Ad hominem ad nauseum.
By on Jan 24th, 2007 at 7:53 pm
Ad hominem ad nauseum.
National Review Senior Editor Ramesh Ponnuru — author of “The Party of Death” — keeps writing factually inaccurate columns about stem cell research. Jonathan Moreno and Sam Berger from the Center for American Progress keep knocking his falsehoods down.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Stem cells and Democrats.
Got to kill unborns to keep the living from dying.
Charlatans.
January 24th, 2007 at 8:01 pmOr to stop them from smirking as Babs Bush should have.
January 24th, 2007 at 8:07 pmStem cells and Republicans.
Got to protect lumps of cells while slaughtering living, breathing, actual human beings.
Hypocrites.
January 24th, 2007 at 8:41 pmTwo days ago in our local paper, our wonderful newly elected Rep. David Davis (R-TN) explained why he voted against all but one of the bills put forth by the Dems in the first 100 hours. (He voted for the cuts to student loan interest rates.)
In typical right-wing blabbing, he said he voted against (surprise!) the stem cell bill because it “destroyed life.”
In a related side note, the reporter of the story left out Davis’ vote on the bill to implement the recommendations of the 9/11 commission. I wrote an e-mail to the reporter yesterday; he said he left out the part about that vote because there wasn’t enough room on the front page for the entire article, so he had to leave something out. He said in retrospect he “should have” included that.
Now…this same article was on the paper’s Internet site. So there should have been enough room there. Right? Right??? Guess again. Today I find that the entire article has been removed from the Web site. Maybe it had something to do with the fact that, in my e-mail to the reporter, I said it would be a shame if Davis’ constituents found out he voted against securing the country from terrorists.
(Note: Davis voted against the bill – H.R. 1 – because he said it would give too much away to the U.N. and we shouldn’t have to ask the U.N. permission to defend our country.)
January 24th, 2007 at 9:44 pmYup, much better to toss the little buggers in the incinerator, eh? Burning them to a crisp respects their life SO MUCH better than using them to save potentially millions of lives.
Look. These blastocysts are going to be made every single solitary time someone wants to artificially inseminate themselves. They will never, ever, EVER have a chance to grow into a baby unless the developing embryo becomes implanted onto the endometrial lining of a uterus.
If you disagree with the premise of artificial insemination, fine. This seems to be the real crux of the issue to many who oppose stem cell research. Instead of going after the life-saving research of stem cell research, attempt to make artificial insemination illegal. Attack what you are REALLY against. Never mind that the vast majority of both eggs AND sperm will never be used to create a baby, be it through natural or artificial causes. Never mind that you are preventing women from using their own eggs and the sperm of their own partners (most often) to create a beautiful baby they can raise that is truly theirs, in the biological sense. Never mind that there is no way around creating all of these extra blastocysts every time you begin the proccess of artificial insemination (at least, not yet).
Don’t let those facts get in the way, eh?
January 24th, 2007 at 9:48 pmPonnuru is a hack.
His argumentative style seems to consist of misrepresenting the arguments of others, pulling on irrelevant semantic threads, and finally making snide ad hominen attacks. When the inevitable retort is published he simply waves away the response as “sloppy” or unprofessional. It boils down to “I’m smarter than you, therefore it’s impossible that your argument is valid.”
What a wanker.
January 24th, 2007 at 10:14 pmPonnuru’s arguments are so flawed I have no idea where to begin.
January 24th, 2007 at 10:22 pmamendment to ‘fairness doctrine’ that known or discovered factual errors MUST be corrected (with a small print ‘correction section’) upon discovery?
January 25th, 2007 at 8:52 amI got this fat faced Hadji-look-alike al Crackkker wannabe mixed up with that other…
…closeted, repressed conned’self-servative scumbag…
…the one blaming liberal Progressives for (whatever he was hallucinating about a week or so ago)…
…either way, they’re both right wing scum…
January 25th, 2007 at 10:15 amPonnuru was bitch-slapped by John Stewart on the Daily Show a little while back… it was as if he had never been confronted on his BS in any capacity before that and I enjoyed his every nervous sip of water.
Stem cells from embryonic fluid are beginning to be found to be more useful, so maybe this could finally put an end to the debate, eh?
January 25th, 2007 at 10:57 am