Michael Moore, Hypocrite

“I'm getting pi$$ed Violin... where's your proof of my being a racist? You can call me a conservative, you can call me unreasonable (your opinion), you can call me any number of things that might be your opinion... however you cannot call me a racist.

Should I contact my attorney NOW to begin action against you re defamation of character, or, can you back up your claims?”

““OK. I didn't read much past this. Let me try and be concise and point this out again:

1. NIH was the major research facility for embryonic stem cell research.

2. ESC has major potential but it's way in the future. Right now, the research is costly and no private firms are touching it. Private firms need to turn profits and make everyone happy. Private firms currently churn out vaccines and antibiotics. It's low risk and big profit.”

Ok, what’s this got to do with the price of KY Jelly in San Francisco?

“3. Govt. is almost always the source of funds when new research is being developed because of the high risks involved. This Bush edict will set back ESC research tremendously.”

True, but it doesn’t fund such things it deems to be crossing a line. Like cloning.

“4. Adult stem cells are not embryonic stem cells. There are fundemental differences which are yet to be understood.”

I never said they were.

I really have no idea what this has to do with my post BM. You seem to be arguing why we should be funding ESC research. My post simply stated facts, not moral points.”

“Did I go on tangents????? i tend to do that when i get worked up.

Your facts seem to....distort(?) certain realities.

Adult stem cell research 'taint worth nearly as much as embryonic and you need Fed Funds to research embryonic stem cells.

And who said anything about cloning?

Overall, I despise the fact that Congress/Executive branch interfer with federally funded research based on "moral" issues.

It may be an oxymoron to complain about feds fighting fed funds, but no more than feds stopping scientific research based on current "morals" of their constituents.”

““Your facts seem to....distort(?) certain realities.”

How so? I think you’re trying to apply the facts to separate issues than my post addressed. Skid Mark said Bush doesn’t fund stem cell research and I showed how he does.

“Adult stem cell research 'taint worth nearly as much as embryonic and you need Fed Funds to research embryonic stem cells.”

I never said it was the same. There are a lot of research going on without federal dollars. And also we have to remember that just because we don’t fund it there are many, many countries around the world that do. The work with embryonic stem cells is being done. It’s even being done here with the existing embryos that have already been set aside.

“And who said anything about cloning?”

It was a comparison. It too is controversial.

“Overall, I despise the fact that Congress/Executive branch interfer with federally funded research based on "moral" issues.”

So do you think the feds should fund any old thing that comes down the pike no matter what the moral implications are?

“It may be an oxymoron to complain about feds fighting fed funds, but no more than feds stopping scientific research based on current "morals" of their constituents.”

Basing funding on the will of the people seems very democratic to me.”

“The 21 embryonic stem cell lines created before the ban had to be grown with nonhuman animal products. This makes them unsuitable for medical use.

Why is embryonic research controversial?

Moral implications can be and are debated among the scientific community. Why mix it with politics?

As an example, the Human genome project spent a huge chunk of it's money on moral/ethical implications.

And why should funding of Scientific research be based on "the will of the people"?

The general populace is too biased and generally too uninformed to understand a large portion of research and it's implications.
last edited: 10/12/04 6:18:31 PM”

““The 21 embryonic stem cell lines created before the ban had to be grown with nonhuman animal products. This makes them unsuitable for medical use.”

There 60, not 21 embryonic stem cell lines.

“Why is embryonic research controversial?”

Because it destroys an embryo which has the potential for life.

“Moral implications can be and are debated among the scientific community. Why mix it with politics?”

Because they want to use tax dollars for it.

“And why should funding of Scientific research be based on "the will of the people"?”

Because some people get touchy about their tax dollars being used for things they find immoral. Dig for info on some of the things that our tax dollars are being spent on and I’m sure you’d find a whole slew of thing you object to. And you would have every right to vote for someone who supports or doesn't support the funding of those things.”

“"What’s this I heard Fatass is giving out free underwear to college kids in exchange for their voting for Kerry? I know he has to still be a virgin but how desperate do ya have to be to meet young women...or probably men in his case?" -nigal

No, that's not entirely accurate. The transcript from his speech (at least the one at my campus) shows that he asked how many ppl in the audience were over the age of 23 and had never voted. And, of those, who were registered to vote. And, of those, who planned to vote in this year's election. It was to the ppl who were still standing that he promised the ramen, underwear, etc. These were ppl who already said they planned to vote. And, there was never a specific reference to Kerry (or Bush) during this offering (tho, it's evident, in general, that he supports Kerry). So, the supposed "bribe" wasn't to vote for Kerry. It was to vote, period. And, it wasn't truly a bribe since the ppl already indicated their intention to vote.

omg... did I just post to a political thread? yikes!”

“I count 22 on the registery of NIH:

http://stemcells.nih.gov/research/registry/

With another 5 "not yet available", which could mean anything.

most embryonic stem cells come from Invitro Fertilizations (IF) that failed or embryo's at IF clinics that are going to be thrown out. No potential for life their.

You make an unfortunate point about tax dollars. But I would be more at ease with people opposing research if they understood it more fully.

Most people, however, seem to get their facts from politicized sources or from the internet. Not direcvtly from the source.
last edited: 10/12/04 6:38:13 PM”

“LOL! I was joking anyhow. Anyone who would sell their vote for a pair of underware is probably already voting for Kerry anyway.”

“And so far, the adult stem cell research show more promise that the embryonic research.

Every single thing I have have read indicates the opposite. As a matter of fact most of what I read stated that there is a growing concern that the adult lines will be result in a dead end.”

“I will admit to not being up-to-date on the whole stem-cell research issue, but in basic terms isn't this just the abortion debate all over again?”

“Hey Nige. I only quoted your post cause it was the most recent on the MM issue.”

“Wanderer, yes.”

“I keep seeing 60 lines.

Because President George Bush recently began allowing limited federal funding for research involving 60 embryonic stem cell lines, research will expand from the private sector into academia. Stem cells can be reproduced in the lab indefinitely to form cell lines.

http://gtresearchnews.gatech.edu/reshor/rh-f01/s-embryo.html

Gray Davis, the state's governor, signed a bill on Sunday that authorises research on stem cells from any source. The bill conflicts with research restrictions introduced by President George Bush in August 2002. These permit federal funds to be used for research on only around 60 pre-existing embryonic stem cell (ESC) lines.

http://www.newscientist.com/hottopics/cloning/cloning.jsp?id=ns99992830

Dr. John Gearhart, a researcher at John Hopkins University in Baltimore, said he was disappointed Bush limited funding only to 60 or so lines of existing stem cells. He said it could slow research unless new stem cell lines are drawn from additional embryos.

http://www.canoe.ca/Health0108/10_stemcell-ap.html

Bush will allow federal funding for research on 60 lines of embryonic stem cells. These lines of cells have the ability to regenerate themselves indefinitely but not all have been approved by the National Institutes of Health, which sets federal standards for research.

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/HEALTH/08/09/stem.cell.alternative/

These are given only to show the number that are out there.”

““I will admit to not being up-to-date on the whole stem-cell research issue, but in basic terms isn't this just the abortion debate all over again?”

I think it's more of a "when does life begin" issue.”

“Thanks for the sources, Nigal. I believe, however, that NIH has the final word on how many lines are available, no?

As for "when does life begin", are you telling me an ESC should not be used because it is "potential" life?

What about when they crack the "code" for adult stem cells? Are they not potential life?

This argument against will not hold out over time.”

“Thanks Nigel & HPM. I always thought that the crux of the abortion issue was simply differeing definitions; what is life, & when does it begin? Those who hold that life begins at conception believe, therefore, that abortion is murder, while those who believe something different don't see abortion as that big a deal.

Of course I'm being very simplistic here...I certainly don't want to offend anyone but am just trying to frame the debate in general terms.

What I find more interesting, and to me the REAL debate, is not necessarily what one's belief might be.. but... why some on the opposing side of the issue just can't seem to understand / appreciate why a certain belief might be important to someone. You don't have to agree with them... just accept & appreciate that others beleve differently thatn you and that their beliefs are important to them.”

““Thanks for the sources, Nigal. I believe, however, that NIH has the final word on how many lines are available, no?”

I can’t say because I don’t know who’s who in the research game.

“As for "when does life begin", are you telling me an ESC should not be used because it is "potential" life?”

No. I’m not telling you anything. You asked why some people were against it and I told you why.

“What about when they crack the "code" for adult stem cells? Are they not potential life?”

Are adult stem cells embryos?

“This argument against will not hold out over time.”

It’s not my argument.”

“I'm telling you the NIH has the final word on who gets funding therefore they determine what lines are acceptable.

When they crack the adult code, people will argue that they are the same as embryonic. I think the only fundemental difference is that they can't slow down the growth rate of an adult cell, it grows too fast.

Why are you avoiding a debate? :D

Goodnight, y'all.”

“"Why are you avoiding a debate? :D"

To what ends? Besides, in this whole discussion you have failed to ask me the one crucial question that would put everything into perspective.”

“Michael Moore's not the only hypocrite around here.”

“Wanderer that is my basic understanding of both issues is the crux of it is when does life begin and the implications of that regarding the rights of the parties involved.

ESC has the added complexity of ending a potential life for the possibility of saving multiple lives as opposed to abortion being a one for one proposition.

I am against abortion on the grounds of ending life yet I think that it must remain a legal option.

ESC I am in favor of completely. It kind of troubles me in that a still small voice in the back of my mind says I should oppose it for the same and similar reasons as I do abortion yet I don't. My clincher is the fact that I believe in sacrifice for the greater good. One potential life given for the possible saving of many existing lives seems a very reasonable thing to me.”

“You mean my effort at banning Violin is working???? Yipeee!!!!”

“Nigal - please inform grasshopper of the question you seek. I am unlearned in these ways.

HPM & ALL - Using ESC's does not involve ending a potential life. This argument is seriously flawed and based on emotions, IMHO.

The embryo's are no good, for one reason or another. They would be destroyed. Therefore/ergo/sum - Not potential life.

Even the cells from aborted fetuses would not be used for anything so why toss them out.

The argument against cloning and using ESC seems to be very circular. If you are against cloning, then these cells can not be used to develop a fully functional human.

If that is so, then again, these cells are not potential life.

One other argument for using ESC - an embryo often fails during IVF due to an unknown genetic disorder. If they could examine the cells of failed embryo's then they might discover why. Discovering "why" is the keystone to curing.

Under current guidlines, researchers cannot do this because they would have to propogate these cell lines.”

“"So, the supposed "bribe" wasn't to vote for Kerry. It was to vote, period. And, it wasn't truly a bribe since the ppl already indicated their intention to vote......"


Classic "pizza and a van"!”

““Nigal - please inform grasshopper of the question you seek. I am unlearned in these ways.”

You never even asked me where I stand on the issue. You assumed I was against it and ran with it when I was never even arguing for or against it. All I was stating was that Bush DOES fund stem cell research, and thereby showing Violin to be wrong yet again.”

“I never assumed you were against it. I felt there were many posts that seemed, IMHO, to be misleading as to how serious a ban on Fed funding was.”

“I am for embryonic stem cell research as long as there are guidelines for harvesting them set in place. There could be a great balance that would serve everyone’s interests. I thought the ban was quite surprising because of the right’s drifting away from the total ban of abortions and their seemingly new stance of settling for banning partial birth abortion. It is clear the SCR ban is based on the same ideals and theologies as the abortion issues so I was surprised to see them go so far the other way. While I think that there is just too much expectation put on SCR and that it is as much magic as science at this point but it should be explored further none the less.”

“"All I was stating was that Bush DOES fund stem cell research, and thereby showing Violin to be wrong yet again."
- NigalKrueger
8:38:42 AM
10/13/04

Your prior post:
"The Bush admin IS funding stem cell research, just NOT embryonic stem cell research. And as I said, embryonic stem cell research is legal, just not with federal dollars."
- NigalKrueger
1:18:15 PM
10/12/04


My link showed that the Bush admin DID fund embryonic stem cell research.

Maybe I'm just dense, but I can't see where I was wrong.”

“Where does it say the funding stopped? It says they are funding the existing 60 lines they already had. This tells me that this was written post-ban. I also showed how they are continuing to fund the research done with adult SCs. You haven’t shown where they ever stopped all funding.

And yes, you do seem to be dense.”

“This argument is seriously flawed and based on emotions

The more I read the more this becomes obvious.”

“Nigal - I never said Bush stopped funding embryonic stem cell research.

I said you were wrong in saying "The Bush admin IS funding stem cell research, just NOT embryonic stem cell research".

Are we communicating yet?”

“This argument is seriously flawed and based on emotions

BM the more I read on the subject the more obviously true your opinion seems to me.”

“HPM - Both sides?”

“Wow, that was a wierd double post.
I didn't think the first one took and posted it again.”

“wow, my browser is having a meltdown.

I can't see anything I post for a few minutes after I post it.
last edited: 10/13/04 1:13:46 PM”

“I finally saw Fahrenheit 9/11 last night (someone lent me a copy... I'd never give Moore on Moore cent).

I was surprised. I was expecting a really well-done, slick in-your-face flick. I liked Moore's "Roger and Me". But Fahrenheit 9/11, to me anyway, was dry and boring and very unconvincing. I'm trying not to say that in a biased way (because I undoubtedly am), but even I was expecting something better. Moore's narration reminded me a Warren Miller flick, very dry and soft and monotone, yet without Miller's biting dry sense of humor. And the conclusions Moore was trying to draw were too far fetched. This movie would only be for those who already hate Bush and even the sight of him makes them ill, otherwise the scenes of Bush weren't even icky or bad to me. I was happily unimpressed. There is nothing to fear in this movie at all for people who aren't conspiratorialist or Bush-haters.”

“Buck, you liked it when the Bushes were shakin' hands with the Saudis?”

“HPM is tripping.”

“Old man Bush isn't icky??

He's a wimp and a sleazy hireling of the Oily Sheiks.”

“Bush special envoy embroiled in controversy over Iraq debt

Naomi Klein

President Bush's special envoy, James Baker, who has been trying to persuade the world to forgive Iraq's crushing debts, is simultaneously working for a commercial concern that is trying to recover money from Iraq, according to confidential documents.
Mr Baker's Carlyle Group is in a consortium secretly proposing to try to collect $27bn (£15bn) on behalf of Kuwait, one of Iraq's biggest creditors, by using high-level political influence. It claims Mr Baker will not benefit personally, but the consortium could make millions in fees, retainers and commission as a result.
[...]
When George Bush appointed Mr Baker, a former secretary of state, as his unpaid envoy on December 5 2003, he called Mr Baker's job "a noble mission". But Mr Baker is also a senior counsellor and an equity partner with a reported $180m stake in the merchant bank and defence contractor the Carlyle Group.
[...]
Kathleen Clark, a law professor at Washington University and a leading expert on government ethics and regulations, said this meant that Mr Baker was in a "classic conflict of interest".

"Baker is on two sides of this transaction: he is supposed to be representing the interests of the US, but he is also a senior counsellor at Carlyle, and Carlyle wants to get paid to help Kuwait recover its debts from Iraq."

She added: "Carlyle and the other companies are exploiting Baker's current position to try to land a deal with Kuwait that would undermine the interests of the US government."
[...]”

“MarkO, Bush shaking hands with Saudis is no biggie at all! In fact I'm glad our leader is shaking the hands of foreigners. Moore can take all kinds of edited footage from years and years and show Bush shaking hands with Saudis making it look like that's all he does all day long is shake hands with Saudis and go on vacation. The Saudis have huge investments in America, but does that mean the President is more concerned with Saudi Arabian interests than our own here in America? The conclusions Moore were coming to were so far-fetched and ridiculous and conspiratorial that it would only play well with existing Bush haters and conspiratorialists. I came away from that movie feeling like it really wasn't very well done. Inserting old clips and his style of narration and the music and stuff made it seem low-budget and hoaky. As a movie, not even referring to content, it wasn't his usual good stuff. But of course that's my opinion. It obviously did extremely well commercially, but again I think that's just because it played to the base of those who are already predisposed to dislike Bush in the first place. To those who feel otherwise, that's cool.”

“I could show edited footage after footage after footage of Bush shaking hands with world leaders suggesting he works closely with each of them all the time. Or I could show footage after footage of Bush picking his nose, or making funny faces, or jogging, or doing whatever it is I want to make people believe he does a lot of to give the perception I'm trying to create. Editing film to portray what you want is a very powerful thing.”

“Buck, the Bush family has been chasing oil money in the middle east for decades.

Dubya's grand daddy was in bed with the Kuwati royals.

They have also made tons of money gun-running.”

““I said you were wrong in saying "The Bush admin IS funding stem cell research, just NOT embryonic stem cell research".”

So why is everyone making it out like Bush hates crippled and sick people then? Yourself included. So if you are admitting that Bush does indeed fund embryonic SCR why did you imply that Bush killed Superman? Are you lying now or then?”

“I've been away for awhile so I need someone to tell me...where's the discussion about Michael "I bleed Cheese Wizz Moore's body guard getting busted for carrying a weapon at? I wasn't a bit surprised when I found out Moore has a bodyguard who carries a gun. His type don't want US to have these rights but it's ok for THEM.

http://www.nynewsday.com/news/local/crime/nyc-gun0121,0,5663690.story?coll=nyc-homepage-breaking2”

“I think I missed that discusion also. ;-)”

“its a vast left-wing conspiracy”

“I think Mike Moore makes great movies and I hope he makes a ton more. Cheers to Michael Moore.”