OUCH. Glenn Beck exposed as phony on HealthCare Debate

[KittenKoder]

**** you. This has NOTHING to do with Obama.

Then why do you blindly support the government now?

Calling Beck a fear-mongering liar does not equate to 'blindly supporting the government'.

However, your statement has proven you blindly oppose the government.

Hardly blindly ... they keep encroaching on freedom each year, there is basis for my worries about them taking control of everything and Obama is only supporting those fears.

 

[Emma]

Sinister

Dear God.

snopes.com: Cash for Clunkers

The new message says the same damned thing.

US CODE: Title 5,552a. Records maintained on individuals

did you bother to read the part about what EFF said?
it proves BECK RIGHT

sheeesh

Really now. Because EFF states that consumers were in NO danger of all the bullshit beck claimed.

 

[DiveCon]

**** you. This has NOTHING to do with Obama.

Then why do you blindly support the government now?

Calling Beck a fear-mongering liar does not equate to 'blindly supporting the government'.

However, your statement has proven you blindly oppose the government.

except you are WRONG in calling him that when he reported it COPRRECTLY and they CHANGED the wording

 

[Emma]

i cant believe emma is being such a shill for obama
never thought i'd ever see that day

**** you. This has NOTHING to do with Obama.

sure it does
it was HIS administration that put the site up
now quit it

and beck reported it ACCURATELY
even your snopes site admits it further down
snopes isnt alway correct either

Snopes does NOT admit Beck was right.

Jesus God, why are you lying? Seriously? Is it intentional or can you simply not understand what you're reading?

 

[DiveCon]

Sinister

Dear God.

snopes.com: Cash for Clunkers

The new message says the same damned thing.

US CODE: Title 5,552a. Records maintained on individuals

did you bother to read the part about what EFF said?
it proves BECK RIGHT

sheeesh

Really now. Because EFF states that consumers were in NO danger of all the bullshit beck claimed.

because the wording on the warning was poorly written
sheeesh emma
even the cars people said that
yet you still want to make it about Beck
damn

 

[DiveCon]

**** you. This has NOTHING to do with Obama.

sure it does
it was HIS administration that put the site up
now quit it

and beck reported it ACCURATELY
even your snopes site admits it further down
snopes isnt alway correct either

Snopes does NOT admit Beck was right.

Jesus God, why are you lying? Seriously? Is it intentional or can you simply not understand what you're reading?

no, they fall short of actually saying it
but what EFF showed was that he was right
sheeesh

to me, its YOU doing the lying right now

 

[Emma]

Then why do you blindly support the government now?

Calling Beck a fear-mongering liar does not equate to 'blindly supporting the government'.

However, your statement has proven you blindly oppose the government.

Hardly blindly ... they keep encroaching on freedom each year, there is basis for my worries about them taking control of everything and Obama is only supporting those fears.

lol

Like I said... you believe it could be true, even if it's not, therefore it is true.

That's, well... crazy.

 

[DiveCon]

god damned, its just a ******* tv guy
and he got it right based on the info they knew at the time
and the government CHANGED IT

 

[Emma]

Then why do you blindly support the government now?

Calling Beck a fear-mongering liar does not equate to 'blindly supporting the government'.

However, your statement has proven you blindly oppose the government.

except you are WRONG in calling him that when he reported it COPRRECTLY and they CHANGED the wording

Now you're just being intentionally obtuse. I never said the warning wasn't there. That isn't my problem with what Beck did and you damned well know it.

 

[DiveCon]

Calling Beck a fear-mongering liar does not equate to 'blindly supporting the government'.

However, your statement has proven you blindly oppose the government.

except you are WRONG in calling him that when he reported it COPRRECTLY and they CHANGED the wording

Now you're just being intentionally obtuse. I never said the warning wasn't there. That isn't my problem with what Beck did and you damned well know it.

he reported it correctly

if he was totally wrong, why did they CHANGE IT????????????


you really need to get over the "faux news " bullshit you got from the lib morons at hannity
sheeesh, its bordering on an obsession for you guys
FNC is no more or less any more dishonest than any other news channel

 

[Emma]

did you bother to read the part about what EFF said?
it proves BECK RIGHT

sheeesh

Really now. Because EFF states that consumers were in NO danger of all the bullshit beck claimed.

because the wording on the warning was poorly written
sheeesh emma
even the cars people said that
yet you still want to make it about Beck
damn

It isn't about the goddamned warning and you know it. It's about Beck and his idiot guests claiming the government was going to access private computers of consumers.

 

[Emma]

Well, you've done as you always have. So I really don't care. Whatever you say, dive.

There. Happy now?

 

[DiveCon]

Really now. Because EFF states that consumers were in NO danger of all the bullshit beck claimed.

because the wording on the warning was poorly written
sheeesh emma
even the cars people said that
yet you still want to make it about Beck
damn

It isn't about the goddamned warning and you know it. It's about Beck and his idiot guests claiming the government was going to access private computers of consumers.

did you actually read what the warning said?????
it DID claim that was exactly what would happen
he reported it correctly and the cars site CHANGED THE WARNING

 

[DiveCon]

Well, you've done as you always have. So I really don't care. Whatever you say, dive.

There. Happy now?

no, thats condescending

 

[Emma]

because the wording on the warning was poorly written
sheeesh emma
even the cars people said that
yet you still want to make it about Beck
damn

It isn't about the goddamned warning and you know it. It's about Beck and his idiot guests claiming the government was going to access private computers of consumers.

did you actually read what the warning said?????
it DID claim that was exactly what would happen
he reported it correctly and the cars site CHANGED THE WARNING

And it says the same thing (see links above), only using more precise legalese. Personally, I'd rather they'd left it alone as plain English.

 

[Emma]

Well, you've done as you always have. So I really don't care. Whatever you say, dive.

There. Happy now?

no, thats condescending

Well, I consider you a dear friend. Perhaps we shouldn't talk politics, then.

 

[DiveCon]

It isn't about the goddamned warning and you know it. It's about Beck and his idiot guests claiming the government was going to access private computers of consumers.

did you actually read what the warning said?????
it DID claim that was exactly what would happen
he reported it correctly and the cars site CHANGED THE WARNING

And it says the same thing (see links above), only using more precise legalese. Personally, I'd rather they'd left it alone as plain English.

no, its not even close to the same
and if snopes hadnt disabled copying from the site i would paste it in here to show you
they completely changed it
not just the wording but the meaning as well
no where does it even imply that your computer is property of the US Government like it did opn the previous warning

 

[Emma]

did you actually read what the warning said?????
it DID claim that was exactly what would happen
he reported it correctly and the cars site CHANGED THE WARNING

And it says the same thing (see links above), only using more precise legalese. Personally, I'd rather they'd left it alone as plain English.

no, its not even close to the same
and if snopes hadnt disabled copying from the site i would paste it in here to show you
they completely changed it
not just the wording but the meaning as well
no where does it even imply that your computer is property of the US Government like it did opn the previous warning

No, it didn't change the meaning of what they had said before. If you read the statutes referenced, it's there. They admit it was poorly worded, but the code referenced is the same one.

 

[Bfgrn]

gotta love credible unbiased sources!

The "source" is Glenn Beck, pea brain...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGeZQrpZbjI]YouTube - Beck "Lose" His "Mind;" Screams At Caller: "Get Off My Phone You Little Pinhead!"[/ame]

No, it was huffingtonpost, dumbfuck. And Glenn was awesome in that clip. That woman was a dumbass.

The "source" of the idiocy is Glenn Beck. The Huffington Post only "reported" on it... they didn't make anything up, he said what the HP said he said...it is called "accurate" reporting.

The only thing that was "awesome" is Beck's ignorance and his proof that he is a moron.

 

[DiveCon]

The "source" is Glenn Beck, pea brain...

YouTube - Beck "Lose" His "Mind;" Screams At Caller: "Get Off My Phone You Little Pinhead!"

No, it was huffingtonpost, dumbfuck. And Glenn was awesome in that clip. That woman was a dumbass.

The "source" of the idiocy is Glenn Beck. The Huffington Post only "reported" on it... they didn't make anything up, he said what the HP said he said...it is called "accurate" reporting.

The only thing that was "awesome" is Beck's ignorance and his proof that he is a moron.

hey, go look for that magic bullet