Re: Rush and Michael

Phyllis wrote:

He even admitted in his own book he stopped taking his meds for public
appearances and fund raising. Terrible manipulation in my mind.

If he was off his meds at this stage in the disease he wouldn't be able
to move or talk at all. He's had PD for more than 10 years. Early on,
not being medicated accentuates the movements. Later in the game, not
being medicated keeps one in a frozen state. He said in the interview
with Katie Couric that he had taken his medication that day but it was
working too well, and he was dyskinesic as a result. He has no control
over that aspect.

It would have been a bit more honest of Michael had he not declared
the
opponent was against stem cell research. That candidate is not
against
stem cell research, but against embryonic stem cell research; is pro
adult
and cord blood research which has produced many successes, whereas
embryonic hasn't. Most admit it will be 15 to 20 years before anything
can
be learned from embryonic stem cell research, and the funds used for
that
could easily produce new succeses in the current stem cell research.

But in the meantime, if nothing is done in those 15 to 20 years...

In those commercials he also doesn't state that the wording of the law
he
wants passed is deliberately deceptive (not my words) so that if you
think
you are voting no, you are really voting yes. If you think you are
voting
against cloning, you are really voting for it. If it were the right
thing
to do, they wouldn't have to resort to deception.

And it's up to the voters in Missouri to decide what they want to do
with this law. Michael's concern is stem cell research. If Nancy
Reagan did the same spot, do you think she'd be getting the same
treatment?

Phyllis, let me ask you something. Do you think in virto fertilization
is a good thing, even though it creates more embryos than are going to
be used, embryos that are destined to be disposed of as medical waste
once their time is up? These embroys are going to be "killed" no matter
what.

This isn't just another law either. It is an amendment to their state
constitution. No going back if the people's votes result in something
other than what they truly wanted. As sympathetic as one may be for
his
illness, not many respect a man who is dishonest in his dealings with
disease.

I don't live in Missouri, but if I was I would learn more about the
ballot proposal before voting. Then again, most voters don't do their
homework on things like this.

Learn more about the nature of PD before you make these accusations.
Again, early in the disease the movements are magnified when not
medicated. Later, the patient is in a frozen, immobile state when not
medicated. Even when taking medications regularly there's no guarantee
that they will work properly every time. Why do you think MJF hasn't
done any acting work in years? He can't predict how his meds are going
to work.

Yet people will claim that he can manipulate this disease at will.
Limbaugh and Lauer and their ilk should have to watch a loved one die of
a degenerative disease. Then they can accuse that loved one of faking
the symptoms.

I've had enough of people who don't know the first thing about these
diseases making their own diagnoses. And I've said enough here. You
can go ahead and stick your head in the sand all you want, you can claim
that anyone who has PD is manipulating their meds for sympathy. That
kind of talk is despicable, in my book.

The Other Kim
kimagreenfieldatyahoodotcom


.

Quantcast