Michael J Fox: ballot measures – Parkinson’s mess; Boston Legal – perfectly OK

By: Steve Yuhas

After listening to the debate involving Michael J. Fox and radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh for an entire week I finally decided to seek out and watch for myself the ad that exploited Fox and misrepresented a ballot measure.  I am never surprised when the left comes up with absurdities about the right, but even this ad surprised me because it was so patently false.  Even worse than the ad, though was his explanation and defense.

It has been said by people from all over the political landscape that they feel for Fox’s physical condition and I join in that chorus.  Having Parkinson’s disease cannot be an easy thing and advocating for something you believe in is a good thing - usually.  The problem with Fox and his allies is that after the debate began and to this very moment he is being given a pass by the mainstream media about his position on the various issues, and the commercial itself, simply because he suffers from a disease.

On Sunday Fox admitted that he did not even read the measure for which he was being used as a patsy to whore the initiative on to the people of Missouri.  One would have thought he would have done at least that for the commercial; after all he memorized the lines; surely he could have taken the time to read what the law was actually going to do before he so dramatically endorsed it.

Maybe Fox was snookered into doing a commercial lauding a cause that he believes in, stem cell research, without knowing that the ballot measure is not about stem cells.  It would be nice for someone in the media with access to Fox (read: people who agree with him) to ask him, but since Fox has a disease he is off limits to hard questions and every American should find that fact alone objectionable.

There is no question that having a disability is rough – I know this from personal experience and to some degree I empathize with Fox because he seems to have sincerely held beliefs.  The difference between Fox and me is little more than our world views: his says that having a disease gives you moral authority; mine does not.  His is more akin to the old John Kerry adage whereby if you questioned Kerry on his policies you were, by extension, questioning his patriotism.  That worked for awhile, but was wrong – like Fox.

When people on the left are victims they are held out as heroes and off limits to criticism: Cindy Sheehan was off limits because she lost her son to the war in Iraq (and ultimately bastardized his sacrifice by her juvenile tantrum on a dusty road in Crawford, TX), Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) who had a boy toy running a prostitution gig out of his home was ultimately kept in Congress because he was a victimized homo.  Enter Michal J. Fox who is off limits because he has Parkinson’s disease. 

Liberal victims are untouchable and doing so is not only hurtful to the victim, but metaphorically deadly to the accuser because soon after they will be labeled as a hateful, homophobic, anti-gay, anti-black, anti-grieving mother or every ‘ism’ that has yet to find a home in the English lexicon.

Meanwhile on the right – being a victim does not seem to carry with it the same level of Teflon that it does on the left.

When a conservative has a drug problem or addiction there is not only harsh judgment from pundits on both sides, but generalized glee at the political fall out that may follow the revelation (no Charlie Sheen “I’ve been to rehab 35 times, but it doesn’t seem to take” excuse for conservatives allowed).  When a conservative has marital problems and has no connection to a prostitution ring or unseemly sex with interns (or a blue dress in his background) they are promptly and shamefully ushered out of the Congress or other bastion of power – first by the right – without the need for the left to make the call.

And the cherry on top is when a conservative disagrees with the left’s new baby: embryonic stem cell research and human cloning.  It makes no difference if the conservative is someone who developed a disease like Parkinson’s over time or someone like me who was injured because of a fluke that forever changed his life – the reaction is still the same.  Fox starred in a couple of sitcoms, fictitiously traveled Back to the Future and somehow he has the moral authority to not just speak about research, but to speak about it as if he were the Pope – with absolute infallibility.

Then there is a conservative like me: a disabled former military man who dreamt of a career in the military who ended up having to listen to people tell him that he was an idiot because I am unwilling to say yes kill that unborn child and use it for research so I can ride the roller coasters at Six Flags or get through the grocery store more quickly.  Would successful (which is still up for debate) stem cell cures make my life easier – very much so, but I place a higher value on human life than those who would say take the life of the unborn today so that I can lead an easier life tomorrow.  To me – that is the principled stand – not the easy: kill the unborn so I don’t shake one.

The problem is that in America today we’ve gone from a society that was allowed, nay, encouraged to debate issues on their merits to a society that is only allowed to debate conservatives on personality and merit, but to never question liberals if they go off of their medication or don’t read what they’re endorsing. 

Every single week I am assailed either in print, by email or by callers for an idea of mine and never do I turn the tables and pull out the “hold on a second – I’m a disabled honorably discharged Jewish homo – you can’t question my ideas” card, but that is exactly where the people on the left are comfortable being.

Is it sad that Fox went through his life and ended up with a disease that makes him shake and stammer? Of course it is, but does that give him the right to misrepresent the facts of a ballot measure and then when questioned have people not worry about the reality of the concern, but to have a full blown fit because he suffers from a disease himself?  No.

Having a disability or disease has now become the newest and most often played card in the liberal deck of off limits to criticism cards.  It used to be that Social Security was the only thing we couldn’t talk about, then came Medicare, divorce, what you actually said or did not say, dictators you hugged out of politeness (never because you were a Commie yourself) and now we’ve gone full circle to the point where the only people that it is okay to criticize are white Christian conservative men and women. 

That is UNLESS they happen to be a conservative who is disabled, a veteran, a Jew and gay BUT happens to think the wrong way – then that is okay too.

One day soon the pendulum will have gone so far off whack that no longer will we have political debates at all – we’ll just all gather around the television and there will be an American Idol of political success whereby the party with the most oppressed and victimized person wins.  The challenge to see who can come up with the most eclectic mix of disabled, multi-ethnic and religiously oppressed person will decide the course of the debate and election.

G-d help us when it comes down to it because chances are the only black-Hispanic-Asian mix, female, vegetarian, natural blonde haired, blue eyed, lesbian, Koran reading amputee will be on the left and then there will be no chance for political dialogue at all.

I’m still amazed that nobody in the press has pressed Fox to talk about his appearance and behavior in the commercial versus his demeanor on Boston Legal.  For all of the cat fighting and one-upmanship of this whole ordeal Fox has not been challenged by those with access about why after all of the episodes of Boston Legal that Fox was somehow able to do: getting dressed, not falling all over himself on the set, remembering the lines and not shaking his way from milk to butter he somehow could not find sixty seconds in order not to be the rickety mess he was on television when it came time to sway a political point.

And how lucky for Democrats that they caught him at exactly the right time when he was in that state.  What would have happened if he had just talked the way he does when he’s saying hello to Denny Crane?  Not as much political punch in that when you can have a full fledged victim celebrity at your disposal.  Christopher Reeve would be proud.

Steve Yuhas is a radio talk show host on NewsRadio 600 KOGO in southern California and may be reached at steve@steveyuhas.com or www.steveyuhas.com