House fails to override stem cell veto

House fails to override stem cell veto

By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 46 minutes ago



WASHINGTON - President Bush rejected legislation Wednesday that could have multiplied the federal money going into embryonic stem cell research, using the first veto of his presidency to underscore his stand on the emotionally charged, life-and-death issue.

A few hours later, the House voted 235-193 to overturn Bush's veto, 51 short of the required two-thirds majority.

"This bill would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others," Bush said. "It crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect."

Most Americans disagree with the president, according to public opinion polls. A number of lawmakers expressed confidence the legislation would someday become law and some suggested Bush's stance could hurt Republicans in congressional elections this fall.

"Mr. President, we will not give up," said Sen. Edward Kennedy (news, bio, voting record), D-Mass. "We will continue this battle."

Bush made good on a promise he made in 2001 to limit federally funded embryonic research to the stem cell lines that had been created by the time.

Bush's first veto, 5 1/2 years into his presidency, came in the Oval Office without any ceremony — though he then announced it surrounded by families with cheerful toddlers born from embryos. He added his signature to the bottom of a two-page message that was promptly hand-delivered to the House, where the legislation began.

"If we are to find the right ways to advance ethical medical research, we must also be willing when necessary to reject the wrong ways," his message said. "For that reason, I must veto this bill."

Bush has made 141 veto threats during his time in office, and the Republicans controlling Congress typically respond by changing bills to his liking. His single veto is a departure from the practices of other recent presidents — Bill Clinton had 37, Bush's father had 44 and Ronald Reagan had 78.

Supporters of embryonic stem cell research have had powerfully moving proponents on their side, including the late "Superman" star Christopher Reeve and actor Michael J. Fox. Other proponents say the research could lead to cures for the diseases that threaten to kill them.

Bush tried to put a face on his position, too. Eighteen families who had adopted unused frozen embryos were in the East Room as Bush made his case in a 15-minute speech that came 40 minutes after the veto. On stage behind the president and in the audience were two dozen children, squirming in their Sunday best, born from those leftover embryos.

"These boys and girls are not spare parts," Bush said. "They remind us of what is lost when embryos are destroyed in the name of research."

Also in the crowd were four embryo donor families and four patients who have been aided by adult stem cells. Those cells are found in various tissues, including bone marrow. Bush supports research involving adult stem cells.

As he vetoed the bill, he signed another that was passed unanimously in both chambers that would ban "fetal farming," the prospect of raising and aborting fetuses for scientific research. "Human beings are not a raw material to be exploited, or a commodity to be bought or sold, and this bill will help ensure that we respect the fundamental ethical line," Bush said, drawing a shout of "Amen!" from one of the fathers on stage with him.

Bush said he was disappointed that Congress failed to pass a third bill that would encourage adult stem cell research. Opponents said it would have given lawmakers political cover for opposing the embryonic stem cell bill. But Bush said it would fund vital and ethical research, and he would direct his administration to pursue this kind of science.

Pleadings from celebrities, former first lady Nancy Reagan and some fellow Republicans had failed to move Bush. He acted after two days of often wrenching emotional debate in Congress, punctuated by stories of personal and family suffering, that had cast lawmakers into the intersection of politics, morality and science.

Some are predicting the veto could hurt GOP congressional candidates in close races this November. And the issue split the Republican senators who are thinking about running to replace Bush in the White House in 2008.

Sens. Sam Brownback of Kansas, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and George Allen of Virginia sided with Bush in opposing the bill. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee and Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record) of Arizona voted for the increased federal funding.

"I am pro-life, but I disagree with the president's decision to veto the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act," said Frist, a heart surgeon. "Given the potential of this research and the limitations of the existing lines eligible for federally funded research, I think additional lines should be made available."

Rep. Diana DeGette (news, bio, voting record), D-Colo., a co-sponsor of the House bill, submitted 11,000 signatures urging Bush to sign the measure and said of his veto: "He is doing that on the backs of tens of millions of Americans."

I just cannot agree with embryotic stem cell research; it leaves too much room for unethical practices. Just like with cloning and euthanasia, who gets to play God? I feel for the people with the diseases that medical science is searching for a cure, but there has to be a better way than by taking a life to save another.

I know a lot of people have no problem with this, but, these are the same people that do not have a problem with abortion. These embryos are living beings. What makes their life less important than another?

Exactly, not to mention there are other way of getting the results they want. Adult stem cells have been shown to be very promissing, not so with emb. cells. The news has been making it out that he's banning it and that's not what's happening either. He is simly saying the govt. should not support it monitarily. I agree.

I must say that I disagree, I believe we should be doing everything we can to help find cures for diseases and such (Yes, I know all about the other ways etc, But this is another way as well) I will also say I would be more than willing to donate my eggs for this science to be used in whatever way seemed fit.....Just my personal opinion and view though :p

It isn't about just the egg...it is about the EMBRYO which is fertilized. This means that it is a life. How can it be ok to take a life in order to MAYBE save another life? And why take a life if there are other ways to accomplish the same thing? Using ADULT stem cells has been proving to be more productive than embryotic stem cells. So, why? :confused:

And like it was mentioned, this is about using government money (tax dollars) to fund this project or not. I personally do not want my tax dollars to be spent for this expermentation; just like I do not want my tax dollars paying for abortions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tngirl

How can it be ok to take a life in order to MAYBE save another life?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tngirl

I know a lot of people have no problem with this, but, these are the same people that do not have a problem with abortion. These embryos are living beings. What makes their life less important than another?

---

Don't you mean a potential life? Every embryo does not develop into a human baby and every one that does develop into a baby doesn't develop into a healthy one that can sustain life.

I personally don't have a problem with embryonic stem cell research and I think it's very wrong of you to lump people who support it with those who 'do not have a problem with abortion.' I happen to be pro-choice and think abortion is acceptable in very few cases like rape, imminent death of the mother or child or severe retardation.

Why is it wrong to destroy potential human life when that research may save thousands, maybe millions of people already living (or even to be born in the future with the problems this research could solve)?

OH, and as for that idiot Shrub saying that it is 'morally reprehensible' or whatever he said. That was a LAUGH and a half. How many 'morally reprehensible' acts has he comitted or helped commit during his 5 1/2 year tenure? In the very least, isn't LYING considered 'morally reprehensible?' :rolleyes:

Because we are not God and it is not for us to make the decision as to who gets to live and who does not. Potential life...makes it easier to kill a baby I guess. When a woman gets pregnant she is potentially going to give birth to a baby. We all know that there is no gaurantee that will happen, so much could go wrong...miscarriage or still birth.

I do not think this is a case of the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. The "many" have had a chance at life, why should that chance be taken away from a potential child?

**Backing out of thread** :D

I only want to say that please do not turn this into a thread for bashing people with different views (I mean everyone, Not one person)
This is an interesting topic and I am looking forward to hearing everyone's viewpoint and reasoning :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by freeby4me

**Backing out of thread** :D

I only want to say that please do not turn this into a thread for bashing people with different views (I mean everyone, Not one person)
This is an interesting topic and I am looking forward to hearing everyone's viewpoint and reasoning :)

---

:confused: Who is bashing who? The only bashing is against Pres. Bush and that is totally irrellevant.

Nobody is bashing yet......but this is a hot topic. (besides, another threads been started)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by freeby4me

I must say that I disagree, I believe we should be doing everything we can to help find cures for diseases and such (Yes, I know all about the other ways etc, But this is another way as well) I will also say I would be more than willing to donate my eggs for this science to be used in whatever way seemed fit.....Just my personal opinion and view though :p

---

You are perfactly free to do so. There are many places in the private sector that can use them. It's funny how they try to bash Bush about it but then simple facts like he was the first and only (so far) to fund this kind of research. It was legal to do this research back when Clinton was president but did he fund it when he had the chance? NO. Since Bush funded it there have been no breakthroughs, or anything even promissing. However like it's been said before there have been lots of good things comming out of adult stem cell research, and nobody potentially has to die. ;)

Quote:

---

It's funny how they try to bash Bush about it but then simple facts like he was the first and only (so far) to fund this kind of research. It was legal to do this research back when Clinton was president but did he fund it when he had the chance?

NO.

Since Bush funded it there have been no breakthroughs, or anything even promissing. However like it's been said before there have been lots of good things comming out of adult stem cell research, and nobody potentially has to die.

---

I keep trying to make this point but the ABB Krewe don't want to hear it....

Thoughts on the First Veto
Posted by: Mary Katharine Ham at 2:31 PM
Wednesday, July 19, 2006

http://www.townhall.com/blog/g/8b3a3...1-45cb75f818f8

So, Bush vetoed the stem-cell bill just now.

I'm sure Expose the Left will soon have the video up. http://www.exposetheleft.com/

Here's the Washington Post story on the veto: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...071900524.html

Quote:

---

"This bill would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others," Bush, speaking at the White House, said after he followed through on his promise to veto the bill. "It crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect. So I vetoed it."

---

The House and Senate do not appear to have the votes needed to override the veto, meaning it is unlikely the measure will become law this year...Bush rebuffed emotional calls from prominent Republicans, including Nancy Reagan and conservative Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (Utah), to support the measure.

Here is Nancy Reagan's statement on the vote, via Frist's new medical blog, Medical Matters. http://www.medicalmatters.org/index....ew&Blog_id=371

On that same blog, the debate is indelicately called "stemapalooza." http://www.medicalmatters.org/index....ew&Blog_id=369 It seems that, since some of the conservative base will be incensed by this vote and Frist allegedly still wants to run for President, he would do well to treat their concerns with a little more respect than this blog post shows. Tacky.

Charmaine Yoest at FRC was live-blogging the veto ceremony today. http://www.medicalmatters.org/index....ew&Blog_id=369


Here's the basic info on the bill itself. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.R.810:


Stones Cry Out appreciates the President's call on this: http://www.stonescryout.org/archives...bout_time.html

Quote:

---

It's sad that it took Bush this long to veto anything, but it's a fine one to start on. Morally and financially, this was the right call.

---

RedState thanks the President and bashes Frist:
http://www.redstate.com/story/2006/7/19/12021/0417

Quote:

---

It is fitting that the President's first veto would erase a bill to increase spending. Somehow, many in the Republican Party who are opposed to increased spending have a blind spot on this morally divisive issue - perhaps some are merely opposed to increased spending on programs they dislike, and change their minds when it's something that social conservatives care about. We wish the President would veto more increased spending as a rule, especially in areas where the free market should determine investment - as in this controversial circumstance - but it is a good start.

---

I have to say that I agree with the President on this. I think it's really easy for folks to say, "look at all that embryonic stem cells could do if only the evil Mr. Bush would give us money to do it!" Well, if the private sector hasn't deemed ESC research valuable enough to support without government funding, isn't that a sign that maybe it's not worth funding? Why subsidize something that the free market isn't supporting, especially when it's such an ethical controversy? ESC research isn't illegal, as many on the pro side like to imply. It seems not at all unreasonable to me to say that American citizens, many of whom have serious reservations about this kind of research, shouldn't have to pay for it with their tax dollars. I disagree, however, with Stones Cry Out and RedState that the timing of this veto is somehow fitting or good. Instead, I think it sheds an unfortunate light on Bush's principled stand that this is the FIRST spending he has vetoed. President Bush cares about the culture of life, which is why he is vetoing this bill. That is a great reason. He also, ostensibly, cares about limiting the growth of government. Both are principled stands and worthy causes. But he has never, ever vetoed a spending bill until now. Wouldn't it make it a lot harder for the Dems to bring out the afflicted-with-various-diseases (who carry a whole bunch of moral authority with the public whether we think they necessarily should or not) and to accuse Bush of heartlessness and playing to the base if he had simply shown the same determination to veto other kinds of spending before now? I think it's unfortunate, both for his stand on stem-cell research, and for the federal budget that he didn't. Maybe he will start now. After all, that wasn't so hard, and it seems it will work.

I see the whole thing as moot. If you don't agree that tax dolars should be spent on it then fine it's your tax dollars at work. Even if the was a "holy grail" in stem cell research I don't think (As a society) we're ready for it. Plus even if something was to become of it the French would probably pioneer the reasearch and we'd be left on the side lines.

Quote:

---

Well, if the private sector hasn't deemed ESC research valuable enough to support without government funding, isn't that a sign that maybe it's not worth funding? Why subsidize something that the free market isn't supporting, especially when it's such an ethical controversy? ESC research isn't illegal, as many on the pro side like to imply

---

Me and my sisters were discussing this yesterday. If all those movie stars are so gung ho on stem cell research then why aren't they donating their millions to the cause? And as for the rest of the private sector, now why would they throw good money after bad?

I stated in the other thread in V/W that I actually believe that the push for embryotic stem cell research is more for the purpose of "legally" researching cloning than with curing disease.

Quote:

---

I just cannot agree with embryotic stem cell research; it leaves too much room for unethical practices. Just like with cloning and euthanasia, who gets to play God? I feel for the people with the diseases that medical science is searching for a cure, but there has to be a better way than by taking a life to save another.

I know a lot of people have no problem with this, but, these are the same people that do not have a problem with abortion. These embryos are living beings. What makes their life less important than another?

---

I totally agree with you. It's all unethical. And I do not believe that the majority of americans disagree with Bush. Obviously, their poll was based on only those who took it.

Cardin uses Fox in Steele, Bush attack ad

Following his appearance in an advertisement for Missouri Democratic Senate candidate Claire McCaskill, Canadian-born actor Michael J. Fox vouches for another Democratic Senate hopeful in Maryland. Congressman Ben Cardin is using Fox in a similiar ad, where the actor, suffering from Parkisan’s disease, is seen gyrating while he tries to persuade voters not to vote for Republican candidate Michael Steele.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9WB_PXjTBo


UPDATE: Michael Steele’s campaign has exposed Cardin’s vote against stem cell research: http://www.steeleformaryland.com/SET...iticalGain.htm

TEMPLE HILLS, MD – Today, Michael Steele released the following statement setting the record straight on stem cell research:

Quote:

---

Michael Steele said, “There is only one candidate in this race who voted against stem cell research and it’s Congressman Ben Cardin. Ben Cardin had a chance to support stem cell research that would not destroy human embryos, and he voted against it – not because of his beliefs on the issue, but as a transparent political stunt. Both Senators Barbara Mikulski and Paul Sarbanes voted for this legislation. Ben Cardin wanted to politicize the issue instead of getting something done, so he voted against it. Marylanders deserve better than Congressman Cardin’s continued Washington double-talk, mistruths and sheer political gamesmanship on an issue as important as stem cell research.”

On September 6, 2006, the Frederick News Post reported: “[Cardin] opposes suggestions that stem cell research is acceptable if the embryo isn’t destroyed. (Liam Farrell, “Pursuing Change,” Frederick News Post, September 2, 2006)
Michael Steele added, “I am an enthusiastic supporter of cord blood, adult stem cell and embryonic stem cell research that does not destroy the embryo, and I fully support expanding innovations in technology that make it possible to treat and prevent disease without the willful destruction of human embryos.”

---

I saw that ad and I've seen interviews with M.J. Fox recently and I had the impression that either he has got worse real fast or someone didn't take thier meds before the commercial was shot. Maybe it made for a more sympathetic commercial ...... I don't know. Doesn't change my mind though. I don't think the govt. should increase the funding.

Limbaugh mocks Michael J. Fox political ad
Conservative talk show host accuses actor of faking Parkinson's disease

Updated: 1 hour, 11 minutes ago
Possibly worse than making fun of someone's disability is saying that it's imaginary. That is not to mock someone's body, but to challenge a person's guts, integrity, sanity.

To Rush Limbaugh on Monday, Michael J. Fox looked like a faker. The actor, who suffers from Parkinson's disease, has done a series of political ads supporting candidates who favor stem cell research, including Maryland Democrat Ben Cardin, who is running against Republican Michael Steele for the Senate seat being vacated by Paul Sarbanes.

"He is exaggerating the effects of the disease," Limbaugh told listeners. "He's moving all around and shaking and it's purely an act. . . . This is really shameless of Michael J. Fox. Either he didn't take his medication or he's acting."

Limbaugh, whose syndicated radio program has a weekly audience of about 10 million, was reacting to Fox's appearance in another one of the spots, for Missouri Democrat Claire McCaskill, running against Republican Sen. James M. Talent.

But the Cardin ad is similar. It is hard to watch, unless, for some reason, you don't believe it. As he speaks, Fox's restless torso weaves and writhes in a private dance. His head bobs from side to side, almost leaving the video frame.

"This is the only time I've ever seen Michael J. Fox portray any of the symptoms of the disease he has," Limbaugh said. "He can barely control himself."

'A shameless statement'
Later Monday, still on the air, Limbaugh would apologize, but reaction to his statements from Parkinson's experts and Fox's supporters was swift and angry.

"It's a shameless statement," John Rogers said yesterday. Rogers, Fox's political adviser, who also serves on the board of the Parkinson's Action Network, added: "It's insulting. It's appallingly sad, at best."

"Anyone who knows the disease well would regard his movement as classic severe Parkinson's disease," said Elaine Richman, a neuroscientist in Baltimore who co-wrote "Parkinson's Disease and the Family." "Any other interpretation is misinformed."

Fox was campaigning yesterday for Tammy Duckworth, a congressional candidate, outside Chicago, when he alluded to Limbaugh's remarks. "It's ironic, given some of the things that have been said in the last couple of days, that my pills are working really well right now," he said, according to a report on the CBS2 Web site.

After his apology, Limbaugh shifted his ground and renewed his attack on Fox.

"Now people are telling me they have seen Michael J. Fox in interviews and he does appear the same way in the interviews as he does in this commercial," Limbaugh said, according to a transcript on his Web site. "All right then, I stand corrected. . . . 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."

Then Limbaugh pivoted to a different critique: "Michael J. Fox is allowing his illness to be exploited and in the process is shilling for a Democratic politician."

'Hope to millions of Americans'
Limbaugh's shock at Fox's appearance is a measure of the disease's devastation, advocates say. Contrary to the charge that Fox might not take his medicine to enhance his symptoms, the medicine produces some of the uncontrolled body movements.

"Stem cell research offers hope to millions of Americans with diseases like diabetes, Alzheimer's and Parkinson's," Fox says in the Cardin ad. "But George Bush and Michael Steele would put limits on the most promising stem cell research."

Fox has appeared in ABC's "Boston Legal" this season. In his scenes, taped over the summer, Fox does not shake or loll his head as he does in the Cardin commercial, but does appear to be restraining himself, appearing almost rigid at times.

A source with direct knowledge of Fox's illness who viewed the Cardin ad said Fox is not acting to exaggerate the effects of the disease. The source said Fox's scenes in "Boston Legal" had to be taped around his illness, as he worked to control the tremors associated with Parkinson's for limited periods of time.

Staff writer Frank Ahrens contributed to this report.

© 2006 The Washington Post Company

:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

Actors, athletes to be in stem-cell ad
By JIM SALTER, Associated Press Writer
Wed Oct 25, 12:33 PM ET

ST. LOUIS - Days after actor Michael J. Fox appeared in a TV ad urging Missouri voters to support stem cell research, opponents will unveil their own commercial during the World Series Wednesday night.

The Cardinals' starting pitcher for Game 4, Jeff Suppan, is among several celebrities who appear in the minute-long ad. Others include Arizona Cardinals quarterback Kurt Warner, Kansas City Royals player Mike Sweeney and two actors — Patricia Heaton of TV's "Everybody Loves Raymond" and Jim Caviezel, who portrayed Jesus in "The Passion of the Christ."

"Amendment 2 claims it bans human cloning, but in the 2,000 words you don't read, it makes cloning a constitutional right," Suppan says in the commercial. "Don't be deceived."

Amendment 2 would provide constitutional protections for embryonic stem cell research in Missouri. The 30-second spot featuring Fox, 45, who sways uncontrollably in the ad due to his Parkinson's disease, is actually a commercial for Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Claire McCaskill.

But the Senate race and stem cell issue are intertwined — McCaskill's Republican opponent, Sen. Jim Talent, opposes the stem cell measure.

Fox also has lent his celebrity to Democrats Rep. Benjamin L. Cardin, running for the Senate in Maryland, and Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle, who is seeking re-election. Both politicians also back stem cell research.

"They say all politics is local, but it's not always the case," Fox says in the ad that began airing Saturday during Game 1 of the World Series. "What you do in Missouri matters to millions of Americans — Americans like me."

The Fox ad has triggered a backlash, with some criticizing it as exploitive. Conservative radio commentator Rush Limbaugh claimed Fox was "either off his medication or acting," though he later apologized.

Dr. John Boockvar, a neurosurgeon and assistant professor at Weill Cornell Medical Center at New York's Presbyterian Hospital, called Limbaugh's claim "ludicrous." Boockvar said those with Parkinson's have "on" and "off" spells.

"If there is one single disease that has the highest potential for benefit from stem cell research," Boockvar said Tuesday, "it's Parkinson's."

The Missouri ad opposing Amendment 2 was finished Tuesday and was immediately available on the Internet. Missourians Against Human Cloning spokeswoman Cathy Ruse said the ad was already in the works, "but we sped up production after the Michael J. Fox ad came out.

"That ad claims opponents want to criminalize research and prevent the expansion of stem cell research. Those claims are just false and misleading," Ruse said. "Our gripe with Amendment 2 is it creates a right to do human cloning and it creates the right to human egg trafficking for cloning research."

Connie Farrow, a spokeswoman for Missouri Coalition for Lifesaving Cures, a supporter of the amendment, called the ad "a pathetic attempt to distort the facts and mislead voters."

"To believe the claims made in their ad you'd have to believe that over 100 nonprofit patient and medical organizations, including the Missouri State Medical Association, the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation and the Muscular Dystrophy Association, just to name a few, are conspiring to mislead voters," Farrow said. "And that defies commonsense."

Celebrities have a long history of supporting political candidates. But there's no question that Fox, who campaigned John Kerry in the 2004 presidential race, is uniquely suited as a spokesman for stem cell research.

Fox, who starred on TV's "Family Ties" and "Spin City" plus the "Back to the Future" films, shakes and rocks as he directly addresses the camera, the effects of his disease clearly apparent.

"The reason that he's powerful is that he's comparatively young," said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director for the University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg Public Policy Center. "As a result, a lot of people in that age range can look at him and say, `If that can happen to him, it can happen to me.'"

Jamieson noted that the stem cell issue has the potential to be an advantage to Democrats in the November elections since polls have shown the majority of Americans favor some form of stem cell research. Critics say it requires the destruction of a human embryo.

The risk, Jamieson added, is that the ads could appear as using Fox's hopes for a cure for political gain, as some claimed was the case when the paralyzed actor Christopher Reeve lobbied for stem cell research before his death in 2004.

Parkinson's disease is a chronic, progressive disorder of the central nervous system that leaves patients increasingly unable to control their movements.

Fox was diagnosed with Parkinson's in 1991 and revealed his condition publicly in 1998. In 2000, he quit full-time acting because of his symptoms and founded the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research, which has raised millions of dollars.

He has since acted sporadically in smaller roles, such as in a several-episode guest appearance earlier this year on ABC's "Boston Legal," playing a business tycoon with cancer.

For that role and others, Fox generally has sought to control his movements, though his illness was evident. He told The Associated Press in January that one long scene was physically taxing and that because of Parkinson's disease, he "can't show up with a game plan."

___

On the Net:

http://www.michaeljfox.org/

Parkinson's Disease Foundation: http://www.pdf.org/

Missouri Coalition for Lifesaving Cures: http://www.missouricures.com

Missouri Right to Life: http://www.missourilife.org

___

AP entertainment writer Jake Coyle in New York contributed to this story.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061025/...ampaign_ads_24

Actors, athletes to be in stem-cell ad
By JIM SALTER, Associated Press Writer
Wed Oct 25, 12:33 PM ET

ST. LOUIS - Days after actor Michael J. Fox appeared in a TV ad urging Missouri voters to support stem cell research, opponents will unveil their own commercial during the World Series Wednesday night.

The Cardinals' starting pitcher for Game 4, Jeff Suppan, is among several celebrities who appear in the minute-long ad. Others include Arizona Cardinals quarterback Kurt Warner, Kansas City Royals player Mike Sweeney and two actors — Patricia Heaton of TV's "Everybody Loves Raymond" and Jim Caviezel, who portrayed Jesus in "The Passion of the Christ."

"Amendment 2 claims it bans human cloning, but in the 2,000 words you don't read, it makes cloning a constitutional right," Suppan says in the commercial. "Don't be deceived."

Amendment 2 would provide constitutional protections for embryonic stem cell research in Missouri. The 30-second spot featuring Fox, 45, who sways uncontrollably in the ad due to his Parkinson's disease, is actually a commercial for Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Claire McCaskill.

But the Senate race and stem cell issue are intertwined — McCaskill's Republican opponent, Sen. Jim Talent, opposes the stem cell measure.

Fox also has lent his celebrity to Democrats Rep. Benjamin L. Cardin, running for the Senate in Maryland, and Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle, who is seeking re-election. Both politicians also back stem cell research.

"They say all politics is local, but it's not always the case," Fox says in the ad that began airing Saturday during Game 1 of the World Series. "What you do in Missouri matters to millions of Americans — Americans like me."

The Fox ad has triggered a backlash, with some criticizing it as exploitive. Conservative radio commentator Rush Limbaugh claimed Fox was "either off his medication or acting," though he later apologized.

Dr. John Boockvar, a neurosurgeon and assistant professor at Weill Cornell Medical Center at New York's Presbyterian Hospital, called Limbaugh's claim "ludicrous." Boockvar said those with Parkinson's have "on" and "off" spells.

"If there is one single disease that has the highest potential for benefit from stem cell research," Boockvar said Tuesday, "it's Parkinson's."

The Missouri ad opposing Amendment 2 was finished Tuesday and was immediately available on the Internet. Missourians Against Human Cloning spokeswoman Cathy Ruse said the ad was already in the works, "but we sped up production after the Michael J. Fox ad came out.

"That ad claims opponents want to criminalize research and prevent the expansion of stem cell research. Those claims are just false and misleading," Ruse said. "Our gripe with Amendment 2 is it creates a right to do human cloning and it creates the right to human egg trafficking for cloning research."

Connie Farrow, a spokeswoman for Missouri Coalition for Lifesaving Cures, a supporter of the amendment, called the ad "a pathetic attempt to distort the facts and mislead voters."

"To believe the claims made in their ad you'd have to believe that over 100 nonprofit patient and medical organizations, including the Missouri State Medical Association, the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation and the Muscular Dystrophy Association, just to name a few, are conspiring to mislead voters," Farrow said. "And that defies commonsense."

Celebrities have a long history of supporting political candidates. But there's no question that Fox, who campaigned John Kerry in the 2004 presidential race, is uniquely suited as a spokesman for stem cell research.

Fox, who starred on TV's "Family Ties" and "Spin City" plus the "Back to the Future" films, shakes and rocks as he directly addresses the camera, the effects of his disease clearly apparent.

"The reason that he's powerful is that he's comparatively young," said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director for the University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg Public Policy Center. "As a result, a lot of people in that age range can look at him and say, `If that can happen to him, it can happen to me.'"

Jamieson noted that the stem cell issue has the potential to be an advantage to Democrats in the November elections since polls have shown the majority of Americans favor some form of stem cell research. Critics say it requires the destruction of a human embryo.

The risk, Jamieson added, is that the ads could appear as using Fox's hopes for a cure for political gain, as some claimed was the case when the paralyzed actor Christopher Reeve lobbied for stem cell research before his death in 2004.

Parkinson's disease is a chronic, progressive disorder of the central nervous system that leaves patients increasingly unable to control their movements.

Fox was diagnosed with Parkinson's in 1991 and revealed his condition publicly in 1998. In 2000, he quit full-time acting because of his symptoms and founded the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research, which has raised millions of dollars.

He has since acted sporadically in smaller roles, such as in a several-episode guest appearance earlier this year on ABC's "Boston Legal," playing a business tycoon with cancer.

For that role and others, Fox generally has sought to control his movements, though his illness was evident. He told The Associated Press in January that one long scene was physically taxing and that because of Parkinson's disease, he "can't show up with a game plan."

___

On the Net:

http://www.michaeljfox.org/

Parkinson's Disease Foundation: http://www.pdf.org/

Missouri Coalition for Lifesaving Cures: http://www.missouricures.com

Missouri Right to Life: http://www.missourilife.org

___

AP entertainment writer Jake Coyle in New York contributed to this story.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061025/...ampaign_ads_24

Actors, athletes to be in stem-cell ad
By JIM SALTER, Associated Press Writer
Wed Oct 25, 12:33 PM ET

ST. LOUIS - Days after actor Michael J. Fox appeared in a TV ad urging Missouri voters to support stem cell research, opponents will unveil their own commercial during the World Series Wednesday night.

The Cardinals' starting pitcher for Game 4, Jeff Suppan, is among several celebrities who appear in the minute-long ad. Others include Arizona Cardinals quarterback Kurt Warner, Kansas City Royals player Mike Sweeney and two actors — Patricia Heaton of TV's "Everybody Loves Raymond" and Jim Caviezel, who portrayed Jesus in "The Passion of the Christ."

"Amendment 2 claims it bans human cloning, but in the 2,000 words you don't read, it makes cloning a constitutional right," Suppan says in the commercial. "Don't be deceived."

Amendment 2 would provide constitutional protections for embryonic stem cell research in Missouri. The 30-second spot featuring Fox, 45, who sways uncontrollably in the ad due to his Parkinson's disease, is actually a commercial for Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Claire McCaskill.

But the Senate race and stem cell issue are intertwined — McCaskill's Republican opponent, Sen. Jim Talent, opposes the stem cell measure.

Fox also has lent his celebrity to Democrats Rep. Benjamin L. Cardin, running for the Senate in Maryland, and Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle, who is seeking re-election. Both politicians also back stem cell research.

"They say all politics is local, but it's not always the case," Fox says in the ad that began airing Saturday during Game 1 of the World Series. "What you do in Missouri matters to millions of Americans — Americans like me."

The Fox ad has triggered a backlash, with some criticizing it as exploitive. Conservative radio commentator Rush Limbaugh claimed Fox was "either off his medication or acting," though he later apologized.

Dr. John Boockvar, a neurosurgeon and assistant professor at Weill Cornell Medical Center at New York's Presbyterian Hospital, called Limbaugh's claim "ludicrous." Boockvar said those with Parkinson's have "on" and "off" spells.

"If there is one single disease that has the highest potential for benefit from stem cell research," Boockvar said Tuesday, "it's Parkinson's."

The Missouri ad opposing Amendment 2 was finished Tuesday and was immediately available on the Internet. Missourians Against Human Cloning spokeswoman Cathy Ruse said the ad was already in the works, "but we sped up production after the Michael J. Fox ad came out.

"That ad claims opponents want to criminalize research and prevent the expansion of stem cell research. Those claims are just false and misleading," Ruse said. "Our gripe with Amendment 2 is it creates a right to do human cloning and it creates the right to human egg trafficking for cloning research."

Connie Farrow, a spokeswoman for Missouri Coalition for Lifesaving Cures, a supporter of the amendment, called the ad "a pathetic attempt to distort the facts and mislead voters."

"To believe the claims made in their ad you'd have to believe that over 100 nonprofit patient and medical organizations, including the Missouri State Medical Association, the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation and the Muscular Dystrophy Association, just to name a few, are conspiring to mislead voters," Farrow said. "And that defies commonsense."

Celebrities have a long history of supporting political candidates. But there's no question that Fox, who campaigned John Kerry in the 2004 presidential race, is uniquely suited as a spokesman for stem cell research.

Fox, who starred on TV's "Family Ties" and "Spin City" plus the "Back to the Future" films, shakes and rocks as he directly addresses the camera, the effects of his disease clearly apparent.

"The reason that he's powerful is that he's comparatively young," said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director for the University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg Public Policy Center. "As a result, a lot of people in that age range can look at him and say, `If that can happen to him, it can happen to me.'"

Jamieson noted that the stem cell issue has the potential to be an advantage to Democrats in the November elections since polls have shown the majority of Americans favor some form of stem cell research. Critics say it requires the destruction of a human embryo.

The risk, Jamieson added, is that the ads could appear as using Fox's hopes for a cure for political gain, as some claimed was the case when the paralyzed actor Christopher Reeve lobbied for stem cell research before his death in 2004.

Parkinson's disease is a chronic, progressive disorder of the central nervous system that leaves patients increasingly unable to control their movements.

Fox was diagnosed with Parkinson's in 1991 and revealed his condition publicly in 1998. In 2000, he quit full-time acting because of his symptoms and founded the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research, which has raised millions of dollars.

He has since acted sporadically in smaller roles, such as in a several-episode guest appearance earlier this year on ABC's "Boston Legal," playing a business tycoon with cancer.

For that role and others, Fox generally has sought to control his movements, though his illness was evident. He told The Associated Press in January that one long scene was physically taxing and that because of Parkinson's disease, he "can't show up with a game plan."

___

On the Net:

http://www.michaeljfox.org/

Parkinson's Disease Foundation: http://www.pdf.org/

Missouri Coalition for Lifesaving Cures: http://www.missouricures.com

Missouri Right to Life: http://www.missourilife.org

___

AP entertainment writer Jake Coyle in New York contributed to this story.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061025/...ampaign_ads_24

Actors, athletes to be in stem-cell ad
By JIM SALTER, Associated Press Writer
Wed Oct 25, 12:33 PM ET

ST. LOUIS - Days after actor Michael J. Fox appeared in a TV ad urging Missouri voters to support stem cell research, opponents will unveil their own commercial during the World Series Wednesday night.

The Cardinals' starting pitcher for Game 4, Jeff Suppan, is among several celebrities who appear in the minute-long ad. Others include Arizona Cardinals quarterback Kurt Warner, Kansas City Royals player Mike Sweeney and two actors — Patricia Heaton of TV's "Everybody Loves Raymond" and Jim Caviezel, who portrayed Jesus in "The Passion of the Christ."

"Amendment 2 claims it bans human cloning, but in the 2,000 words you don't read, it makes cloning a constitutional right," Suppan says in the commercial. "Don't be deceived."

Amendment 2 would provide constitutional protections for embryonic stem cell research in Missouri. The 30-second spot featuring Fox, 45, who sways uncontrollably in the ad due to his Parkinson's disease, is actually a commercial for Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Claire McCaskill.

But the Senate race and stem cell issue are intertwined — McCaskill's Republican opponent, Sen. Jim Talent, opposes the stem cell measure.

Fox also has lent his celebrity to Democrats Rep. Benjamin L. Cardin, running for the Senate in Maryland, and Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle, who is seeking re-election. Both politicians also back stem cell research.

"They say all politics is local, but it's not always the case," Fox says in the ad that began airing Saturday during Game 1 of the World Series. "What you do in Missouri matters to millions of Americans — Americans like me."

The Fox ad has triggered a backlash, with some criticizing it as exploitive. Conservative radio commentator Rush Limbaugh claimed Fox was "either off his medication or acting," though he later apologized.

Dr. John Boockvar, a neurosurgeon and assistant professor at Weill Cornell Medical Center at New York's Presbyterian Hospital, called Limbaugh's claim "ludicrous." Boockvar said those with Parkinson's have "on" and "off" spells.

"If there is one single disease that has the highest potential for benefit from stem cell research," Boockvar said Tuesday, "it's Parkinson's."

The Missouri ad opposing Amendment 2 was finished Tuesday and was immediately available on the Internet. Missourians Against Human Cloning spokeswoman Cathy Ruse said the ad was already in the works, "but we sped up production after the Michael J. Fox ad came out.

"That ad claims opponents want to criminalize research and prevent the expansion of stem cell research. Those claims are just false and misleading," Ruse said. "Our gripe with Amendment 2 is it creates a right to do human cloning and it creates the right to human egg trafficking for cloning research."

Connie Farrow, a spokeswoman for Missouri Coalition for Lifesaving Cures, a supporter of the amendment, called the ad "a pathetic attempt to distort the facts and mislead voters."

"To believe the claims made in their ad you'd have to believe that over 100 nonprofit patient and medical organizations, including the Missouri State Medical Association, the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation and the Muscular Dystrophy Association, just to name a few, are conspiring to mislead voters," Farrow said. "And that defies commonsense."

Celebrities have a long history of supporting political candidates. But there's no question that Fox, who campaigned John Kerry in the 2004 presidential race, is uniquely suited as a spokesman for stem cell research.

Fox, who starred on TV's "Family Ties" and "Spin City" plus the "Back to the Future" films, shakes and rocks as he directly addresses the camera, the effects of his disease clearly apparent.

"The reason that he's powerful is that he's comparatively young," said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director for the University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg Public Policy Center. "As a result, a lot of people in that age range can look at him and say, `If that can happen to him, it can happen to me.'"

Jamieson noted that the stem cell issue has the potential to be an advantage to Democrats in the November elections since polls have shown the majority of Americans favor some form of stem cell research. Critics say it requires the destruction of a human embryo.

The risk, Jamieson added, is that the ads could appear as using Fox's hopes for a cure for political gain, as some claimed was the case when the paralyzed actor Christopher Reeve lobbied for stem cell research before his death in 2004.

Parkinson's disease is a chronic, progressive disorder of the central nervous system that leaves patients increasingly unable to control their movements.

Fox was diagnosed with Parkinson's in 1991 and revealed his condition publicly in 1998. In 2000, he quit full-time acting because of his symptoms and founded the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research, which has raised millions of dollars.

He has since acted sporadically in smaller roles, such as in a several-episode guest appearance earlier this year on ABC's "Boston Legal," playing a business tycoon with cancer.

For that role and others, Fox generally has sought to control his movements, though his illness was evident. He told The Associated Press in January that one long scene was physically taxing and that because of Parkinson's disease, he "can't show up with a game plan."

___

On the Net:

http://www.michaeljfox.org/

Parkinson's Disease Foundation: http://www.pdf.org/

Missouri Coalition for Lifesaving Cures: http://www.missouricures.com

Missouri Right to Life: http://www.missourilife.org

___

AP entertainment writer Jake Coyle in New York contributed to this story.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061025/...ampaign_ads_24

link

Quote:

---

The Unconscionable Claims of Michael J. Fox
October 25th, 2006

The popular and appealing actor Michael J. Fox has taken to the airwaves in Senate battleground states Missouri, Maryland, and New Jersey with a highly misleading ad urging defeat of Republican Senatorial candidates opposing the use of taxpayer dollars to fund new embryonic stem cell line research. He states,

“Stem cell research offers hope to millions of Americans with diseases like diabetes, Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s…. But George Bush and Michael Steele would put limits on the most promising stem cell research.”

Mr. Fox and his ads’ sponsors are guilty of conflating embryonic stem cell research, which the GOP candidates and many Americans oppose for destroying a human life in the name of curing other people’s diseases, with stem cell research in general, which includes adult stem cell research and umbilical cord blood stem cell research.

The only limits in question are on federal funding of new embryonic stem cell lines, requiring the sacrifice of new embryos. Private and state-funded research (California voters are spending six billion dollars borrowing money to fund this) is ongoing. The implicit claim that research based on new embryos is “the most promising” is absurd, completely unsupported by the scientific literature, and an insult to voters, based as it is on the assumption that they are incapable of understanding the issue. Too stupid to tell the difference, is the elitist assumption underlying this campaign.

Flim-flam is a charitable description. Why would federally-funded research be more promising than state- and privately-funded research? And on what possible basis can the claim be made that embryonic stem cell research is more promising than adult stem cell research?

The plain fact is that embryonic stem cell research is proving to be a bust. There are currently 72 therapies showing human benefits using adult stem cells and zero using embryonic stem cells. Scientifically-minded readers can review this medical journal article on the status of adult stem cell research. Adult stem cell therapies are already being advertised and promoted while no such treatments are even remotely in prospect for embryonic stem cell research.

---

CBS Gives Fox Platform to React to Limbaugh's 'Ugly' Criticism,
Skips Fox's Distortions
Brent Baker
October 26, 2006

http://newsbusters.org/taxonomy/term/84

Ignoring the inaccuracies in Michael J. Fox's TV ads against some Republican Senate candidates, CBS Evening News anchor Katie Couric gave him a lengthy forum -- more than eight minutes -- to react to Rush Limbaugh's suggestion his swaying in the ads was exaggerated beyond the real impact of Parkinson's disease and to advocate for federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. With video of Fox behind her, Couric portrayed Limbaugh as the aggressor: “The battle over embryonic stem cell research turns ugly, and he is a target.”

Though Fox's ads denounce Republicans and insidiously suggest they are against curing his disease, Couric never challenged Fox on the false charges he made in the ads which injected Fox into partisan politics. She never even played those portions, instead only showed this positive line from one of the ads: "In Missouri, you can elect Claire McCaskill, who shares my hope for cures." In that ad against Missouri Republican Senator Jim Talent, Fox distorted Talent's opposition to cloning into how "Talent even wanted to criminalize the science that gives us the chance for hope."

In his ad for Maryland Democrat Ben Cardin, Fox alleged that Republican candidate Michael Steele “would put limits on the most promising stem cell research,” meaning embryonic. But embryonic has not shown promise and there's lots of research money going into it.

Couric noted, “in the spirit of full disclosure,” that “my dad has Parkinson's disease” and that “in the past I've made contributions for Parkinson's research through Michael J. Fox's foundation." But, she didn't note if she will give equal time soon to someone with a contrary view to Fox's on the desirability of federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.

Misleading measure may launch U.S. cloning
By Robert D. Novak
Townhall.com

A new video available on YouTube marks a late attempt by pro-life forces to avert serious defeat in Missouri Nov. 7, with national implications. Cathy Ruse, speaking for
Missourians Against Human Cloning, declares: "Amendment 2 is a fraud. It is an attempt to trick Missourians into approving -- in their Constitution -- human cloning, the right of biotech firms to do human cloning in Missouri -- something Missourians oppose by an overwhelming majority." But Amendment 2 is identified for many Missouri voters by the language at the beginning of the five-page, 2,000-word
ballot initiative: "No person may clone or attempt to clone a human being." That explains why polls have shown a substantial margin of support for the constitutional amendment, also backed by key Republican politicians and business interests. It seems to offer the best of all worlds: government support of stem cell research without fear of cloning.

The problem is that the proposal so narrowly defines cloning as to open the door in Missouri to any cloning procedure that takes place outside the womb. If this is approved by a state that historically is a barometer of national trends and is considered a pro-life stronghold, it will be a national model for breaking popular resistance to what the scientists and biotech companies want.

A campaign costing an estimated $20 million has helped build a substantial lead for the amendment. A September poll by the Republican firm McLaughlin & Associates shows a 59 percent to 31 percent advantage. Democrats appear to have no doubt, favoring it 75 to 22, with only 3 percent undecided. But Republicans are split, 40 percent in support and 45 against, with 15 percent undecided.

Big Republican names -- former Sen. John Danforth, Gov. Matt Blunt and party contributor Sam Fox -- support the amendment. The $2 billion-endowed Stowers Institute in Kansas City, funded by GOP benefactors, spearheads the campaign.

That establishment Republican support for Amendment 2 has created a difficult situation for first-term GOP Sen. Jim Talent, engaged in a difficult re-election campaign. I reported Talent's "defection from the anti-cloning ranks" in February when he took his name off a Senate bill to ban cloning on grounds it might hamper acceptable scientific research.

Talent at that time was taking no position on Amendment 2, but he has since come out against it. In a recent debate with the Democratic Senate candidate, state Auditor Claire McCaskill, on NBC's "Meet the Press," Talent said the proposal "would create ... an unqualified constitutional right to clone the earliest stages of human life. " But he hastened to add he is not against stem cell research.

McCaskill sought to cast the debate in terms of whether the candidates are for or against the medical miracles that can be achieved through stem cell research. She proclaimed "I come down on the side of hope, hope of cures and supporting science." But she put this in the framework of the constitutional amendment that, she said, "strictly prohibits human cloning."

This confrontation on what is in the ballot proposition is enough to confuse voters. Amendment 2 bans only cloning that involves planting an embryo within the womb. It specifically prohibits government from interfering with somatic cell nuclear transfer, which involves replacing the nucleus of a human egg outside the womb -- the cloning procedure used to produce Dolly the sheep.

Unequivocally, the proposal tries to keep politicians from interfering with its approved cloning process: "[N]o state or local government body or official shall eliminate, reduce, deny or withhold any public funds provided or eligible to be provided to a person that lawfully conducts stem cell research or provides stem cell therapies and cures."

This language, contends the YouTube video, "provides biotech firms a blank check for taxpayer dollars to support unethical and unproven research that Missourians oppose."

If government-approved cloning can be sold to the barometer pro-life state of Missouri, it will show up next in other states with major research facilities.

Hollywood hatred

Don Murphy is the producer of Natural Born Killers, Apt Pupil, Double Dragon, and The Transformers movie. He was the former business partner of unhinged, trash-talking, blackface-endorsing left-wing blogger, Jane Hamsher.

These people can't express themselves without sinking into the gutter. Here's Murphy's response to pro-life actors Patricia Heaton and Jim Cavaziel, posted on his website message board (pardon the language): http://www.d13satellite.com/donmurph...threadid=15186

Quote:

---

Wimps or Pussies- You decide

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nguJQ_dRPXw&NR

Not only do these retards run an ad that is morally and logically unsound, and MOCK Michael J Fox for having a disease, they have set it so that comments must be approved by them. Anything they don't like, doesn't get approved. Pure lameness. Are they wimps or pussies?

This is a good opportunity to state that Patricia Heaton is a worthless *****. When Bryan Singer and I were doing APT PUPIL, we made the mistake of offering her the role of the mother. It was a small role, and her career was nothing at the time. She didn't want to do it. People pass all the time, so fine. She was offended by the role. Okay, fine, **** you, be offended *****. But no - the worthless ***** wrote a letter to Sherry Lansing the head of the studio complaining that the film was evil and would destroy children's minds. She was ignored and mocked, of course, but can you believe this worthless human **** would have liked to STOP a movie because it offended her lame ***** sensibilities?

I'd vote yes for experimenting on Patricia Heaton cells.

As for Cavaziel, have you seen him in anything lately? Thought so.

---

The name of Murphy's production company, appropriately enough, is Angry Films.

Cloning? What is this Star Wars?

JKat posted: "Don't you mean a potential life? Every embryo does not develop into a human baby and every one that does develop into a baby doesn't develop into a healthy one that can sustain life."
If you use this logic then an unhealthy embryo could be used in treatments. I believe that it is at six week gestation that a fetus becomes either a girl or boy. Now how old are the embryos that science wants? Before final genetic makeup has completed its transformation? I am hearing reports that people treated with stem cells (didn't mention which ones) are showing signs of brain cancer. I believe that there is alot more to be explored before we start making lives to save lives. I believe once science finds out about the increase in brain cancer, I believe it was in Alzheimer patients, they might find a common virus or chemical disruption.