GUESS WHAT IS THE OCTOBER SURPRISE OF '06??

JWC:

It is interesting that you present the issue in this way. In your view it was Rush Limbaugh who came out with the "surprise".

In truth it was FOX who was placed in key election battles as an OPERATIVE for the Democrats. HE MISREPRESENTED the positions of several of the candidates - ALL OF THEM "JUST HAPPENED" to be Republicans.

Where as Fox said the Missouri GOP candidate was OPPOSED TO STEM CELL RESEARCH in truth the candidate's position is that he SUPPORTS Stem Cell Research but he is OPPOSED to destroying fetuses/embryos in the process of research.

quote:

Talent's campaign called the ad a false attack. "Senator Talent supports medical research including stem cell research that doesn't involve cloning or destroying a human embryo," said Talent spokesman Rich Chrismer.

In Maryland: Steele, Maryland's lieutenant governor, supports research on adult stem cells and umbilical cord blood, but not research that requires destroying an embryo to secure stem cells. Fox supports his opponent, against claiming that Steele is OPPOSED to stem cell research.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/realclearpolitics/20061025/cm_r...cionable_claims_of_m


THE TRUTH IS JWC the "October surprise" is to march out a well known actor at the last minute and have him to shake in front of the camera as he OPENLY SUPPORTS the Democrats in each respective campaign. If someone dares to attack him for doing so then they are called MEAN SPIRITED for attacking a "victim" as if he has innocent motivations.

In a state like Maryland the Black community there in particular should focus more on the fact that there is a virtual pandemic of AIDS in Baltimore and DC rather than allowing the Democrats to come in and sweep the things that are most affecting their community off of the table and get you to focus on THEIR agenda.

And you claim not to watch FoxNews Okay ... It's purely objective analysis and a pure coincidence that your argument and that of Limbaugh and Hannity are the exact same.

But anyway do you mean this Jim Talent:

quote:

At first, Mr. Talent chose to steer clear of the issue, hesitating to take a position on the ballot measure before relenting under pressure from Christian conservatives. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/15/us/politics/15stem.ht...rtner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Or, this Jim Talent:

quote:

The Senate takes up a proposal to expand stem-cell research this week; it's a hot issue for the Christian right, so conservative opponents will be jockeying for attention. But one opponent doesn't want the spotlight: Jim Talent, the Missouri Republican whose opposition to embryonic stem-cell research could cost him his Senate seat. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13880166/site/newsweek/

Or, the Jim Talent whose website until recently promised to fight against any funding for Stem Cell Research; but as of today, the issue is curiously missing from the site. http://talent.senate.gov/Issues/showissues.cfm?TopicID=6

I suspect that his position is closer to that stated in the articles, based on his pre-campaign massaged statements and votes, than the position articulated by Talent's campaign spokesman; but curiously not the candidate himself

quote:

Fox supports his opponent, against claiming that Steele is OPPOSED to stem cell research.

So MJ Fox misrepresented Steele's position because he supports Steele's opponent [who supports stem cell research] and the opponent said that Steele doesn't support the research. Do I have that right?

quote:

THE TRUTH IS JWC the "October surprise" is to march out a well known actor at the last minute and have him to shake in front of the camera as he OPENLY SUPPORTS the Democrats in each respective campaign.

Don't you have that just a little bit partisanly twisted. MJ Fox is stumping for candidates that support stem cell research, that happen to be democrats. With your previous, "I'm not a Black Consultant; I'm a consultant, that just happens to be Black" comments, you should understand the distinction.

Kweli:

Do you ever notice that you call me on "the similarity of my arguments" RATHER THAN DISPROVING my arguments.

You see Dell Gines - this is the consequence of Identity based Politics. As a Black man I am expected to view the position of "The Enemy" and then take the opposing position.

What in my previous post has been DISPROVEN as a lie? I am expected to take the opposite position of Limbaugh and in support of Fox.

THE TRUTH IS JWC the "October surprise" is to march out a well known actor at the last minute and have him to shake in front of the camera as he OPENLY SUPPORTS the Democrats in each respective campaign.---Constructive Feedack

'October Surprise' is the unexpected revelation of information, or an accusation that can, or can be expected to, turn the election.

Michael Fox's ad didn't do that.

Limbaugh's over-the-top, inappropriate reaction, that has persisted these now five whole days,..tow weeks before election day has, and...

It's still going on as of today Friday, October 28, 2006.

No candidate wants this kind of adverse publicity.

His phone must be jumping 'off the hook' with demands to 'FIX IT'....'FIX IT'!!!!!!

PEACE

Jim Chester

quote:

Limbaugh's over-the-top, inappropriate reaction, that has persisted these now five whole days,..tow weeks before election day has, and...

"Inappropriate Reaction"? Please explain?

Michael J. Fox CALLED UPON these specific DEMOCRATIC candidates who are embroiled in tight campaign battles. You can stay in your cave and believe that he was INNOCENT in his motivations but the evidence says otherwise.

Some folks then strike back and him and detail the LIES and MISREPRESENTATION that he has put forth in his ad and YOU say they are out of line?

It seems that YOU need to do some Introspection. You are for "National Ancestry" but you seem to be an agent for the Democrats in America.

DO YOU THINK THAT IT IS OF THE "AFRICAN CULTURE" TO HARVEST HUMAN EMBRYOS IN ORDER TO EXTRACT CELLS FROM THEM FOR RESEARCH?

"Inappropriate Reaction"? Please explain?---Constructive Feedback

Limbaugh's charge that Fox was wrong to intentially allow the public to see the effect on the disease on him without the mitigating effect of his prescription wss 'inappropriate'.

It seems that YOU need to do some Introspection. You are for "National Ancestry" but you seem to be an agent for the Democrats in America.---Constructive Feedback

It is curious that this would be your perception.

I don't see even a remote relationship.

PEACE

Jim Chester

quote:

What in my previous post has been DISPROVEN as a lie?

Well ... Let's start with, you said:

quote:

Where as Fox said the Missouri GOP candidate was OPPOSED TO STEM CELL RESEARCH in truth the candidate's position is that he SUPPORTS Stem Cell Research but he is OPPOSED to destroying fetuses/embryos in the process of research.

And, I responded by showing that no where other than in Talent's post-campaign massaged message did Talent say anything other then he opposed stem cell research. And then, Talent didn't say it, his paid spin-meister,i.e, campaign spokesman did.

Then you said:

quote:

Fox supports his opponent, against claiming that Steele is OPPOSED to stem cell research.

And I responded by pointing out that MJ Fox did not mis-represent Steele's position; he merely supported Steele's prostem cell research opponent.

Then you said:

quote:

THE TRUTH IS JWC the "October surprise" is to march out a well known actor at the last minute and have him to shake in front of the camera as he OPENLY SUPPORTS the Democrats in each respective campaign.

And I pointed out that MJ Fox stumped for candidates that support stem cell research against their non or limited stem cell research opponents.

But first you stated [in another thread] that you have not watched FoxNews in more than a year. But then you stated:

quote:

the "October surprise" is to march out a well known actor at the last minute and have him to shake in front of the camera as he OPENLY SUPPORTS the Democrats in each respective campaign. If someone dares to attack him for doing so then they are called MEAN SPIRITED for attacking a "victim" as if he has innocent motivations.

To this I respond, it is awfully coincidental that FoxNew's talking heads, O'Reilly, Hannity and Limbaugh, all picked the somewhat unknow senator Talent to pooh pooh MJ Fox's ad. And oh yeah ... all three raised the "If someone dares to attack him for doing so then they are called MEAN SPIRITED for attacking a 'victim'" comment.

Coincidence? Okay.

You need to reread the transcripts of the Fox statements. He not only heralded the Democrat's position but in MO he said that the Republican was against EXPANDING Stem Cell Research.

I don't know about YOUR feelings but YES I do have problems with creating human embryos for the purposes of experimentation.

Maybe you have lost your humanity and spirituality in your quest to tow the Democratic line?

I can't count the number of times I have heard BLACK PEOPLE say "we are not like White folks"......"we are a spiritual people. Their ways are not our ways......Our ways are natural and respectful of what God has given us". When this THEORY is tested SOME OF YOU FAIL.

This thread was about Limbaugh, a nolo contendre, defendant in felon drug charge who is accusing another of inappropriate use of drugs.

The moratilty of stem cell research is another issue, of course...that is also serious.

If I had an ailment, or disease, that would likely to be benefited by stem-cell therapy, I would be all for stem-cell research.

Knowing that, where would be my humanity in denying that hope, and possibility to another?

That's my honest position...

On that issue.

RUSH IS STILL THE OCTOBER SURPRISE OF '06.

PEACE

Jim Chester

quote:

The moratilty of stem cell research is another issue, of course...that is also serious.

In India and other countries they have issues with poor people agreeing to sell their own body parts (or the parts of their children) to wealthier people in need of kidneys in particular.

Since your standard is "If I were in need of a cure I would do what ever it took" I can then extrapolate that the "exploitation" of the poor in this manner sits fine with you?

quote:

You need to reread the transcripts of the Fox statements. He not only heralded the Democrat's position but in MO he said that the Republican was against EXPANDING Stem Cell Research.

Okay?!? Are you just responding for the sake of responding? In Missouri, one candidate supports and has supported funding and expanding stem cell research, the other does not ... well ... did not until he recently massaged his campaign message through his campaign spokesman [though the candidate himself has not come and adopted the campaign rhetoric].

Fox supports the candidate that supports his interest and opposes the candidate that opposes his position. What's wrong with that?

quote:

Fox supports the candidate that supports his interest and opposes the candidate that opposes his position. What's wrong with that?

I have not a single problem with Fox entering into a campaign and putting forth his opinions. I told you (and you repeated seemingly without understanding) that he MISREPRESENTED the position of the opponent.

As my previous post detailed SELF INTEREST in an issue should not trump MORAL ISSUES involving the use of a human embryo for testing purposes as we can't pay a poor person for his kidney if a rich person is in need of one.

If you also read the subsequent debates - THERE HAS TO DATE BEEN NO PROOF THAT HUMAN STEM CELLS CAN IN FACT CURE WHAT THOSE WHO LOBBY FOR EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS CLAIM IS THE CASE.

Did you see the commercial put forth by many celebrities making this case and expressing caution about going down the path of destroying life "to save life"?