Video: The most shameless political ad you’ll ever see
posted at 12:33 am on November 4, 2006 by Allahpundit
Got this from Mary K, who says it all. The answer to Pumpkin’s question at the end of the clip is, he’s the guy elected by a majority of Missourians to make tough moral choices.
The clip was produced by Media Fund, a left-wing 527 with at least one other egregiously unfair ad to its credit. It’s headed by former Clinton aide Harold Ickes, which makes sense given that the racial diversity here is about the same as at one of Billy Jeff’s nutroots meet-and-greets.
Does the left really want to play this game, incidentally? I can think of another kind of ad involving what-ifs and children that would not redound to their political advantage.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Well, at least they didn’t talk about any saucy book passages Jim Talent has written. That would be unfair.
see-dubya on November 4, 2006 at 12:36 AM
What if watching ridiculous political ads from moonbat funding groups gives me a brain aneurysm and I die 14 seconds after I watch the next one? How is Mr. Talent going to help me then? Well?
SaidinUnleashed on November 4, 2006 at 12:39 AM
The hell with stem cell research, let’s find out how these people learned to see the future.
Alex K on November 4, 2006 at 12:42 AM
Repugnant, reprehensible, and ridiculous. (Can you tell I like the letter ‘R’?)
urbancenturion on November 4, 2006 at 12:44 AM
Geez..Who’s ever vote this ad actually changed should not be allowed to vote ( I know, I know..But I do believe in the test to vote). That was was at the least, the most propaganda meaning lies with emotional ties) I have seen yet…Can’t wait till Rush’s response…then the MSM response…Let the games begin!
lsutiger on November 4, 2006 at 12:46 AM
That was the worst thing I’ve ever seen. Why didn’t they just have the senator clubbing seals and pulling the plug on the terminally ill?
By the way, lady… He made that decision based on facts of the issue and that authority comes from the fact that we live in a representative republic and he was elected to make decisions on our behalf.
x95b10 on November 4, 2006 at 12:48 AM
Un-frigging-believable.
At least we now know that the Michael J. Fox ad didn’t work.
I pity the poor American electorate, including myself!
I think we have had just about enough from these Damn Democrats!
Jen the Neocon on November 4, 2006 at 12:51 AM
Both candidates are pompous, putrid, and perverted. (letter ‘P’ ftw!)
Screw em both… they deserve eachother.
As far as this ad goes, I’m glad to see it from the looney-left. It will stick in the craw of more people in this country than just Missourians.
SilverStar830 on November 4, 2006 at 12:53 AM
Next summer I’m working in my lab on the most up-to-date stem cell developments. I’ve already discovered how to reverse the spread of cancer, alzheimers and sickle cell–it’s all on my bulletin board ready for me to take home at the end of the night. Suddenly, I’ve found something greater than all the others–the cure for conservatism! I’ve isolated the cause of cellular degeneration that is conservative thought and I know how to stop it! Excitedly, I go into the next room to tell my colleague, who, incidentally, has just discovered a reusable clean source of energy. We’re both thrilled and as we’re leaving with all our discoveries, our lab explodes in a nuclear blast. Why, Democrats? WHY???
Alex K on November 4, 2006 at 12:54 AM
No Doubt. Aaaanyway, I noticed the youtube name for it has “jim talent version”, so is this a cookie cutter ad, like the ones that law offices use (the insert name here type)?
- The Cat
MirCat on November 4, 2006 at 1:05 AM
Indeed, albeit less unfair than this.
Allahpundit on November 4, 2006 at 1:10 AM
I don’t know why the Media Fund forced the three into using fanastical medical conditions to make their case. They could have used the one they already have — paranoia.
And MK is wrong in writing about embryonic stem cells. The ad didn’t make that distinction and obfuscation of that differentiation is what the Media Fund works towards and their success in doing it is what they count on.
Dusty on November 4, 2006 at 1:11 AM
that’s just pathetic
that’s worse then the ford ads
Defector01 on November 4, 2006 at 1:12 AM
Interesting and revealing that the Dems’ campaigns seem to be controlled and run on a national level by Clintonistas like Harold Ickes and Rahm Emmanuel, but I’m sure all that talk about Bill & Hill running a shadow government is just that: talk. Uh-huh.
Just think, if the Dems really had their way, they wouldn’t bother with any kind of stem cell research but just be that much more eager to abort any “foetuses” with “potential problems.”
That little girl should consider herself lucky to be able to grow old and get diabetes!
Jen the Neocon on November 4, 2006 at 1:13 AM
Repugnant.
Yeah. That’s the ticket – repugnant.
These “people” have no shame – and no class.
Corky on November 4, 2006 at 1:15 AM
So, if Bill Frist decides to vote against federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, it’d be okay since he’s a doctor, right? On the flip side, if Barbara Boxer decides to vote in favor of it, I guess she has no right to do so since she’d be laughed off the campus of any medical school.
Ah, the chickendoctor argument. Always a smart debate tactic.
Sean M. on November 4, 2006 at 1:26 AM
Jeeezzz, I was waiting for the little boy with a
suicide vest to come waltzing in and ask why
Jim Talent wants him to blow himself up.
I guess they’re saving that one for monday.
Unbelievable
Texyank on November 4, 2006 at 1:27 AM
“How come he gets to decide who lives or who dies?”
Democrats have zero respect or regard for voters, really…they, like Kerry, believe people are just generally stupid.
This is just sick.
Topsecretk9 on November 4, 2006 at 1:27 AM
That ad needs a couple of F-words: fetal and funding.
jic on November 4, 2006 at 1:38 AM
Actually, it also needs a third: Federal, as in Federal funding.
jic on November 4, 2006 at 1:54 AM
Bullshit, like all Democratic political ads.
“How come he gets to decide who lives or who dies?”
Ans: HE DOESN’T. He just decides if the Federal gub’ment is going to WASTE MONEY for embryonic stem cell research that hasn’t found EVEN ONE CURE FOR ANYTHING. And we elected him to decide if this useless research is worth murdering hundreds if not thousands of babies.
georgej on November 4, 2006 at 1:55 AM
You were right….. they have no shame.
Maxx on November 4, 2006 at 1:58 AM
All this blathering from the left about how wonderful embryonic stem cells are, and nary a word about the fact that they cause cancer.
Of course, that would require some things the left abandoned long ago (say in about 1789, at the start of the French Revolution): honesty, and ethics.
corbettw on November 4, 2006 at 2:03 AM
Someday these kids will look back and wonder what the hell their parents were thinking.
mikeomatic on November 4, 2006 at 2:16 AM
So true. This has the fingerprints of the Clintonistas all over it, a vile bunch of Arkansas hillbillies who introduced our country to the politics of personal destruction. They’ll eat their own too, if you threaten them.
Vince Foster is unavailable for comment. It doesn’t get much nastier than that. Thanks Bill and Hill.
fogw on November 4, 2006 at 2:21 AM
I love it when the left does condescension. They must be kicking themselves now, ’cause it turns out they could have used the mushroom cloud after all.
JM Hanes on November 4, 2006 at 3:17 AM
Not that I believe the federal government should be funding ANY medical research with tax dollars, but the fact is that the federal government DOES fund stem cell research. All kinds of stem cell research. In fact, there is only one form that they refuse to fund, and that is embryonic research that DESTROYS THE BABY (embryo).
They have recently passed a bill for funding of non-destructive embryonic research (I question whether that is technologically possible yet), so it seems that the government is just tossing cash all over the place for stem cell research. Every political ad that suggests that someone is against stem cell research, and refuses to make that distinction is an outright lie.
You have to hand it to Ann Coulter, she has this issue nailed. It isn’t about saving little blue-eyes from her diabetes, it’s about keeping abortion legal. They have seen the tide turning on Roe v Wade, so they’ve changed tactics. If states begin to legislate against abortions of convenience, the legalisation of embryo-harvesting for research will be used as a wedge to keep the abortion door open.
Don’t be deceived, this isn’t a public health issue. How could it be, they know as well as we do that ESCs haven’t managed to cure ONE PERSON of ANYTHING, and likely wouldn’t for at least another 15 years. That’s why this ad speaks of tragedies that won’t occur for another ten-to-twenty years.
AP, your answer to the closing question is perfect. Now why doesn’t everyone over 12 years old in this nation know that?
Freelancer on November 4, 2006 at 5:17 AM
And the “Final Jeopardy” answer is……….
“Federal spending on stem cell research is authorized by this article of the Constitution”. You have 30 seconds.
Ding-ding-ding-da-da-ding-ding-ding.
Jeff on November 4, 2006 at 5:19 AM
Of course,if the Dems get their power back and crank up the National Health Care program everyone waiting in line to get these miracle cures will die anyway.
bbz123 on November 4, 2006 at 5:24 AM
Right. Only “Mothers” should decide that it’s ok for their children to die. Choice rules, huh kid?
Pablo on November 4, 2006 at 5:52 AM
Advanced Cell Technology says they can do it. Those claims have not been independantly verified, and it is a private company working with private funds so they have no obligation to release any of thier data/processes. But the federal funding legislation did NOT pass, whereas the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act did pass, and will pass again.
Nonsense. Of course it is.
Right, because if you had the little blue eyed kid suffering from diabetes, you’d really be focused on legalizing abortion…..
This doesn’t have a damned thing to do with abortion except in the minds of those who like to tie everything to their pet issues.
Remember when ASC’s hadn’t cured ONE PERSON of ANYTHING?? The 1990′s were crazy times, weren’t they? What were we thinking, doing all that federally funded ASC research?
Pablo on November 4, 2006 at 6:05 AM
Oh hell, I thought I had the issue of federal spending settled but, while I was making my post, Freelancer beat me to it in that post’s first sentence. I too have always thought that the crux of the matter lies in the abortion issue. On the funding subject; I’ve had it up to my eye balls with federal spending and federal laws. None of which is authorized by the Constitution. I swear on a stack of Bibles I’m not making this up. Some years back I happened by C-Span on the TV and they were having congressional hearings on car repair rip-offs. My head almost exploded! Is that any of the federal government’s concern? Get the freakin’ federal government out of our lives and let me spend my money the way I see fit and not on homeless dolphins or whatever other sympathetic cause someone comes up with.
Jeff on November 4, 2006 at 6:11 AM
Amen to what Jeff said about federal laws and tax money grabs!
And Freelancer you said it all, brother–thank you!
Jen the Neocon on November 4, 2006 at 6:13 AM
Let’s just find the one that authorizes the National Institutes of Health, and we’re there. Congress holds the purse strings, so ART I likely holds your answer. But given that Bush authorized the first ESC research funding by executive order, I’d suggest rooting around Art II while you’re at it.
Meanwhile, I’m going to go look for the article of the Constitution that authorized paying for a bridge to nowhere.
Pablo on November 4, 2006 at 6:17 AM
The authorization for the spending of taxpayers’ money on the “bridge to nowhere” can be found in Senator Ted Stevens’ copy of the Constitution.
Jeff on November 4, 2006 at 6:38 AM
You call this ad shameless AP, but is it also misleading as you (IMO wrongly) called the Citizens United ad?
RightWinged on November 4, 2006 at 6:52 AM
“What if” the democrats weren’t so desperate?
SouthernGent on November 4, 2006 at 7:15 AM
Strange that they criticize Jim Talent for not being a doctor. Afterall, there is nothing in this ad to make me think that the little girl, the soccer mom, or the D&D playing teenager have a medical degree.
cmay on November 4, 2006 at 7:41 AM
cmay,
Right. Using that logic, what business did the Senators who voted for it have doing so? Why should they have the same choice Talent had unless they have an M.D.?
RW,
Doesn’t “egregiously unfair” cover that?
Pablo on November 4, 2006 at 7:54 AM
While this:
Can be taken to imply that he views this ad as “egregiously unfair” as well, you could go either way. But even if I were to accept that premise, it’s irrelevant to my point/question, because I already acknowledged that he called it “shameless”. My question is whether AP would consider it “misleading” the way he did the Citizens United ad that he said he fought against posting and eventually caved to repeated requests.
RightWinged on November 4, 2006 at 8:24 AM
This ad smacks of using your kids as bombs.
seejanemom on November 4, 2006 at 8:45 AM
…And to clarify my question, I’m honestly asking, not just trying to be a jerk
RightWinged on November 4, 2006 at 9:09 AM
I live in Missouri and have not seen this ad, yet. This clearly is the most dishonest, despicable campaign ad I’ve ever seen. I hope that my fellow Missourians see this ad. Most people here are decent, honest people. They will see this for what it is-a flagrant attempt at dishonesty. They will not like being lied to and manipulated in this manner. I have faith that they will elect Jim Talent on Tuesday.
liberty on November 4, 2006 at 9:35 AM
And that, I believe, says it all concerning every elected official in any district, state, etc..
They are the ones elected by the majority of the people who actually vote!!!!!!!!!
The real message here is not to make your decisions based purely upon “cute” ads, but to get informed – then get your neighbors, co-workers, etc, informed, then motivate others to vote based upon an informed choice.
Until the collective majority actually gets off of their collective seats and participates in the process, we’ll be stuck with this sort of inanity ad nauseum.
Until then, we will be stuck with the votes of those who vote purely because of ads like this one.
Emmett J. on November 4, 2006 at 9:35 AM
With respect, why are you in need of such an answer in the first place?
Reaps on November 4, 2006 at 9:42 AM
I’m just wondering what AP’s threshhold is for “misleading”. Again, I’m not trying to be a dick about it… I just noticed he used different language in knocking this, but I’m not clear on his opinion of the honesty of the ad. “Unfair” doesn’t make it quite clear enough for me, that’s all. I’m looking for “dishonest” or “misleading” or “outright lies” to be attached, and if not, and explanation why not.
RightWinged on November 4, 2006 at 9:53 AM
Manipulative Ad Messages:
Republicans: If you vote for Democrats, the terrorists will kill us all.
Democrats: If you vote for Republicans, they won’t spend federal money on speculative research and we’ll all die.
Which message will resonate with the voters?
frankj on November 4, 2006 at 10:15 AM
Sadly, both. The collective mass reacts best to fear and fear sells ……….
Again, the emphasis is on why you shouldn’t vote for the other, not why you should vote for them.
For real change… vote Josh Jennings and Rock the House (of Representatives)!
Emmett J. on November 4, 2006 at 10:30 AM
Wow! All they needed in this baby was a puppy to kill if you didn’t vote for their guy.
Everyone is for stem cell research per se. Christians just don’t want to see human life killed in the process. ADULT stem cell research has already yielded dozens of cures/treatments. EMBRIONIC stem cell research has yielded none.
Mojave Mark on November 4, 2006 at 10:33 AM
Jim Talent will put razor blades in your puppy’s kibble!
This is why our publics schools don’t teach kids how to think for themselves, the left wants them to grow up believing this kind of horseshit.
infidel4life on November 4, 2006 at 10:51 AM
Look around – unfortunately, they already do, collectively speaking.
Which is why the cult of personality is so prevalent in our society and elections.
Emmett J. on November 4, 2006 at 11:00 AM
‘This is why our publics schools don’t teach kids how to think for themselves’-infidel4life
Amen brother
Limerick on November 4, 2006 at 11:04 AM
The Left just can’t get themselves to say “embryonic” stem cell research because that would suggest extinguishing an innocent human life form. It’s the same reason why they say they are “pro-choice” as opposed to “pro-abortion”.
CliffHanger on November 4, 2006 at 11:17 AM
On the flip side, this has to mean the Left is rather desperate. Do they feel momentum has shifted away…?
CliffHanger on November 4, 2006 at 11:20 AM
What ever happened to TRUTH IN ADVERTISING? Does this law not apply to lawmakers?
This is deceitful and full of lies.
shooter on November 4, 2006 at 11:28 AM
I just love it when a cute little actress playing a cute little girl threatens to get diabetes in her imaginary future, and asks me to vote Democrat. Makes me feel all indignant about those mean-spirited Republicans who don’t care how many imaginary people threaten to get crippled or die.
Well, I care! Jim Talent, what a heartless beast you are. It’s a good thing I’m in Missouri and can go out and vote for what is good and righteous. Then I’m going right ahead and join the military, cuz that’s what us dum ol’Republicans do when we reelize its are only hope!
NellE on November 4, 2006 at 11:33 AM
South Park has already done this!
They did an episode on smoking – the Rob Reiner episode …
THey put Cartman up on a stool for an anti-smoking ad. The kid stares mournfully into the camera and coughs … ending with, “By the time you see this commerical, I’ll be dead.”
There’s a long pause …
Cartman: “Dead? What do you mean, dead?”
Ghoulist assistant, “Very good, Cartman. Here’s a cupcake.”
… Rob Reiner, “Cartman, do you know what a hero is? A hero is someone who sacrifices himself for others. You can be a hero. All you have to do is eat the cupcake.”
Cartman, “Jesus Christ!”
naliaka on November 4, 2006 at 11:36 AM
I loved that SP episode, Reiner stuffs his piehole through the whole thing.
infidel4life on November 4, 2006 at 11:46 AM
Buy this album or we’ll shoot this dog…
The Machine on November 4, 2006 at 11:51 AM
Self-obsessed 20-something: Help me!
Self-obsessed 40-something: Help me!
Nascent human being in the womb: What about me?
The rest: Shut up meatsack…
spmat on November 4, 2006 at 11:53 AM
Just for that, I’m voting for that senator.
I wonder if the raving lunatics on the left know that most people know the difference between EMBRYONIC SCR, and ADULT and CORDBLOOD SCR? And that we’re only necessarily against Embryonic?
Why, Demmie and Lefties, Why do you want to kill little babies? Why?
Mazztek on November 4, 2006 at 12:16 PM
Perhaps because they have shown, by their actions, that they are the true inheritors of the Hitlerian/Stalinist philosophy and creed towards humanity.
Not all Demmies, mind you, but many of the leadership certainly.
Emmett J. on November 4, 2006 at 12:36 PM
Scaremongering liberals!!
JayVee on November 4, 2006 at 12:37 PM
HESCR – Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research, is abortion. It involves the destruction of a living human being, which a human embryo is.
Abortion legalization has helped dehumanize the baby in the minds of the public. Abortion has also desensitized the public to the destruction of human beings at the beginning of their lives.
Adult stem cell research has been funded by private industry. Of approximately 57 labs engaged in stem cell research receiving private funding, 54 of them were engaged in Adult stem cell research.
HESCR is merely an extension of the lack of value in human life in its tiny, early stage, and another form of abortion, explained away in false terms, and dishonest, conjured up, faux, distorted, inaccurate “science.”
The human being’s life begins at conception-fertilization, that is a scientific fact, yet the hot and bothered to destroy embryos and collect billions of dollars in tax payer money in order to do it, for a hyped up “cure” for all the world’s diseases, all as if these cures are just a few minutes away, want us all to believe otherwise. This human being is not really a human being. Got it?
No! She is alive and human and a human being.
The ad asks who is Talent to say who shall live and who shall die. I ask the actors in the ad and those who are pushing this lie, and nonsense, you are calling for the death of an innocent, new, tiny human being in order for your own personal gain. You are exploiting the weak, defenseless, who have no voice for your own selfish concerns. Who are YOU to decide who will live and who will die?
It would be nice if these HESCR pushers would be honest about the term “Stem Cell Research.” This is about HESCR, not the generic Stem Cell Research which uses adult stem cells. That obfuscation is not only dishonest, it is malicious. Many of us support stem cell research, but not the destroying of innocent humans in their embryo stage.
Finally, it is not necessary to snuff out tiny lives via HESCR when there are viable, realistic alternatives which are already not only promising, but they are actually being used to treat people, and have been used for years.
William
William2006 on November 4, 2006 at 1:08 PM
Mojave Mark,
There is one case in which researchers were able to inject embryonic stem cells into mice and see improvement, but the mice developed cancer cells, so it was counterproductive.
I enjoyed your suggestion regarding the political ad that they threaten to kill the puppy if we don’t support HESCR for their imaginary disease they will contract in the future.
Gee, why don’t they just accuse people of causing them to be alive. It must be someone else’s fault that they are here, so blame everyone else. If they weren’t here they might not ever get sick, or die. of course they might not ever know joy, compassion, pleasure, love, and so on.
Bummer!
Nevertheless, I am certain that you know that not only Christians oppose the destruction of living human beings in their embryonic stage, or at any other time in mother’s womb, for that matter.
I oppose HESCR because it is the destruction, and exploitation, of a living human being for the personal gain of another. By that logic we might as well use others for our own personal gain. Take death row inmates and use them for medical experiments, take their organs, and so on. After all, like the excuse given for destroying human embryos “for science,” that they are going to be destroyed anyway, might as well put them to some use, for the “greater good,” and “for the many.”
Take the death row inmates, the soldiers in combat, handicapped persons, people in a coma, senior citizens – who are closer to death chronologically speaking than younger people, and use them all “for the greater good.”
Everyone wants to go to heaven – no one wants to die to get there. Everyone wants to live forever. No one is willing to accept old age, illness, and death.
HESCR exploits the innocent for the benefit of the powerful.
What else is new?
William
William2006 on November 4, 2006 at 1:26 PM
No, and neither are any of the hard tards who wrote, directed, acted in, or in any other way were associated with the production of this abortion, so shut your cakeholes, make-believers.
Phil Smith on November 4, 2006 at 1:33 PM
Good one, Phil!
Ethics is solely the realm of the high priests, the scientist or the doctor, or those who are ill or who know someone who is ill. They can tell everyone else what they should think and do regarding ethics, bioethics, and medical ethics. Everyone else SHUT UP! You have no moral right to oppose us!
There are numerous doctors and scientists who oppose HESCR. What is the opinion from the ad’s characters about that?
Oh, those who oppose HESCR don’t count, because those doctors and scientists who oppose HESCR don’t want a cure, but want them to be ill and to suffer and die.
Right.
William
William2006 on November 4, 2006 at 1:43 PM
This is at least the second time this election cycle that the Democrats have used kids to tell outright lies in political ads. Remember this ad? This should be against the law. Kids not old enough to vote are sure as hell not qualified to tell adults how to vote ! It’s shameful and despicable and as someone else pointed out, this is a form of child abuse!
Maxx on November 4, 2006 at 1:46 PM
Unbe-frickin’-lievable.
A truly impressive achievement in intellectual dishonesty.
Not ONE – SINGLE – MENTION of the word “embryonic?” Not ONE?
Not one – single – mention of the fact that we’re talking about GOVERNMENT FUNDING – not about the research itself? Nobody voted “against stem cell research.” That’s simply a lie.
Or how about the biggie? How about the simple fact that the entire thing is scientifically dubious at best?
Jesus wept. Congrats, liberals. I’ve been a little disturbed by some conservatives lately.
Thanks for reminding me why I’ll never, ever vote for you again.
Professor Blather on November 4, 2006 at 2:11 PM
Pablo – that may be the most intellectually dishonest statement I’ve ever read here.
Professor Blather on November 4, 2006 at 2:15 PM
What does Embryonic Stem Cell research have to do with abortion, Prof?
Explain it to me, please.
Pablo on November 4, 2006 at 2:19 PM
No, it isn’t, any more than war is peace and slavery is freedom.
Pablo on November 4, 2006 at 2:22 PM
Pablo:
The dishonesty required to even ask the question is stunning; I assume you actually do know, but have your partisan blinders on.
Since I don’t have time for a lengthy discourse on why the sky is – in fact – blue, I’ll answer your question with a few of my own:
1) If abortion has nothing to do with it – why is the word “embryonic” never mentioned? In any discussion of ESC research? Why do you think that is – if abortion isn’t at all related?
2) And a more obvious question: if abortion and ESC research aren’t inextricably intertwined … WHY do abortion groups vocally support it? Why would NARAL (The National ABORTION Rights Action League, FYI) even mention stem cell research? Why? If they have nothing to do with each other – why would a group SOLELY dedicated to abortion issues be absolutely zealous about ESC research?
Try to be honest – at least with yourself. I stand by my statement: you just displayed stunning intellectual dishonesty.
Read, learn, and ask yourself how this makes sense – if abortion isn’t involved:
QED.
Professor Blather on November 4, 2006 at 2:30 PM
Abortion is the termination of pregnancy by killing a living human being before term, or during delivery as takes place with late term abortions, called partial birth abortion.
Destroying the new human being during the embryo stage, as takes place during Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research, aborts the life of a living human being.
It is abortion because it kills a human being who has not come to term, or who has been killed during interrupted delivery. The development of the embryo is arrested by keeping her from developing so her cells can be absconded and used for medical experiments. She is farmed for medical experiments.
HESCR is to abortion, as medical experimentation is on Jewish inmates in Hitler’s death camps, only the embryo is smaller, younger and less mature, yet fully human.
William
William2006 on November 4, 2006 at 2:31 PM
No it doesn’t. Man cannot make living human beings. How do you define living? Can you live in a freezer? Did you spring forth from a petrie dish?
Pablo on November 4, 2006 at 2:33 PM
More on NARAL’s strange non-abortion related interest in ESC. Wierd that an abortion group would be so interested, since, of course – it has nothing to do with abortion. They must be bored or something, right, Pablo?:
http://storiesinamerica.blogspot.com/2006/07/support-stem-cell-research.html
http://www.prochoiceminnesota.org/s09issues/200210185.shtml
Enjoy. This is so dumb it’s not even worth discussing. But I realize that you and reality aren’t exactly close friends.
Less Kool-Aid. More thinking.
Peace.
Professor Blather on November 4, 2006 at 2:33 PM
And what party is that, Professor?
I assure you that I’ve given the issue an enormous amount of consideration.
Pablo on November 4, 2006 at 2:34 PM
What on Earth does that mean? You’re talking about an ad campaign, I think. I am not. I’m talking about an area of biomedical research. The people who conduct it don’t talk about abortion, they talk about things more microscopic. And I doubt that those who do abortions discuss “embryonic” things much. They’re busy killing living fetuses.
I’m going to suggest that you reread my statement to which you are so opposed:
Guess where NARAL falls on that scale.
Pablo on November 4, 2006 at 2:39 PM
Indeed. Be it NARAL flavored or Operation Rescue flavored, Kool-Aid is for children.
Try a little Krauthammer M.D., and maybe a bit of Frist M.D.
Pablo on November 4, 2006 at 2:43 PM
Repubs need to take a hint from the Internet provider NetZero who did a parody on AOL’s TV ads.
Hire the same little girl or a close look-a-like and have her say.
“I’ll never have to worry about getting diabetes or any other diseases, my mother aborted me” could I have been one of your kids?”
GoodBoy on November 4, 2006 at 2:55 PM
Professor and William, correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t some of these HESCR experiments and treatments involve either cells from a foetus and/or its placenta, because I think I’ve read about them using womens’ placental fluids for cures?
If they can use placenta, then why wouldn’t they use aborted foetuses?
They have ESC in abundance.
So abortion would fit right in with their plans.
Also, the Missouri amendment is for constitutional cloning, which wraps up human engineering and eugenics, abortion of human embryos and the attendant unethical and immoral experimentation into one big bow-wrapped package.
It’s playing God and in the worst way.
I see Pablo’s over here pushing his Dr. Frankenstein line…*sigh*
The cures aren’t there, P., and even if they were, I don’t want my tax dollars spent on this mad science!
It will give me some degree of peace to see this cloning amendment go down to defeat Tuesday night.
Jen the Neocon on November 4, 2006 at 3:00 PM
\
Jen, my dear. You don’t have the first f*cking clue as to what is there and what isn’t, and you’ve already admitted as much. Moreso, your first paragraph shows that you have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about, period, aside from the far-right partisan line. Please stop pretending otherwise. This is not the Neocon Underground.
Pablo on November 4, 2006 at 3:10 PM
I will assume that you’re making a rather oblique reference to ABORTION, as you imply that there was something unfair in the ad. First there is NOTHING unfair in the ad, as the concept of “FAIRNESS” is about as misplaced in politics as tits would be on a bull. The object of politics, for the benefit of the Republican part which is CLEARLY CLUELESS, is TO WIN. The ad is brilliant, in that it poses questions for thought and tugs at the heart strings as well! Here are a few things that the STUPID FECKLESS REPUBLICANS are too stupid and feckless to let the nation know in their ads.
1. There has not been ONE SINGLE piece of promising research derived from embyronic stem cell research.
2. The very malleablity which makes embryonic stem cells attractive, is actually the problem. While they will be pliable enough to “morph” into various types of cells, they are unstable and continue to “morph” into things like CANCER.
3. The ONLY PROMISING REASEARCH OR TREATMENT derived from STEM CELL RESEARCH has been in the area of ADULT STEM CELLS. Period.
Now if a kid from Queens knows all of this, why don’t these facts appear in Republican ads ANYWHERE? Answer: Because the Republicans are losers in waiting, that’s why!
Soothsayer on November 4, 2006 at 3:23 PM
No, it’s because they know all that isn’t true. They’re lovely talking points, but removed from reality. See Krauthammer, Frist, et al…
Pablo on November 4, 2006 at 3:31 PM
To the woman in the commercial:
How do I know that you aren’t my mother in the future?
Because my mother already has been diagnosed with Parkinson’s (moderate) and (mild) Alzheimer’s and I take care of her full time.
Because even though she is afflicted with both, SHE is against forcing every taxpayer in America to pay for EMBRYONIC stem cell research.
Because not only is it against her religion’s teachings, but even with her mental problems, she is bright enough to understand enough about the science to see that there are more problems than solutions with EMBRYONIC stem cells;
Because she is able to understand that there is a difference between the heavily taxpayer funded adult stem cell research and embryonic stem cell research that is not banned, but merely must be funded voluntarily rather than through taxes……
Because, even though suffering with both brain defects she is more mentally competent than the average Democrat.
LegendHasIt on November 4, 2006 at 3:47 PM
Ok… I’ll call. Name a cure, commercially available, based on ESC, that does not involve giving cancer to lab rats.
psrch on November 4, 2006 at 4:12 PM
The democrats keep on misrepresenting this issue. They want people to think this is about research when it’s really about them creating more federal empires for their party’s gain.
Kevin R on November 4, 2006 at 4:17 PM
Dude, all the best commercially available cures give cancer to lab rats!
/snark off
It’s extremely early in the ESC research game, given that it only started 8 years ago. They aren’t there yet, of course. But those who know what the hell they’re talking about, like Drs. Krauthammer and Frist among many many others, understand the pros and cons of the potential of the research. They also understand that first you work in rodent models, then you work in primate models, and then, if you’ve got fascinating data you talk about applying to the FDA for IND status and approval to run human clinical trials. The underlying work is being done and is exciting the people who do it. Like this. 8 years is the blink of an eye as far as these things go.
BTW, a teratoma is not cancer. But I gather that “ESC’s cause cancer” is the new article of faith. Shall we expect all future children to be riddled with cancer then, if that is the ultimate outcome of ESC’s? Or just teratomas, maybe?
Pablo on November 4, 2006 at 5:18 PM
Ah, that piece from last year, linked in my last post, has new news: First embryonic stem cell trial on the cards
Pablo on November 4, 2006 at 5:26 PM
This from the party who has no problem with pulling a full term baby from the womb by the feet. Drilling a hole in the baby’s head and then sucking out the baby’s brains.
Wade on November 4, 2006 at 5:38 PM
See? Conservatives can disagree.
p.v. cornelius on November 4, 2006 at 6:56 PM
In Michigan, opponents are running an ad that says that if you vote for the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, Proposal 2, little girls will get cervical cancer.
Vote for me or I’ll kill this dog.
rokemronnie on November 4, 2006 at 8:32 PM
Hmmm, So elections are now going to hinge on unscientific facts,
portrayed by hired unscientific actors?
byteshredder on November 4, 2006 at 10:28 PM
p.v. cornelius, Frankly, I don’t think that Pablo cussing me out and making John Kerry-like botched jokes about the level of my intelligence is exactly civil disagreement…
Golly, I mention the fact that those who experiment with HESCR want to use placental and foetal materials from abortions and he goes ballastic–makes you wonder.
And why does NARAL support HESCR? Why not “Save the Whales?”
Jen the Neocon on November 5, 2006 at 1:37 AM
invent the fact that those who experiment with HESCR want to use placental and foetal materials from abortions and he goes ballastic.
There, I fixed that for you, Jen. Edited for accuracy.
Pablo on November 5, 2006 at 4:29 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »