Beck won't let go of discredited claim that "Obamacare covers abortion in Pennsylvania"
July 19, 2010 5:51 pm ET
From the July 19 edition of Fox News' Glenn Beck:
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201007070057#911636
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201007160047#923319
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201007160039#923167
That should end his postings on this article....
???????
Because they also know Seaslug?
Facts, the correct information (such as knowing the differences between dot com and dot org), and clear sentence structure all matter.
Kind of like...Klingon?
Wingnuts are.. well....
Facts, and the correct information matter.
It came down to MM's use of the word "absurd" to describe some right wingers claim. The wingnut poster didn't find the claim "absurd" at all, because he believed it. Case closed.
Very limited abortions, ones that protect the life or the health of the mother, are covered.
And that's the way the federal law has ALWAYS read - that ONLY for the mother's health needs can an abortion be provided.
You're just too stupid to know this.
There's a difference between elective abortion and ALL abortions.
Federal money has ALWAYS gone to abortions that are provided to "SAVE and PROTECT women's lives and health!" It will continue to do so.
Obama was refuting the claim that elective abortions are going to be funded.
But "abortions" will be covered. They've always been covered. The Hyde Amendment allows for those necessary for the health and well-being of the woman, including her mental health in the case of rape or incest.
How about you tell us where he lied about this one?
Until you can conclusively debunk them, they are perfectly good and true links.
Are you going to tell us?
Your tactic is old. Get a new one.
Now, tell us where Beck told the truth.
They can never seem to bring themselves to click those related links before embarrassing themselves. Laziness is the mother of Wingnuttery.
The problem is making sense out of the MMFA double-speak and spin. Sometimes it is so out of control that it's easy to lose what the he** the initial claim of "misinformation" was. To make matters worse, any attempt at intelligent debate is stomped on with juvenile name-calling and insults.
I can't get over the fact that it's always Beck and Rush apologists who say this. STOP USING JUVENILE NAME-CALLING AND INSULTS AGAINST MY HEROES WHEN THEY COMPARE OBAMA TO HITLER!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You haven't answered my question, doughie.
Kudos for admitting the primary cause of your frustration- you get confused and forget what the topic is. Most wingnuts never get around to admitting that.
In fact, yourt first post on this thread showed you to be uninformed on the subject, and it was mostly an insult directed at bintx. Not exactly the best way to start off "intelligent debate".
Please quit with the victim act. It's really boring.
***Limbaugh Classic***
Rush: Liberals don't think, they fell. Everything is based on feelings. Conservatives think.
Caller: Well, we ['conservatives'] feel, too.
Rush: Well, sometimes but let's face it. Not Much.
Now, are you going to answer my question?
"I'm Governor of California!!"
Glenn,
I am sorry to hear that you are having Eye Problems!
I send you my Best! That the Eye Problem is Small and can be Cured!
"It is time we end the politicization of this issue," Obama said. "In the coming weeks, my administration will initiate a fresh conversation on family planning, working to find areas of common ground to best meet the needs of women and families at home and around the world."
"President Obama struck down a rule Friday that prohibits U.S. money from funding international family-planning clinics that promote abortion or provide counseling or referrals about abortion services."
Have you answered my question?
You don't think things through.
Please answer my question.
I asked my question first.
You still haven't answered my question.
Maybe I should guess who you are referring to?
President Obama struck down a rule Friday...
See, it's sort of a common thing for some athletes to speak about themselves in the third person, I thought that was widely known.
You just proved our argument. No where in that passage does it say funds for abortion. Promoting means that the clinic will actually tell the woman that abortion is an option. Provide counseling, well that is just self-explanatory. Referrals, just the same as getting a referral for a specialist from you PCP. But nowhere does it say FUND ABORTION.
As an aside, funding for family planning groups actually probably reduces abortions.
You still haven't answered my question, doughie? Why?
Dumba**.
He's on the wrong site and doesn't seem to realize it.
Correct me if this summary is too far off the mark:
The study shows that conservatives and liberals are correct about the same proportion of the time, but that conservatives are more than twice as likely to be wrong.
Fascinating - I wonder why the LAT buried (pardon the pun) the story in the obituaries?
Not quite. In the study, the subjects were commanded to press M when M appeared on the computer screen. But about twenty percent of the time a W would appear and when that happened they were supposed to refrain from tapping M. Liberals and conservatives performed equally well when an M appeared on the screen. But on the less common occasions when a W appeared, conservatives made many more mistakes. The conservatives just couldn't let go of their beloved M key and thus couldn't adapt to exceptional circumstances. This finding coincided with a higher level of brain activity for liberals in the part of the brain that deals with conflict. It seems this part of the brain is stronger in liberals.
In my unscientific opinion, this inability to process conflict has left its fingerprint all over conservative positions. Take for example the run-up to the war in Iraq; Saddam was an evil and bad man, So CON logic went, therefore we were right to overthrow him. Liberals on the other hand were by and large able to acknowledge that on the one hand that Saddam was evil, but that it would be unwise to invade Iraq. Conservatives would often accuse liberals of "supporting" Saddam because they just couldn't see how one could believe he was evil and yet not want to wage war with him. The same sort of logic can be seen when it comes to treatment of terror suspects; Guantanamo detainees are dangerous terrorists who must not get a trial lest we find them not guilty, according to many a wingnut.
One can also see this kind of binary-brained thinking in the belief that regulation and the progressive income tax are "communist". They seem to figure that since communists were wrong in having the government seize all private property, it must be wrong for any tax dollars to be used to benefit the common good. There can be no exceptions. We see this kind of thinking expressed frequently by our very own righton when he argues with posters who support single payer health care or cap and trade. "Of course you want that", righton often says, "liberals always want to expand government".
Perhaps the reason they get their information about the world from the likes of Rush Limbaugh is so they don't have to hear information that runs counter to their rigid beliefs. Either way, it seems like they've got their key, and they're sticking with it through thick and thin.
This is what I had perceived to be the salient points in the article:
They were instructed to tap a keyboard when an M appeared on a computer monitor and to refrain from tapping when they saw a W. M appeared four times more frequently than W, conditioning participants to press a key in knee-jerk fashion whenever they saw a letter. Liberals had more brain activity and made fewer mistakes than conservatives when they saw a W, researchers said. Liberals and conservatives were equally accurate in recognizing M. ...liberals were 4.9 times as likely as conservatives to show activity in the brain circuits that deal with conflicts, and 2.2 times as likely to score in the top half of the distribution for accuracy.
Still, despite my faulty reading, this seems to support my observation that some conservatives (traditionalist, we've-done-it-this-way-forever, no-need-to-change types) have an almost-instinctive reaction (their key, as you put it) to every situation - even if that reaction is inappropriate.
Could it be that the conservative brain is more susceptible to selective thinking and filtering out the 'mistakes' through confirmation bias?
Very interesting, bintx has been linking to it, I just started reading it last night.
Now all of a sudden, he's able to use proper punctuation in addition to spelling every word correctly.
It's got one that's not stupid? I'll have to keep an eye out for that.
Expect more of this the closer it gets to November.
A) they don't deliberately come to a site whose purpose they disagree with, defend every media figure whose lies and/or batsh!ttery are being documented, and call the people who don't do either of the above stupid
and
B) they're not all the same two or three guys.
Why do you consider a dissenting opinion, or someone who is just pointing out how ridiculous most of the claims in here are, a troll?
Maybe you can point me in the direction of a right wing site that considers you trolls, repeatedly tries to ridicule you for your opinion, and uses juvenile name-calling and insults? If I promise to stay out of your site, will you stay out of mine?
You might find you get a different response from people if you clean up your act a little, instead of trying to blame everybody else.