INGO Challenge = Proof #2

[SavageEagle]

Same as the first thread. This one should be a little easier.

Prove Glenn Beck wrong.

I say this should be easier because Glenn Beck doesn't show you something without having proof. So, just as before...

Concrete, hard evidence. Not some blog or forum posting. News articles are only acceptable if accompanied by a time-line or some other piece of proof.

Again, this one should be a little easier for you all since you demand that the subject provide proof, which he does every time.

Anyone wanna take on THIS challenge? Or just make jokes?

 

[shibumiseeker]

We have a choice???!? Jokes of course!!!


At least I've HEARD of Beck...

 

[WHAT HAPPENED]

Glenn Beck is only telling you HALF TRUTHS yes .5 or 1/2 or 50% of the truth...

In a nutshell with all the facts...

This is why...
New Corporation is owned buy FOX NEWS
News Corporation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Keith Rupert Murdoch is the Company's Chairman, Chief Executive Office and Founder.
Rupert Murdoch - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Glenn Beck is Payed buy Fox...

Mr. Murdoch the Company's Chairman, Chief Executive Office and Founder is a Bilderberger.
YouTube - Murdoch of Fox News Admits Manipulating the News for Agenda
Wikipedia 'editors' censor Bilderberg's Nazi roots - http://217.72.179.7/bilderberg/ and www.bilderberg-mirror.org.uk - The High Priests of Globalisation - Bilderberg Conferences - secret Mafia governmnent for transatlantic elite power
Issues On Call: Rupert Murdoch, Bilderbergs, Council on Foreign Relations, Seizing The World!

ALL THE FACTS!!!!!

Murdoch’s mouthpiece: It’s not what Beck exposes, it’s the issues he deflects and who he discredits that counts

 

[WHAT HAPPENED]

Same as the first thread. This one should be a little easier.

Prove Glenn Beck wrong.

I say this should be easier because Glenn Beck doesn't show you something without having proof. So, just as before...

Concrete, hard evidence. Not some blog or forum posting. News articles are only acceptable if accompanied by a time-line or some other piece of proof.

Again, this one should be a little easier for you all since you demand that the subject provide proof, which he does every time.

Anyone wanna take on THIS challenge? Or just make jokes?

Hope fully my post does not get DELETED.....

 

[Lars]

.Thanks.

 

[WHAT HAPPENED]

.Thanks.

 

[SavageEagle]

I knew Beck was under the thumb, and I knew he wasn't showing the WHOLE picture, but I've yet to see anyone, ANYONE prove him completely wrong.

 

[ATM]

I...but I've yet to see anyone, ANYONE prove him completely wrong.

Completely?

So what if someone's only wrong 99% of the time?

 

[SavageEagle]

Completely?

So what if someone's only wrong 99% of the time?

Then we get to blame you cause you stopped cooking us bacon.

 

[ATM]

Then we get to blame you cause you stopped cooking us bacon.

I must challenge you to prove that





...completely.

 

[jdhaines]

I'm you're huckleberry...

Glenn Beck's Assertion:
Video: Link Here
Segment starts at 3:48
Segment ends at 6:28

1. Assertion: ~5:58 he claims that the law being voided will require doctors to "Commit murder or you can't work here anymore"
2. Assertion: ~6:15 he claims that doctors will not be able to refuse to do a procedure that they believe is murder [after the repeal of the law]

His essential talking point is that once Bush's "Freedom of Conscious Act" (Official name Provider Refusal Rule, which took effect the day of Obama's Inauguration) is repealed, Doctor's will be forced to perform procedures against their moral and religious values. I feel that conservatively this is his primary statement. We can argue whether he meant this, but it seems pretty clear to me. If we can all agree this was his statement, I'll work towards showing he was completely wrong.

Support Glenn Beck is Wrong:

1. Title 42, Chapter 6A, Subchapter VIII, Section 300a-7 (Link Here) States that:
   

   ...No individual shall be required to perform or assist in the performance of any part of a health service program or research activity funded in whole or in part under a program administered by the Secretary of Health and Human Services if his performance or assistance in the performance of such part of such program or activity would be contrary to his religious beliefs or moral convictions...

2. Federal law already protects doctors from both requiring procedures against their moral obligations as well as discrimination from the organization if they decide not to perform a procedure. The new law that Bush proposed right at the end of his presidency does not change that. It simply requires an organization to certify that it is complying with the new rule
   Source
   

   Federal law bars discriminating against healthcare workers who refuse to provide abortions or abortion referrals to patients, but the Bush reg change requires federally funded facilities to certify that they're complying with it

3. The biggest reason that the bill is being repealed is that both those for the law and against the law have agreed that it can be taken much to broadly. It can allow anyone in the medical field (including a cashier or pharmacy tech at walgreens) to refuse service and be protected. (The cashier could refuse to sell you Viagra medication simply because of moral reasons). This was the primary reason for the Obama group's repeal of the law.
   Source: My general understanding from multiple sources (Link1, Link2, Link3, Link4)

Extra Information: This law was mixed with some environmental things in a lame duck ruling thrown in right at the end of Bush Jr.'s presidency. Glenn Beck made a huge deal out of this and acted like if we repeal this law we will be forcing doctors to kill babies and grandmothers ("Bye Bye Grammy" ~GB in the segment above). He overstated his position, overexaggerated the law, and was completely wrong about the implications that doctors will have to perform abortions or be fired.

My Rant: I generally like Beck and I see him as a venting tool. If no one on TV was saying the things we think, people would be even more pissed off than they are. He is a blow off valve for the far-right. You'll notice that nothing he says or does brings about any change. He says things that we can all shake our head, sit back in the chair and say "Wow, he's right. I'm glad someone is thinking about this and saying it on TV." Then we all relax a bit more and go about our day. If no one was saying these things it would feel more like a government controlled media than it already does. That said, I think if we looked more deeply into many things he says we would find these similar half truths in many of the things he discusses.

Full Disclosure: I got the idea for this topic from Glenn Beck Sucks but then took off and did my own research on both what Glenn claimed and what the truth was behind it all.

Side Note: Funny that Glenn said he's an alcoholic. I didn't know that.


This was fun, don't take it too seriously, although I really feel like I'm right on this based on my research.

 

[level.eleven]

Here is an entire article from reason.com about Beck's slip-ups with historical events.

Beck U - Reason Magazine

 

[jdhaines]

Here is an entire article from reason.com about Beck's slip-ups with historical events.

Beck U - Reason Magazine

Oh sure...just let someone else do your dirty work. Good find though. SE in the OP wanted actual proof. I wonder how hard it would be to take one of those statements, find when Beck said it, and find the actual historical happening as real facts....hmm.

 

[shibumiseeker]

Oh sure...just let someone else do your dirty work. Good find though.

It does make you feel dirty wrestling with pigs, doesn't it!

 

[Expat]

.Thanks.

Is that an invisible thanks

 

[SavageEagle]

Oh sure...just let someone else do your dirty work. Good find though. SE in the OP wanted actual proof. I wonder how hard it would be to take one of those statements, find when Beck said it, and find the actual historical happening as real facts....hmm.

I appreciate your first response. I'll pick through it when I get home later. However, I'm not looking for slip-ups on historical events or when he's called a goat a cow. I'm looking for charges that he's made about government that's wrong. Charges he's made against the circle of power (Crime, INC, etc) that's wrong.

I'll be back on later though.

 

[MilitaryArms]

I'm curious, what is this obsession with proving entertainers "wrong"? You do realize Beck, Jones, Limbaugh, Maddow, Maher, etc. are entertainers, right?

I also wouldn't group Beck into the same camp as Jones. Jones feeds conspiracy theories which, in many cases, are way out there. I put him in the same camp as Art Bell. Beck is a political commentary entertainer much like Maddow, Maher, etc. There's a little truth in much of what they say, but they put their particular brand of spin on everything. The truth is in the eye of the beholder.

I don't rely on entertainers to feed my political views. I listen to them in small doses, as I find their commentary interesting (both left and right), and it kills time while in the car. But I would never base my political views on such folks exclusively... nor would I allow their views to even weigh heavily on my own.

 

[SavageEagle]

Well, I hope that people will at least TRY to take my challenge here. Try to prove them wrong and present it here. I don't care anymore if they've proven their case. Show me evidence that they're wrong. Challenge YOURSELF to look at things from all the angles whether its against your belief system or not. Push yourself through the anger and rage and see if you can make a counter argument against yourself on the issue.

That is my point with this thread.

Everyone is going on and on and on that Jones or Beck haven't PROVEN their side. I don't care. PROVE THEM WRONG. Entertainment or not, I don't care. I want to see them proven wrong. Show me your evidence.

 

[SavageEagle]

I don't rely on entertainers to feed my political views.

I completely agree. Doing so would be to feed the Sheep Mentality. You know, if everyone's thinking alike, no one's thinking for themselves.

I don't rely on ANYONE to shape my political views. My views are based on Liberty and the Founding Ideals. No, it wasn't perfect, but there's only one thing in this universe that IS perfect, but we can't go into that.

However, My challenge still stands. I don't think anyone here is up to it.

 

[MilitaryArms]

Well, I hope that people will at least TRY to take my challenge here. Try to prove them wrong and present it here. I don't care anymore if they've proven their case. Show me evidence that they're wrong. Challenge YOURSELF to look at things from all the angles whether its against your belief system or not. Push yourself through the anger and rage and see if you can make a counter argument against yourself on the issue.

That is my point with this thread.

Everyone is going on and on and on that Jones or Beck haven't PROVEN their side. I don't care. PROVE THEM WRONG. Entertainment or not, I don't care. I want to see them proven wrong. Show me your evidence.

I have no desire to prove Jones or Beck wrong as I have no interest in proving Quentin Tarantino or Alex Baldwin wrong. I don't listen to Jones anymore and I rarely listen to Beck.

I honestly have no issue with Beck. Jones is a whack job. That's like saying "prove Bob Lazar wrong". How can you prove a whack job wrong? If I say the Constitution was burned in the War of 1812 and the one on display in Washington is a fake, I challenge you to "prove me wrong". It's a fools errand.