The idea behind Missouri Constitutional Amendment No. 2 is that IF it is passed, it will provide a safehaven for stem cell research, therapy, and cures. This could conceivably benefit not only Michael J. Fox, but anyone else, resident or not. But first, it needs to pass. I can tell you that the Catholic Church is fighting this amendment tooth and nail.
My point about Michael Fox was that he could have supported this legislation, perhaps later helped to raise research funds, or other funds, thus helping to create a situation that could benefit him or others. That is his goal, right?
Instead, he chose to insert himself in an election that has little to do with him directly, between Talent and McCaskill. I might add that regardless of who is elected, either in Missouri or elsewhere is not going to help Michael J. Fox in terms of what he says he wants.
Yet he had the opportunity to make direct difference by speaking in favor of the Amendment. The fact that he did not do so illustrates the purpose of the ad that Michael J. Fox made, all by itself.
But going a step further, he also portrayed himself (I believe "dramatize" is the word you used) in a manner that he has never portrayed himself publicly in the past. Not in the Congressional hearings, not on Boston Legal. I'll allow you to draw your own conclusions as to why he chose this method of "dramatization"....there is several possibilities. But I'd say none of them have to do with being more honest than 99.9% of the commercials as you say. Take that hook out of your mouth before they reel you in.
OldTrader