanopoulos: In the ad now running in Missouri, Jim Caviezel speaks in Aramaic. It means, "You betray me with a kiss." And his position, his point, is that actually even though down in Missouri they say the initiative is against cloning, it's actually going to allow human cloning.
Fox: Well, I don't think that's true. You know, I campaigned for Claire McCaskill. And so I have to qualify it by saying I'm not qualified to speak on the page-to-page content of the initiative. Although, I am quite sure that I'll agree with it in spirit, I don't know, I— On full disclosure, I haven't read it, and that's why I didn't put myself up for it distinctly.
Nothing like advertising for an Amendment when you have no clue what it is actually about (NOT stem cell research but protecting embryo cloning in the missouri constitution)
Michael J Fox hasn't even read the Missouri Amendment 2
http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/story?id=2613377&page=2
Stephanopoulos: In the ad now running in Missouri, Jim Caviezel speaks in Aramaic. It means, "You betray me with a kiss." And his position, his point, is that actually even though down in Missouri they say the initiative is against cloning, it's actually going to allow human cloning.
Fox: Well, I don't think that's true. You know, I campaigned for Claire McCaskill. And so I have to qualify it by saying I'm not qualified to speak on the page-to-page content of the initiative. Although, I am quite sure that I'll agree with it in spirit, I don't know, I— On full disclosure, I haven't read it, and that's why I didn't put myself up for it distinctly.
Nothing like advertising for an Amendment when you have no clue what it is actually about (NOT stem cell research but protecting embryo cloning in the missouri constitution)
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
[quote name='schuerm26']How ironic.
Michael J Fox hasn't even read the Missouri Amendment 2[/quote]
You and him should start an exclusive club then.
Well, at least you've dropped the "human cloning" angle since you seem to realize what a farce it was. Now, perhaps you can elucidate me on what is implied when you say "protecting embryo cloning," and why that's something you would be against.
Michael J Fox hasn't even read the Missouri Amendment 2[/quote]
You and him should start an exclusive club then.
Well, at least you've dropped the "human cloning" angle since you seem to realize what a farce it was. Now, perhaps you can elucidate me on what is implied when you say "protecting embryo cloning," and why that's something you would be against.
[quote name='mykevermin']You and him should start an exclusive club then.
Well, at least you've dropped the "human cloning" angle since you seem to realize what a farce it was. Now, perhaps you can elucidate me on what is implied when you say "protecting embryo cloning," and why that's something you would be against.[/quote]
As i have said from the very beginning vermin, this is a CLONING amendment.
Well, at least you've dropped the "human cloning" angle since you seem to realize what a farce it was. Now, perhaps you can elucidate me on what is implied when you say "protecting embryo cloning," and why that's something you would be against.[/quote]
As i have said from the very beginning vermin, this is a CLONING amendment.
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
[quote name='schuerm26']As i have said from the very beginning vermin, this is a CLONING amendment.[/QUOTE]
So, you don't know what "embryo cloning" is then, Dr. scheurm? Gotcha.
Let me try this one last time, babydoll:
You said:
The amendment's response:
It's alright to be wrong about things; I find myself wrong pretty often. But, you're not only at a "when it rains, it means God is peeing" level of being wrong, but you're completely and utterly unwilling to entertain the fact that clear contradictions of what comes out of your mouth has any truth to it at all - even, in this case, when the contradicition is the language of the amendment itself.
So, you don't know what "embryo cloning" is then, Dr. scheurm? Gotcha.
Let me try this one last time, babydoll:
You said:
The amendment's response:
It's alright to be wrong about things; I find myself wrong pretty often. But, you're not only at a "when it rains, it means God is peeing" level of being wrong, but you're completely and utterly unwilling to entertain the fact that clear contradictions of what comes out of your mouth has any truth to it at all - even, in this case, when the contradicition is the language of the amendment itself.
Hey guess what Mike
there is NO law that holds back missouri scientists from conducting reasearch that is allowed by federal government. What you posted is already allowed.
The only cloning amendment 2 bans is one that results in a full grown human being.
I will say it again, this is a cloning amendment
there is NO law that holds back missouri scientists from conducting reasearch that is allowed by federal government. What you posted is already allowed.
The only cloning amendment 2 bans is one that results in a full grown human being.
I will say it again, this is a cloning amendment
CocheseUGA
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 33 (100%)
[quote name='mykevermin']So, you don't know what "embryo cloning" is then, Dr. scheurm? Gotcha.
Let me try this one last time, babydoll:
You said:
The amendment's response:
It's alright to be wrong about things; I find myself wrong pretty often. But, you're not only at a "when it rains, it means God is peeing" level of being wrong, but you're completely and utterly unwilling to entertain the fact that clear contradictions of what comes out of your mouth has any truth to it at all - even, in this case, when the contradicition is the language of the amendment itself.[/QUOTE]
Some people are entertaining to banter with, but there comes a time when it's best to cut your losses.
Let me try this one last time, babydoll:
You said:
The amendment's response:
It's alright to be wrong about things; I find myself wrong pretty often. But, you're not only at a "when it rains, it means God is peeing" level of being wrong, but you're completely and utterly unwilling to entertain the fact that clear contradictions of what comes out of your mouth has any truth to it at all - even, in this case, when the contradicition is the language of the amendment itself.[/QUOTE]
Some people are entertaining to banter with, but there comes a time when it's best to cut your losses.
CocheseUGA
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 33 (100%)
[quote name='schuerm26']The feeling is mutual.[/QUOTE]
When you can actually make a convincing arguement without resorting to hack websites and news sources, people might take you seriously.
When you can actually make a convincing arguement without resorting to hack websites and news sources, people might take you seriously.
[quote name='CocheseUGA']When you can actually make a convincing arguement without resorting to hack websites and news sources, people might take you seriously.[/quote]
Hmmm, a bunch of libs not thinking a conservative is correct. What's new. This is like a republican posting at moveon.org. It's obvious everyone here is going to be against what i post no matter what. Every source i post, to you, is going to be a hack site.
Hmmm, a bunch of libs not thinking a conservative is correct. What's new. This is like a republican posting at moveon.org. It's obvious everyone here is going to be against what i post no matter what. Every source i post, to you, is going to be a hack site.
If Missourians want to live in the Stone Age, it's no skin of my back. And scherm, based on your definition of cloning, researchers "clone" human cells all the time so you're already out of luck. I also wonder how you'd react to the fact that we've also tried fetal cell transplants in live Parkinson's patients.
CocheseUGA
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 33 (100%)
[quote name='schuerm26']Hmmm, a bunch of libs not thinking a conservative is correct. What's new. This is like a republican posting at moveon.org. It's obvious everyone here is going to be against what i post no matter what. Every source i post, to you, is going to be a hack site.[/QUOTE]
I correct my statement: I don't take you seriously because you think I'm a liberal.
I correct my statement: I don't take you seriously because you think I'm a liberal.
Ikohn4ever
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 5 (100%)
[quote name='schuerm26']Hmmm, a bunch of libs not thinking a conservative is correct. What's new. This is like a republican posting at moveon.org. It's obvious everyone here is going to be against what i post no matter what. Every source i post, to you, is going to be a hack site.[/QUOTE]
I think thats your problem you confuse intelligence with liberalism, which is understandable, though i am pretty sure CAG has a decent amount of Libertarians in it.
I think thats your problem you confuse intelligence with liberalism, which is understandable, though i am pretty sure CAG has a decent amount of Libertarians in it.
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
[quote name='CocheseUGA']I correct my statement: I don't take you seriously because you think I'm a liberal.[/QUOTE]
Cochese is about as liberal as scheurm's arguments in this thread are well-researched.
Cochese is about as liberal as scheurm's arguments in this thread are well-researched.
CocheseUGA
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 33 (100%)
[quote name='Hex']Two so far, thanks to that CNN political position thread.[/QUOTE]
I think technically I'm one too. It's hard to quantify.
I think technically I'm one too. It's hard to quantify.
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
[quote name='CocheseUGA']I think technically I'm one too. It's hard to quantify.[/QUOTE]
Not that I have a Bill Frist-like level of making diagnoses without actually ever seeing/meeting someone, your posts often suggest a tolerance for other people that isn't typical of those who would fall under the "socially conservative" category.
It may be a limited interpretation of how Libertarians view themselves, but I've always thought of it as "fiscal conservatism and social liberalism," brought under the umbrella of "keeping government the
out of our lives in as many ways as we can think of."
Not that I have a Bill Frist-like level of making diagnoses without actually ever seeing/meeting someone, your posts often suggest a tolerance for other people that isn't typical of those who would fall under the "socially conservative" category.
It may be a limited interpretation of how Libertarians view themselves, but I've always thought of it as "fiscal conservatism and social liberalism," brought under the umbrella of "keeping government the
out of our lives in as many ways as we can think of."
CocheseUGA
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 33 (100%)
Get out of my head!!!
I used to be very social conservative. I never really had an opinion about homosexuality. A little homophobic, maybe, but didn't really care all that much. Now I consider myself pretty much what you described. Gay/lesbian people don't bother me at all, I could care less if they want to get married - it doesn't say anything about my state of marriage if you want to express yourself in that manner. I want less taxes and less spending, and legislators less of a say in what is right and wrong. I am pro military and pro defense, and don't mind the pre-emptive bombing of a country or two if it helps us long term (and we have aing plan). I'm anti-UN in the manner of it doesn't ing accomplish anything. Get another system in there and I'd give it a shot.
It's funny, I voted for a lot of Republicans (and quite a few Democrats) for state offices in the primary. I got a postcard inviting me to have a meet/greet dinner with the Republican canidates for Governor, Lt. Gov, Sec/State etc. I quipped to my wife, 'Hey, wanna meet all the people you hate?' Had to have been there.
I think being married to who I am, it's influenced my way of thinking from the balls-to-the-wall conservatism to 'Hey, let me actually research who the hell I'm voting for and make a decision that way.' In doing so, I've found I've voted for more liberal canidates than I ever thought I would.
I'm thinking being in favor of privitization of SSA and a flat tax places me firmly in that category, too. As far as drugs go, I'm kinda split. It reallys you up in ways these kids can't appreciate, but do I think a user should sit in jail for a few years?
I used to be very social conservative. I never really had an opinion about homosexuality. A little homophobic, maybe, but didn't really care all that much. Now I consider myself pretty much what you described. Gay/lesbian people don't bother me at all, I could care less if they want to get married - it doesn't say anything about my state of marriage if you want to express yourself in that manner. I want less taxes and less spending, and legislators less of a say in what is right and wrong. I am pro military and pro defense, and don't mind the pre-emptive bombing of a country or two if it helps us long term (and we have a
ing plan). I'm anti-UN in the manner of it doesn't ing accomplish anything. Get another system in there and I'd give it a shot.It's funny, I voted for a lot of Republicans (and quite a few Democrats) for state offices in the primary. I got a postcard inviting me to have a meet/greet dinner with the Republican canidates for Governor, Lt. Gov, Sec/State etc. I quipped to my wife, 'Hey, wanna meet all the people you hate?' Had to have been there.
I think being married to who I am, it's influenced my way of thinking from the balls-to-the-wall conservatism to 'Hey, let me actually research who the hell I'm voting for and make a decision that way.' In doing so, I've found I've voted for more liberal canidates than I ever thought I would.
I'm thinking being in favor of privitization of SSA and a flat tax places me firmly in that category, too. As far as drugs go, I'm kinda split. It really
s you up in ways these kids can't appreciate, but do I think a user should sit in jail for a few years?[quote name='mykevermin']Not that I have a Bill Frist-like level of making diagnoses without actually ever seeing/meeting someone, your posts often suggest a tolerance for other people that isn't typical of those who would fall under the "socially conservative" category.
It may be a limited interpretation of how Libertarians view themselves, but I've always thought of it as "fiscal conservatism and social liberalism," brought under the umbrella of "keeping government the out of our lives in as many ways as we can think of."[/quote]
Pretty much, I guess. As Penn Gillette once said, 'If you can get the potheads to accept guns, and gun nuts to accept mary jane, then everyone would vote Libertarian.'
[quote name='CocheseUGA']Get out of my head!!!
I used to be very social conservative. I never really had an opinion about homosexuality. A little homophobic, maybe, but didn't really care all that much. Now I consider myself pretty much what you described. Gay/lesbian people don't bother me at all, I could care less if they want to get married - it doesn't say anything about my state of marriage if you want to express yourself in that manner. I want less taxes and less spending, and legislators less of a say in what is right and wrong. I am pro military and pro defense, and don't mind the pre-emptive bombing of a country or two if it helps us long term (and we have aing plan). I'm anti-UN in the manner of it doesn't ing accomplish anything. Get another system in there and I'd give it a shot.
It's funny, I voted for a lot of Republicans (and quite a few Democrats) for state offices in the primary. I got a postcard inviting me to have a meet/greet dinner with the Republican canidates for Governor, Lt. Gov, Sec/State etc. I quipped to my wife, 'Hey, wanna meet all the people you hate?' Had to have been there.
I think being married to who I am, it's influenced my way of thinking from the balls-to-the-wall conservatism to 'Hey, let me actually research who the hell I'm voting for and make a decision that way.' In doing so, I've found I've voted for more liberal canidates than I ever thought I would.
I'm thinking being in favor of privitization of SSA and a flat tax places me firmly in that category, too. As far as drugs go, I'm kinda split. It reallys you up in ways these kids can't appreciate, but do I think a user should sit in jail for a few years?[/quote]
I'm exactly, like word-for-word, the same way. :lol: Although it wasn't really knowing any Democrats that made me un-conservative as it was sort of accepting that shit isn't black and white anymore and that thinking exclusively-conservatively doesn't really allow you to expand your mind, which I like to do.
It may be a limited interpretation of how Libertarians view themselves, but I've always thought of it as "fiscal conservatism and social liberalism," brought under the umbrella of "keeping government the
out of our lives in as many ways as we can think of."[/quote] Pretty much, I guess. As Penn Gillette once said, 'If you can get the potheads to accept guns, and gun nuts to accept mary jane, then everyone would vote Libertarian.'
[quote name='CocheseUGA']Get out of my head!!!
I used to be very social conservative. I never really had an opinion about homosexuality. A little homophobic, maybe, but didn't really care all that much. Now I consider myself pretty much what you described. Gay/lesbian people don't bother me at all, I could care less if they want to get married - it doesn't say anything about my state of marriage if you want to express yourself in that manner. I want less taxes and less spending, and legislators less of a say in what is right and wrong. I am pro military and pro defense, and don't mind the pre-emptive bombing of a country or two if it helps us long term (and we have a
ing plan). I'm anti-UN in the manner of it doesn't ing accomplish anything. Get another system in there and I'd give it a shot.It's funny, I voted for a lot of Republicans (and quite a few Democrats) for state offices in the primary. I got a postcard inviting me to have a meet/greet dinner with the Republican canidates for Governor, Lt. Gov, Sec/State etc. I quipped to my wife, 'Hey, wanna meet all the people you hate?' Had to have been there.
I think being married to who I am, it's influenced my way of thinking from the balls-to-the-wall conservatism to 'Hey, let me actually research who the hell I'm voting for and make a decision that way.' In doing so, I've found I've voted for more liberal canidates than I ever thought I would.
I'm thinking being in favor of privitization of SSA and a flat tax places me firmly in that category, too. As far as drugs go, I'm kinda split. It really
s you up in ways these kids can't appreciate, but do I think a user should sit in jail for a few years?[/quote] I'm exactly, like word-for-word, the same way. :lol: Although it wasn't really knowing any Democrats that made me un-conservative as it was sort of accepting that shit isn't black and white anymore and that thinking exclusively-conservatively doesn't really allow you to expand your mind, which I like to do.
Cheese
CAGiversary!
[quote name='Hex']Pretty much, I guess. As Penn Gillette once said, 'If you can get the potheads to accept guns, and gun nuts to accept mary jane, then everyone would vote Libertarian.'[/QUOTE]
He leaves out Jesus.
And there are divisions within the Libertarians too, from the self described "socially liberal, fiscally conservative" to self-serving, extremist Ayn Rand-ian types, those who believe that 'fiscally conservative' means the Gov't is stripped down to fixing roads and funding an army, everything else is shitcanned. Which is similar to what we had in the late 19th/early 20th century, which lead to rampant corruption, limited literacy and the poor dying of dysentery in the street, yeah, let's go back to that.
He leaves out Jesus.
And there are divisions within the Libertarians too, from the self described "socially liberal, fiscally conservative" to self-serving, extremist Ayn Rand-ian types, those who believe that 'fiscally conservative' means the Gov't is stripped down to fixing roads and funding an army, everything else is shitcanned. Which is similar to what we had in the late 19th/early 20th century, which lead to rampant corruption, limited literacy and the poor dying of dysentery in the street, yeah, let's go back to that.
usickenme
CAGiversary!
[quote name='schuerm26']How ironic.
Nothing like advertising for an Amendment when you have no clue what it is actually about (NOT stem cell research but protecting embryo cloning in the missouri constitution)[/QUOTE]
Ironic indeed; he was campaigning for McCaskill, youing idiot.
Nothing like advertising for an Amendment when you have no clue what it is actually about (NOT stem cell research but protecting embryo cloning in the missouri constitution)[/QUOTE]
Ironic indeed; he was campaigning for McCaskill, you
ing idiot.
bread's done