Advancing abortion!

The past week or so has been an interesting time in politics. First, Michael J. Fox starred in a political commercial that highlighted the symptoms of the Parkinson’s disease he suffers from. Then, Rush Limbaugh criticized, some say 'mocked', his appearance in the commercial. That may be debatable. Predictably, Mr. Limbaugh's response to the commercial becomes the primary issue that is being talked about in many media outlets.

I'm sure that many are fans of both Mr. Fox and Mr. Limbaugh. However, I find it

disingenuous for one to use a debilitating disease or disability to further a political position unless there is a direct connection. Now, I have to agree that this is America and we do so cherish our ’freedom of speech’. However, ’freedom of speech’ always has consequences. One of the consequences is that someone, somewhere, may respond to your entering into the political fray with a response not sympathetic to your political position or, as in this case, heartbreaking physical condition.

Now, I’m sure that if Mr. Fox’s commercial had been presented as a means of generating support for the National Parkinson’s Foundation or some such organization, no one would have even raised a brow. Famous personalities often lend their voices to assist in the garnering of support for foundations that were created to study, treat, and/or assist folk that are suffering from chronic ailments and disabilities. I’ve yet to hear of any criticisms being raised when this is done. The problem appears to occur when one presumes or demands immunity from criticism when participating in the processes of electing leaders in our democratic republic. This, of course is not possible due to the passions that are stirred during these times of heated discussions and possible change in the balance of power.

I will not pretend to know the stage of the disease that Mr. Fox is afflicted with or the extent that that affects his body. My heart goes out to him as he suffers the affects of this disease everyday. My ire would be reserved for those handlers that put this man in a situation that they had calculated to be fairly safe due to his illness. In my opinion, it had to be a calculated risk that his disease would inoculate him from criticism. It did not, and yet, none have stepped up to take responsibility for this error in judgment.

As for Mr. Limbaugh, In my opinion, that is another matter altogether. If Mr. Limbaugh had not responded the way he did, would I now know that the commercial in question was misleading and playing very loose with the facts?

Mr. Fox said in the controversial commercial ‘But George Bush and Michael Steele will put limits on the most promising stem cell research. Fortunately, Marylanders have a chance to vote for Ben Cardin. Cardin fully supports life-saving stem cell research. It’s why I support Ben Cardin. And with so much at stake, I respectfully ask you to do the same.’ Amazingly, it was discovered that Mr. Cardin voted against stem cell research while Mr. Steele supports stem cell research. The confusion lies in the absence of two conveniently missing words, embryonic and adult. You see, Mr. Cardin supports embryonic stem cell research, but rejects adult stem cell research. Mr. Steele supports adult stem cell research but rejects embryonic stem cell research.

It appears that adult stem cell research does not endanger the life of the adult but embryonic stem cell research endangers the life of the embryo. Well, well what do we have here? We have discovered some very ostensible rationale being presented to further establish and validate the need for more abortions. To make matters even worse, a dreaded disease was being used to silence the opposition while hiding the true motive of advancing abortion.