Name one person ?

[callmeslick]

whee! Another gem:
Beck,"In the health care bill, we're now offering insurance for dogs."


Politifact(a Florida, non-partisan truth in journalism effort), gave this one it's worst rating of "Pants on Fire".

[Barfly]

Do you hang out in the http://www.democraticunderground.com/ Mr. Slick?

[callmeslick]

never. There are loons on the left, as there are on the right. Everything I've ever read out of that site leads me to believe it is a waste of my time. That said, I've never read or even visited the site, so I am using sort of pre-emptive judgement.

[fatman]

Concentration camps?? Establishment of totalitarian rule?? Are you all completely nuts?

Or the patriot act 20 years ago

[callmeslick]

back to Beck. From MediaMatters.org:
From the February 22 broadcast of Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program:

BECK: It's ordering a comprehensive database on health claims, so everything that you do is going into a computer database for the federal government.

"Database" -- proposed by GOP -- would track sanctions on providers
Database centralizes records of sanctions. The only "database" mentioned in the proposal is a "Comprehensive Sanctions Database" that would compile Medicare and Medicaid sanctions on health care providers and give law-enforcement agencies access to that information. From the president's health care reform proposal:

Comprehensive Sanctions Database. The President's Proposal establishes a comprehensive Medicare and Medicaid sanctions database, overseen by the HHS Inspector General. This database will provide a central storage location, allowing for law enforcement access to information related to past sanctions on health care providers, suppliers and related entities. (Source: H.R. 3400, "Empowering Patients First Act" (Republican Study Committee bill))

Provision taken from GOP bill. As the citation in the proposal notes, the database was proposed in a health care reform bill offered by Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) and the Republican Study Committee:


ooops, well, Glenn, there you go again.......
Let's face it, folks, I could keep this up for days on end. Virtually everything out of Beck's mouth is either a distortion, an error, or an outright lie. I think I've pretty much answered Pud's initial question, several times over. Go ahead, if you wish, buy this idiot's bullshit. And, if you do, it's a sad commentary on your intellect and critical thinking. He is a liar, it's that simple. And, he's doing it to enrich himself at the expense of your gullibility. Hell, it's perfectly alright to question the Obama administration, to differ with them or me, or whoever. But(and, believe it or not, I say this even more frequently to Progressive types with loony government conspiracy theories), if you go and embrace this sort of ignorant garbage, you essentially ruin any credibility when you attempt to debate here, or anywhere. Your call, as always.

[Pudfark]

back to Beck. From MediaMatters.org:
From the February 22 broadcast of Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program:

BECK: It's ordering a comprehensive database on health claims, so everything that you do is going into a computer database for the federal government.

"Database" -- proposed by GOP -- would track sanctions on providers
Database centralizes records of sanctions. The only "database" mentioned in the proposal is a "Comprehensive Sanctions Database" that would compile Medicare and Medicaid sanctions on health care providers and give law-enforcement agencies access to that information. From the president's health care reform proposal:

Comprehensive Sanctions Database. The President's Proposal establishes a comprehensive Medicare and Medicaid sanctions database, overseen by the HHS Inspector General. This database will provide a central storage location, allowing for law enforcement access to information related to past sanctions on health care providers, suppliers and related entities. (Source: H.R. 3400, "Empowering Patients First Act" (Republican Study Committee bill))

Provision taken from GOP bill. As the citation in the proposal notes, the database was proposed in a health care reform bill offered by Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) and the Republican Study Committee:


ooops, well, Glenn, there you go again.......
Let's face it, folks, I could keep this up for days on end. Virtually everything out of Beck's mouth is either a distortion, an error, or an outright lie. I think I've pretty much answered Pud's initial question, several times over. Go ahead, if you wish, buy this idiot's bullshit. And, if you do, it's a sad commentary on your intellect and critical thinking. He is a liar, it's that simple. And, he's doing it to enrich himself at the expense of your gullibility. Hell, it's perfectly alright to question the Obama administration, to differ with them or me, or whoever. But(and, believe it or not, I say this even more frequently to Progressive types with loony government conspiracy theories), if you go and embrace this sort of ignorant garbage, you essentially ruin any credibility when you attempt to debate here, or anywhere. Your call, as always.

Ok, Slick....I'll take'm one at a time last one first.....

BECK: It's ordering a comprehensive database on health claims, so everything that you do is going into a computer database for the federal government.

I cannot recall the Topic of that particular program...so one sentence of it, could have been taken out of context or maybe not...it really doesn't matter....because, what you wrote in red ink, has no application to it.....The reason? Beck is not a part of the GOP....he claims no party affiliation and frequently says he has libertarian leanings.....So?

Further, if the Feds should control health care...they will absolutely use the info they get...they always do...and most of the time...nobody knows about it...and you won't have a choice in giving it to them, if you become part of the proposed system.

Old Pudfark sez: " That pretty much makes yer last paragraph...meaningless "

[Pudfark]

whee! Another gem:
Beck,"In the health care bill, we're now offering insurance for dogs."


Politifact(a Florida, non-partisan truth in journalism effort), gave this one it's worst rating of "Pants on Fire".

Whoooo Wheee, we is on a roll for another one sentence quote from Beck...Context is in question again...Was it from his radio program..tv show..or his on the road comedy show?

Old Pudfark sez: " We get a lot of them Gems in the outhouse, in context, of course "

[Pudfark]

One for the Canadians to enjoy:

from FactCheck.org:
RHETORIC: BECK SAID VANCOUVER LOST $1 BILLION WHEN IT “HAD THE OLYMPICS.” Glenn Beck said, “Vancouver lost, how much was it? they lost a billion dollars when they had the Olympics.” [Transcript, Glenn Beck Show, 9/29/09]

REALITY: VANCOUVER’S OLYMPICS WILL NOT TAKE PLACE UNTIL 2010. Vancouver will host the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games from February 12 – 28, 2010 and March 12-21, 2010, respectively. [Vancouver2010.com, accessed 9/29/09]


Please, name one person with functional brain cells who doesn't think Beck is a flaming loon.

Here ya go...this is one bit that I could find...seems it would make rational sense to folks...it did to the White House....

"The White House attacked Glenn over a comment he made about the Vancouver Olympics, pointing out Glenn misspoke when ... Sep. 29, 2009 -"

Old Pudfark sez: " flamin loon = misspoke, Not...I'll go with the White House on this one "

[Pudfark]

Next example: Beck claimed that the White House appointee in question advocated forced sterilization techniques. A prominent de-bunking site wrote this:

But with regard to Beck's claim that Holdren "has proposed forcing abortions and putting sterilants in the drinking water to control population," the text of the book clearly does not support that. We think a thorough reading shows that these were ideas presented as approaches that had been discussed. They were not posed as suggestions or proposals. In fact, the authors make clear that they did not support coercive means of population control. Certainly, nowhere in the book do the authors advocate for forced abortions.

Some have argued that Holdren's view of the imminent and grave global dangers posed by overpopulation should provide pause, given Holdren's current view that global warming now presents imminent and grave global dangers. That's a matter for reasoned debate.


But in seeking to score points for a political argument, Beck seriously mischaracterizes Holdren's positions. Holdren didn't advocate those ideas then. And, when asked at a Senate confirmation hearing, Holdren said he did not support them now. We think it's irresponsible to pluck a few lines from a 1,000-page, 30-year-old textbook, and then present them out of context to dismiss Holdren's long and distinguished career.

Damn Slick...did you not read what you quoted? I did and I don't take any pleasure from pointing a few things out to you....

We think a thorough reading shows that these were ideas presented as approaches that had been discussed.

when asked at a Senate confirmation hearing, Holdren said he did not support them now

We think it's irresponsible to pluck a few lines from a 1,000-page, 30-year-old textbook, and then present them out of context to dismiss Holdren's long and distinguished career.
[/b]

I really like the one above...about the irresponsible pluck'n....and especially the "present them out of context" part....how it so seems to apply to what you have written ...so far...Slick...

If that is all that comes to your mind about Beck? You, really-really, need to watch/listen to his shows....and not because you "disagree"...because, you don't know what your disagreeing with....when, you do? We will try this again...if, you like.

Old Pudfark sez: " There's a treasure of Gems in the outhouse "

[callmeslick]

I'll stand by what I said earlier, Pud. One could spend days picking Beck apart. It's easy.
You know, the 'net is a great source of information, which is criticial to an informed populace. The downside is that the net and our media outlets are chock full of fabrications, half-truths and outright lies. Sorting through requires a bit of diligence. If you don't have the intellect for that, then folks like Beck start to sound plausible, and that's sad.