some of my research tells me...

[Guest Guest]

A Google search of 0.41 sec came up with these:

http://blog.heritage.org/2010/03/10/video-...-what-is-in-it/

http://www.breitbart.tv/nancy-pelosi-we-ne...ut-whats-in-it/

I think you owe someone an apology.

No, you owe the apology. She didn't say they would have to pass the bill to know what's in it. She said when they passed the bill you would know what's in it because you would see it working. As usual, the right wing is lying and distorting people's words.

[Guest Guest]

So why didn't MSNBC or CNN cover Pelosi saying what 2stupid4words claims she said? Because she never said it. What 2stupid4words posted and what you'll find posted other places on the internet is a distortion of what she said. They changed a few little words and completely changed her meaning. So naturally responsible news organizations wouldn't cover it because it would be a lie.

Why did Fox cover it? Same reason. It's a distortion, a lie, spun out to serve Fox's political agenda. That's what Fox does.

Oh, but MSNBC has a political agenda too. Yes it does - but the difference is, they don't lie to promote it. Fox does. And Fox's listeners are either 2stupid to notice or too ultra-stupid to care.

[Guest 4 the Record]

Apparently not that exhaustive a search

http://www.breitbart.tv/nancy-pelosi-we-ne...ut-whats-in-it/

Just saying--do your homework before you spout off.

Excuse me! Nowhere, I mean nowhere, does Speaker Pelosi say that SHE is not aware of the what is in the bill. She does insinuate, and rightly so, that the general public doesn't. How many people (besides me, that is) do you know who are even acquainted with the its contents?

C'mon, stop playing semantics. You know perfectly well that Nancy Pelosi never even hinted that she wasn't fully versed on this legislation.

[Guest 4 the Record]

Well since you admittedly don't know what the ratings are of the cable news stations, I will enlighten you. FOX regularly on a nightly basis, in all the time slots, more than doubles the total viewers of MSNBC and CNN combined. Bill O'Reilly has an almost 3 to 1 lead over MSNBC and CNN combined.

Also, Beck is now #2 behind Opera as the most popular TV personality.

So you continue to get your "real" journalism from the far left shills, the majority of clear thinking americans will stick with FOX.

BTW: Considering where you go for "news", I'd say I'm far 2smart4u. Ditto on the nice day.

All of which means what? You're correct---I admittedly don't know and I admittedly don't care about network ratings! "The Jersey Shore" undoubtedly has high viewer numbers, but I don't watch that for information, either.

However, if your theory about "clear thinking Americans" gleaning the news from FOX has any basis, then why couldn't all those fine upstanding conservatives at your favorite station have had more influence on the outcome of the presidential election? It certainly wasn't for lack of trying. I reiterate, Fox=entertainment.

BTW: I'm not just a little smarter than you. I'm a whole lot smarter! Can you spell Oprah?

[Guest 2smart4u]

A Google search of 0.41 sec came up with these:

http://blog.heritage.org/2010/03/10/video-...-what-is-in-it/

http://www.breitbart.tv/nancy-pelosi-we-ne...ut-whats-in-it/

I think you owe someone an apology.

Loony Left gutter snipes don't apologize, they just fade back into the woodwork.

[Guest 2smart4u]

Apparently not that exhaustive a search

http://www.breitbart.tv/nancy-pelosi-we-ne...ut-whats-in-it/

Just saying--do your homework before you spout off.

Apparently 4 the Record's "exhaustive" search never got beyond MSNBC.

[Guest Guest]

The headline at http://blog.heritage.org/2010/03/10/video-...-what-is-in-it/ is “We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it.”

She actually said “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.” Fox actually got it right, even though they put their right wing spin on it. http://www.thefoxnation.com/nancy-pelosi/2...what-it?page=12

Omission of the word “that” does not alter the meaning, so at least the misquotation by Heritage wasn’t malicious. Her meaning is clear: when the bill is passed, people will see how it works and that is how most people will know what’s in it. Fox tries to spin it but Pelosi is absolutely right. It’s not good language politically but there’s nothing wrong with what she said.

However, the headline at http://www.breitbart.tv/nancy-pelosi-we-ne...ut-whats-in-it/ is “We Need to Pass Health Care Bill to Find Out What’s In It.” That is a lie. That is not what she said, and yes it changes the meaning.

2stupid4words claims that she said "we should all vote for the bill and then we'll find out what's in it." Obviously, that is a lie and a complete distortion from our resident lying right wing scumbag.

Those are the facts, plain and simple, fair and balanced.

[Guest 4 the Record]

The headline at http://blog.heritage.org/2010/03/10/video-...-what-is-in-it/ is “We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it.”

She actually said “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.” Fox actually got it right, even though they put their right wing spin on it. http://www.thefoxnation.com/nancy-pelosi/2...what-it?page=12

Omission of the word “that” does not alter the meaning, so at least the misquotation by Heritage wasn’t malicious. Her meaning is clear: when the bill is passed, people will see how it works and that is how most people will know what’s in it. Fox tries to spin it but Pelosi is absolutely right. It’s not good language politically but there’s nothing wrong with what she said.

However, the headline at http://www.breitbart.tv/nancy-pelosi-we-ne...ut-whats-in-it/ is “We Need to Pass Health Care Bill to Find Out What’s In It.” That is a lie. That is not what she said, and yes it changes the meaning.

2stupid4words claims that she said "we should all vote for the bill and then we'll find out what's in it." Obviously, that is a lie and a complete distortion from our resident lying right wing scumbag.

Those are the facts, plain and simple, fair and balanced.

Thank you. Couldn't have said it better myself.

[Guest 4 the Record]

Apparently 4 the Record's "exhaustive" search never got beyond MSNBC.

While I admit that I like MSNBC, I certainly don't limit myself to one source of information. I also utilize:

Rueters, the Associated Press, DNAinfo/NY, Global Exchange and of course all the major networks (ABC, CBS and NBC). Wouldn't want to become one-dimensional, right?

Hope that's "exhaustive" enough for you!

[Guest 2smart4u]

The headline at http://blog.heritage.org/2010/03/10/video-...-what-is-in-it/ is “We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it.”

She actually said “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.” Fox actually got it right, even though they put their right wing spin on it. http://www.thefoxnation.com/nancy-pelosi/2...what-it?page=12

Omission of the word “that” does not alter the meaning, so at least the misquotation by Heritage wasn’t malicious. Her meaning is clear: when the bill is passed, people will see how it works and that is how most people will know what’s in it. Fox tries to spin it but Pelosi is absolutely right. It’s not good language politically but there’s nothing wrong with what she said.

However, the headline at http://www.breitbart.tv/nancy-pelosi-we-ne...ut-whats-in-it/ is “We Need to Pass Health Care Bill to Find Out What’s In It.” That is a lie. That is not what she said, and yes it changes the meaning.

2stupid4words claims that she said "we should all vote for the bill and then we'll find out what's in it." Obviously, that is a lie and a complete distortion from our resident lying right wing scumbag.

Those are the facts, plain and simple, fair and balanced.

Remind's me so much of Bubba Clinton's meaning of "is" argument. Loony's are always good for a laugh.

[Guest Guest]

Remind's me so much of Bubba Clinton's meaning of "is" argument. Loony's are always good for a laugh.

Dear Ignorant, Stupid Lying Right Wing Scumbag:

Everything reminds you of Clinton and even if it doesn't you say it anyway.

Look stupid, you got spanked. You lied about what Pelosi said and contrary to your pitiful attempt at a response you distorted her meaning.

Look at it from another angle, you're wrong either way. If the words mean the same thing, then why did you change them? That's what quotation marks are for, idiot. You're not supposed to change the words inside a quotation. That's lying. If you don't like when Clinton lied and then wouldn't admit it, then why are you doing the same thing?

No doubt you'll have some equally inane, childish non-response to that. You always do.

[Guest 2smart4u]

Dear Ignorant, Stupid Lying Right Wing Scumbag:

Everything reminds you of Clinton and even if it doesn't you say it anyway.

Look stupid, you got spanked. You lied about what Pelosi said and contrary to your pitiful attempt at a response you distorted her meaning.

Look at it from another angle, you're wrong either way. If the words mean the same thing, then why did you change them? That's what quotation marks are for, idiot. You're not supposed to change the words inside a quotation. That's lying. If you don't like when Clinton lied and then wouldn't admit it, then why are you doing the same thing?

No doubt you'll have some equally inane, childish non-response to that. You always do.

Depends what the meaning of "is" is and I did not have sexual relations with Pelosi.

[Guest Guest]

No, you owe the apology. She didn't say they would have to pass the bill to know what's in it. She said when they passed the bill you would know what's in it because you would see it working. As usual, the right wing is lying and distorting people's words.

Wrong again, where is the lie? It’s clear what she said, she didn't say what you claim. Seems you’re the one distorting words. It’s amazing how she says something and you hear what you want to hear. Must be too much Kool-Aid.

[Guest Guest]

Wrong again, where is the lie? It’s clear what she said, she didn't say what you claim. Seems you’re the one distorting words. It’s amazing how she says something and you hear what you want to hear. Must be too much Kool-Aid.

The lies are very clearly pointed out in post 32, which you could have read easily, and probably did, before putting your fingers in your ears, your hands over your eyes and yelling "la-la-la I'm not listening." Here, I'll make it so you don't have to scroll up.

The headline at http://blog.heritage.org/2010/03/10/video-...-what-is-in-it/ is “We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it.”

She actually said “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.” Fox actually got it right, even though they put their right wing spin on it. http://www.thefoxnation.com/nancy-pelosi/2...what-it?page=12

Omission of the word “that” does not alter the meaning, so at least the misquotation by Heritage wasn’t malicious. Her meaning is clear: when the bill is passed, people will see how it works and that is how most people will know what’s in it. Fox tries to spin it but Pelosi is absolutely right. It’s not good language politically but there’s nothing wrong with what she said.

However, the headline at http://www.breitbart.tv/nancy-pelosi-we-ne...ut-whats-in-it/ is “We Need to Pass Health Care Bill to Find Out What’s In It.” That is a lie. That is not what she said, and yes it changes the meaning.

2stupid4words claims that she said "we should all vote for the bill and then we'll find out what's in it." Obviously, that is a lie and a complete distortion from our resident lying right wing scumbag.

Those are the facts, plain and simple, fair and balanced.

Of course, you have to be willing and able to read and understand it to get it.

[Guest 4 the Record]

The lies are very clearly pointed out in post 32, which you could have read easily, and probably did, before putting your fingers in your ears, your hands over your eyes and yelling "la-la-la I'm not listening." Here, I'll make it so you don't have to scroll up.

The headline at http://blog.heritage.org/2010/03/10/video-...-what-is-in-it/ is “We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it.”

She actually said “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.” Fox actually got it right, even though they put their right wing spin on it. http://www.thefoxnation.com/nancy-pelosi/2...what-it?page=12

Omission of the word “that” does not alter the meaning, so at least the misquotation by Heritage wasn’t malicious. Her meaning is clear: when the bill is passed, people will see how it works and that is how most people will know what’s in it. Fox tries to spin it but Pelosi is absolutely right. It’s not good language politically but there’s nothing wrong with what she said.

However, the headline at http://www.breitbart.tv/nancy-pelosi-we-ne...ut-whats-in-it/ is “We Need to Pass Health Care Bill to Find Out What’s In It.” That is a lie. That is not what she said, and yes it changes the meaning.

2stupid4words claims that she said "we should all vote for the bill and then we'll find out what's in it." Obviously, that is a lie and a complete distortion from our resident lying right wing scumbag.

Those are the facts, plain and simple, fair and balanced.

Of course, you have to be willing and able to read and understand it to get it.

You know, you can dissect and analyze this matter ad infinitum, the FOX-hounds are inherently predisposed to fear any social progress. They are hypnotized, mesmerized, and robotized by the craven idols they worship.

After reading all the banter on this site, I still don't get what the anti-reformists are afraid of! It's the same old drivel we heard back in the 60s when Medicare was signed into effect: it was a Communist plot; it wouldn't work; old people would be scammed and left without coverage. Well none of it came to fruition and Medicare has proven to be the savior for seniors on a fixed income.

When all is said and done, this is a moral issue. How can we, who call ourselves Americans, stand by and see our fellow human beings denied the most basic of physical needs? How can we, especially those of us who have health coverage, sleep at night knowing that somewhere a child needs crucial medical attention or a worker can't seek treatment for a serious injury?

I repeat: What are you afraid of? Cost? We have spent billions on two wars no one wanted. Government intervention? That is why government exists--to facilitate where individuals can't.

The only conclusion I am left with, is that this fear is rooted in prejudice. It's the old, "I got mine, the hell with everyone else."

Please prove to me that I'm wrong. Answer me. What are you afraid of?

[Guest Bubba]

The lies are very clearly pointed out in post 32, which you could have read easily, and probably did, before putting your fingers in your ears, your hands over your eyes and yelling "la-la-la I'm not listening." Here, I'll make it so you don't have to scroll up.

The headline at http://blog.heritage.org/2010/03/10/video-...-what-is-in-it/ is “We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it.”

She actually said “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.” Fox actually got it right, even though they put their right wing spin on it. http://www.thefoxnation.com/nancy-pelosi/2...what-it?page=12

Omission of the word “that” does not alter the meaning, so at least the misquotation by Heritage wasn’t malicious. Her meaning is clear: when the bill is passed, people will see how it works and that is how most people will know what’s in it. Fox tries to spin it but Pelosi is absolutely right. It’s not good language politically but there’s nothing wrong with what she said.

However, the headline at http://www.breitbart.tv/nancy-pelosi-we-ne...ut-whats-in-it/ is “We Need to Pass Health Care Bill to Find Out What’s In It.” That is a lie. That is not what she said, and yes it changes the meaning.

2stupid4words claims that she said "we should all vote for the bill and then we'll find out what's in it." Obviously, that is a lie and a complete distortion from our resident lying right wing scumbag.

Those are the facts, plain and simple, fair and balanced.

Of course, you have to be willing and able to read and understand it to get it.

Well, it depends upon what that word "that" means, just like what the meaning is of that word "is" is. It really gets very confusing for us Loonys.

[Guest 2smart4u]

You know, you can dissect and analyze this matter ad infinitum, the FOX-hounds are inherently predisposed to fear any social progress. They are hypnotized, mesmerized, and robotized by the craven idols they worship.

After reading all the banter on this site, I still don't get what the anti-reformists are afraid of! It's the same old drivel we heard back in the 60s when Medicare was signed into effect: it was a Communist plot; it wouldn't work; old people would be scammed and left without coverage. Well none of it came to fruition and Medicare has proven to be the savior for seniors on a fixed income.

When all is said and done, this is a moral issue. How can we, who call ourselves Americans, stand by and see our fellow human beings denied the most basic of physical needs? How can we, especially those of us who have health coverage, sleep at night knowing that somewhere a child needs crucial medical attention or a worker can't seek treatment for a serious injury?

I repeat: What are you afraid of? Cost? We have spent billions on two wars no one wanted. Government intervention? That is why government exists--to facilitate where individuals can't.

The only conclusion I am left with, is that this fear is rooted in prejudice. It's the old, "I got mine, the hell with everyone else."

Please prove to me that I'm wrong. Answer me. What are you afraid of?

"social progress", key word of the Obomination goal of turning the U.S. into a government run nanny state, an entitlement society where we depend on the federal government for everything. We are headed for bankruptcy as a nation and the Loonys are oblivious.

The silver lining of this government takeover nightmare is the 2010 and 2012 elections. The GOP can repeal this disaster before it takes effect.

[Guest Guest]

You know, you can dissect and analyze this matter ad infinitum, the FOX-hounds are inherently predisposed to fear any social progress. They are hypnotized, mesmerized, and robotized by the craven idols they worship.

After reading all the banter on this site, I still don't get what the anti-reformists are afraid of! It's the same old drivel we heard back in the 60s when Medicare was signed into effect: it was a Communist plot; it wouldn't work; old people would be scammed and left without coverage. Well none of it came to fruition and Medicare has proven to be the savior for seniors on a fixed income.

When all is said and done, this is a moral issue. How can we, who call ourselves Americans, stand by and see our fellow human beings denied the most basic of physical needs? How can we, especially those of us who have health coverage, sleep at night knowing that somewhere a child needs crucial medical attention or a worker can't seek treatment for a serious injury?

I repeat: What are you afraid of? Cost? We have spent billions on two wars no one wanted. Government intervention? That is why government exists--to facilitate where individuals can't.

The only conclusion I am left with, is that this fear is rooted in prejudice. It's the old, "I got mine, the hell with everyone else."

Please prove to me that I'm wrong. Answer me. What are you afraid of?

You know they won't answer because you're right.