2:15 - I think she's thinking of Goldilocks and the Three Bears here, not Four Bears...
(Before stupid cunts start correcting me, it's a pun. I'm punning on 'forebears', OK? And I'm riffing on Bachmann's cretinous nature and the way she speaks to people as if she's telling fairy tales to toddlers. I fucking HATE having to explain jokes, but Yanks never get it)
While I think the 3/5s compromise was a neccesary evil, there's a huge difference between the founding fathers making a (hopefully temporary) concession to unite the nation, and them fighting tirelessly to end slavery.
Now, Thomas Jeffersons dislike of religion... that's when the right stop about the Founding Fathers. I just don't get the FF reverence of the right wing. They were great men, no doubt, but they were still fallible, and products of their time.
Bachmann is such a joke. What happened to passing the torch of liberty to the next generation when you VOTED TO EXTEND THE FUCKING PATRIOT ACT. Also, lets gut social programs, especially now when we need them the most. The working and middle class can just live on the streets. If you want to live a dignified life, well you're just going to have to bootstrap yourself like the grossly wealthy who don't have to pay their share in taxes. Fuck you Bachmann, and fuck you Tea Party (Koch Brothers).
Michele Bachmann is an absolute jabbering idiot. You ask her a question and gives you this long cicular answer that has nothing to do with the question. How anyone could possibly think her and Sarah Palin are people who are smart enough to be president, is beyond me. You want someone who doesn't know where the battles of Lexington & Concord were fought? You want someone who has made a career out of bashing gays?
She's a fucking dolt, and her apologist in this vid is a fucking idiot.
Only one thing to say about the theocretin party and their chosen reps - 'Who controls the past, controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.' - G. Orwell, 1984. Purposefully obfusticating and bold face lies regarding historic facts should be jailable offenses - especially when it comes from someone who is supposed to display leadership. What a cunt.
COctOpus wrote, "funny how she doesn't just say what she means and needs you to translate." Fair and open-minded people easily understand her. But since you're a belligerent person with a political axe to grind, you choose NOT to understand. Your feigned ignorance is a pathetic tactic that shifts the debate from the substance of her ideas to the fiction of your Leftist memes. Since you can't possible debate her on the issues, you simply dismiss her as an idiot. Easy, yes. Persuasive, no.
Our Founding Fathers could only do what was realistic and possible. They knew that slavery was evil, but they also knew it couldn't be abolished overnight. The documents they carefully crafted were a shot of slow-acting poison that would eventually bring slavery to its knees and kill it once and for all. That's what Bachman meant. And Chris Matthews is the idiot. "3/5 of a human being" was not racist; It was ANTI-racist! The owners wanted each of their slaves to count for a full vote.
@stuntbaby63 "The documents they carefully crafted were a shot of slow-acting poison that would eventually bring slavery to its knees and kill it once and for all. That's what Bachman meant."
funny how she doesn't just say what she means and needs you to translate.
""3/5 of a human being" was not racist; It was ANTI-racist! The owners wanted each of their slaves to count for a full vote. "
yeah, because the owner got to vote FOR his slaves, of course they wanted more voting power, dumbass.
@C0ct0pusPrime "yeah, because the owner got to vote FOR his slaves, of course they wanted more voting power, dumbass" Yes, which is exactly my point. If the slaves were given full voting rights, the slave owners' enhanced voting powers would serve the institution of slavery. Chris Matthews portrayed the "3/5 of a human being" law as a racist attempt to certify the sub-human status of blacks. The truth is that it served the abolitionists' agenda and not that of the slaveholders. See?
@stuntbaby63 so in your mind the slave owners held the best interest of the slaves first? you think that they used those 3/5 votes to vote NOT to have slaves? where the fuck is your rationality? do you also think that corporations pay their employees top dollar while still trying to make a marginal profit? or do they try to screw the worker in the name of the bottom line? do you support elimination of the minimum wage in order to further screw the living poor too?
@C0ct0pusPrime wrote, "in your mind the slave owners held the best interest of the slaves first?" No, that's not what I said. The slaveholders wanted each of their slaves to count as a full vote so as to give themselves much greater voting power. The slaves would be forced to vote in support of their owner's pro-slavery agenda. Abolitionists wanted to help the slaves by shrinking the value of their corrupted vote, hence the "3/5 of a human being" classification. Don't you understand?
@stuntbaby63 dude, its called the 3/5 COMPROMISE...of course i understand....you seem to think that the history books you read were terribly different from the ones i read...or possibly you want to hear what you like.
@C0ct0pusPrime wrote, "of course I understand." Apparently you don't because you asked me a question that makes no sense. You wrote, "in your mind the slave owners held the best interest of the slaves first?" The only way this question makes sense is if you thought I was defending the slaveholders. But how could you possibly conclude that when I clearly stated that the slaveholders wanted to exploit their slaves by corrupting their voting rights? Can you explain this, please. Thanks.
@C0ct0pusPrime wrote, "do you also think that corporations pay their employees top dollar while still trying to make a marginal profit?" What do the so-called "Eeeeevil Corporations" have to do with anything? I believe in freedom and private ownership. If corporations want to make "unfair" profits by screwing over their employees, then their turnover rate will be so counterproductive that they'll self-destruct. Corporations create jobs, wealth and wonderful stuff. Be grateful for them.
Let's get this straight... Yes some founding fathers were against slavery... However Bachman said they abolished slavery which is bs. Secondly, stop defending the guy defending Bachman. It's obvious that he's tiptoeing around every question because the only way to defend her is to not answer the question or lie and appear an idiot, mind you the option he took still made him look like an idiot. Thank you and goodbye
okay, chris mathews is bein a jerk here. the african descendants weren't totally free until the 1960's. they were indentured servants right after the civil war. they weren't free. they followed the jim crow laws or they were hanged. that's not free. the Sal Russo guy was tryin 2 get that out. outright slavery ended he said and i quote 'well, one kind of slavery ended.' that is accurate chris, slow ur roll. u make us liberals look like bill o'reilly
@cruelbusiness1984 If Matthews was a little heavy-handed, he had a good excuse in this instance. Russo was given all the chance in the world to try to explain away Bachmann's disingenuous revisionist history. Your factual point that true equal rights under the law occurred only 46 years ago would not have helped Bachmann or Russo because it just makes her assertions that much more ridiculous. Russo was ill-equipped to defend what she said and frankly, it doesn't deserve to be defended by anyone.
@mw2000 Agreed. I have to admit that I'm embarrassed by the left's utter inability to do exactly what was done here, that is, get in the faces of these dipshits and rub their noses in their stupidity like you would do to a puppy that just piddled the carpet.
They're fucking WRONG. Our damn representatives need to stop being so afraid to say it!
2:00 Fucking idiot with the visual aids, I think anyone with a brain knows what writing is. I understand Bachmann is excited after recently discovering this cultural phenomenon.
Bachman brought this on herself. She should read some basic fucking history before opening her mouth. She and Sarah Palin and the stupid people that vote for them are an embarrassment for America. And by the way people, slavery didn't actually end in this country until WW2. Read "Slavery By Another Name" Douglas Blackmon.
I think that the bitch is retarded for not knowing American history because the opinions of just about everyone in the 18 hundreds would have qualified them as complete assholes by today's standards, including the founding fathers. But what is more important than an ignorance of history is the policy of today, and ending unsustainable spending is incredibly important for the future. Unfortunately the Tea Party doesn't have the first clue as to how we are going to balance our budget, they have...
@MacabreManifesto ...nothing intelligent to put forward. They are for low taxes even though most of our spending is currently mandatory. They've said that they want to slash the military budget, which makes sense. If we only spent a quarter Trillion (1/3 of our current military budget) on the military we'd still be the country with more military spending than any other, by far. But our budget is currently beyond balance unless we jack up taxes and slash military funding, or end social security..
@MacabreManifesto ...not pay out, which is unfair. I think that social security is a pretty stupid system. We should force people to put money away in a bank instead of deliquidizing it into "benefits". When this recession ends we should also increase taxes, they are already pretty low compared to the rest of the world. High taxes in good times, low taxes in bad times, makes sense.
@MacabreManifesto this prevents poor elderly from starving on the streets. social security is needed 2 take care of those who hav no chance 2 set aside money cuz of the back-breakin work it takes just 2 live as working poor. do the math, its hard 4 a 75,000/year income 2 do that, much less the typical working-poor income. its impossible frankly. the system is needed. a society should b judged by how it helps/fails its poor. this system is needed, such intense military is not. $20 million plane..
@MacabreManifesto: sitting around, never having been used! never. $20 million. that's the unsustainable part. not the programs that takes care of the people who built the country. we all cam from the elderly, we all owe the elderly. that's just facts.
@cruelbusiness1984 Social security is unsustainable because A. The government had money rolling into it's coffers that it was supposed to keep locked up (or in a bank account so it wouldn't devalue with inflation, but safe none the less) but it spent it, and that means B. social security always assumes that the ratio of people who pay social security to those who use it, will always increase, which it doesn't.
Okay the girl is an idiot but the civil war did not end slavery...wtf? Thats basic American history. People owned slaves for about 3 years after the civil war ending and then the 14 amendment was what ended slavery, not the war.
@cooldaddy1234567 The difference is that when O'Reilly acts the way he does, he's trying to convince his viewers that he's right by talking over and interrupting his guest's answers. Matthews was interrupting Russo to get an answer because he refused to answer the question, spewed talking points and obvious lies.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
bachmann was refering to the founding fathers who fought RELENTLESSLY to abolish slavery b4 during and after the creation of the country,this little fact is overlooked far to often when the 3/5 law is mentioned. Before the ink was dry on the constitution, men were plotting the abolition of slavery in the united states. Another little fact which is often overlooked is that George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and MANY others FREED ALL there slaves upon their death.
@C0ct0pusPrime hey did you hear people in Texas are re writing history text books because the history is too liberal. so the way I see it, they want to view history in a very colorful limelight on how America was made, how the civil war was fought over state's right when in fact it was not just that, but a human rights, a slave's right.
@C0ct0pusPrime try reading the works of the founding fathers themselves and not the marxist jibberish you learn from most of this country's schools/universities.
@C0ct0pusPrimeEven my mom, who is a card carrying member of N.O.W., avid follower of chris olberman and probably an even bigger left wing nut job than you!, can tell you that the founding fathers fought virulently over slavery because she went to school BEFORE the leftist revionists took over. It used to be COMMON knowledge! Taught in public schools around the country!...obviously not anymore:( try reading AUTObiographies and not biography or worse yet biographical account (which is code for bs
@C0ct0pusPrime I wouldn't call him an idiot, and what does grammar have to do with anyone's point? I think Bachman deserves nothing but disdain for the context here, and I think Chris Matthews nails it. But technically she is accurate, but the implication seems to be perverted and disgusting. Some people can't grasp her intended innuendo, I think they should get a chance to explain themselves before being accused of idiocy....like the asshole in the vid that you and Chris expose....thanx
@sixtiksix "what does grammar have to do with anyone's point?"
when people are trying to act like intellectuals online, it helps to get simple spelling and grammar correct. i mean, i'm basically an opinionated douche, but i at least get simple grammar right.
@knightflyer10 Washington did have a provision in his will that his slaves were to be freed upon his death. Jefferson did not. Neither advocated the abolition of slavery. None of the founding fathers fought RELENTLESSLY to abolish slavery. Ben Franklin was the only one to even advocate it, and he only came to that conclusion shortly before his death.
@OdinsOrb Prime try reading the works of the founding fathers themselves and not the marxist jibberish you learn from most of this country's schools/universities.
@knightflyer10 I have read a fair amount of the works of the founders themselves. Admittedly, I have not read anything they wrote on the subject of slavery specifically. If you could send me a list of any of their writings that contradict anything I said, please do so.
@OdinsOrb If you have read ANYTHING by ANY of the founding fathers and you say you didn't come across the subject of slavery then you are A) lying B) mentally polluted C) mistaken about who the author actually was. I.E. you were reading a biographical account and not AUTObiography. In 1774, Benjamin Franklin and Benjamin Rush founded America's first antislavery society; John Jay was president of a similar society in New York. Constitution signer William Livingston also joind
@knightflyer10 due to the overwhelming numbers of undereducated responses (and a direct request from Odins Orb) to my original post, i will be posting a list of UNpolluted reading material, mostly AUTObiographical and from MY own library, in the near future.
@OdinsOrb Benjamin Franklin explained that this separation from Britain was necessary since every attempt among the Colonies to end slavery had been thwarted or reversed by the British Crown. In fact, in the years following America's separation from Great Britain, many of the Founding Fathers who had owned slaves released them (e.g., John Dickinson, Ceasar Rodney, William Livingston, George Washington, George Wythe, John
@Eaglesfaninca@C0ct0pusPrime try reading the works of the founding fathers themselves and not the marxist jibberish you learn from most of this country's schools/universities.
@Eaglesfaninca Even my mom, who is a card carrying member of N.O.W., avid follower of chris olberman and probably an even bigger left wing nut job than you!, can tell you that the founding fathers fought virulently over slavery because she went to school BEFORE the leftist revionists took over. It used to be COMMON knowledge! Taught in public schools around the country!...obviously not anymore:( try reading AUTObiographies and not biography or worse yet biographical account(which is code for bs
@knightflyer10 Oh boy. Most of them never even released their slaves. It's nice to here that your Mom listens to "Chris Olbermann", I've never heard of that guy before though. I've heard of Chris Mathews and Keith Olbermann.
@knightflyer10 Holy crap. Despite all the BS you spew on this comment. You actually lauded those men for having the "moral integrity" to free their slaves upon their death. "Who cares that they kept them while still alive." That's cool. "Jus' so long as you let'em go after ya' die. Don't want people think'n we'z racist or nothin'."
Jefferson only freed 5 of his slaves, all of whom were relatives of Sally Hemings. After Jefferson's death 130 of his slaves were sold at auction, including the wife and children of one of the slaves he freed. This information isn't difficult to find if you bother to look for it. Jefferson was a great man, but mythologizing him, varnishing over his very real moral lapses, or making up a more politically-correct version of his life doesn't help him or anyone else.
So it was ok because they freed them, AFTER THEY FUCKING DIED. Oh how merciful! And you can't do something after you die first of all, but why didn't they free them when they were still alive? BECAUSE THEY WANTED THE SLAVES! You're a fucking retard.
coctopusprime, this is not entertaining or funny AT ALL! I didn't enjoy this.The Tea Party Express should be abolished. These people are are not expressing free speech. THEY ARE SPEWING THE MOST VILE GARBAGE I have ever heard. I'm embarrassed for America. I have a great sense of humor but this is not remotely funny. I went to school in Davis not far from the TPE HQ. My campus is filled w/the brightest minds in the country. The Tea Party recruits the dimmest of light bulbs. Russo is only about $.
"We wouldn't have a Tea Party movement if people weren't dissatisfied with Republican policies". - Sal Russo
OK, Sal, then why is the Tea Party supporting Republicans? Why aren't you calling for more Democratic policies? The truth is that the Tea Party is an astroturf movement founded by rich, extreme-right Republicans with the goal of shifting the Republican party further to the right.
its also is kinda cruel to the native americans and the chinese, who were enslaved by the old-world americans that only the africans get recognized as slaves, its also unfair to the white slaves, that slavery is seen as a "racial issue" when it was actually an economic one (as well as a human rights violation).
slavery dates back to the start of civilization, it was always seen as economic, not racial, and the Old-World Americans were no exception.
I must point out the minor mistake of Chris Mathews here:
That Slavery was a "racial issue", not true: it was seen as a standard economical policy, to tell the truth, race wasn't that important economically, the first slaves in america (as with most cultures with slavery) were of the same (that is, white) race as the slave masters, (they were called "indentured servants" or just "servants"), the next were the Natives, and then African and Chinese.
Racism just became co-morbid with slavery as African slaves became the most common. (as they were the most economically viable and socially acceptable) ill admit though, racism did contribute to the way the non-white slaves were treated comparatively. Enough that both are associated today.
and Lincoln did not fight the civil war to "free the slaves" even though it was the final result, freeing the slaves was something that he was using to gain support, and even he thought poorly of the Africans.
That is was entirely a racial issue is untrue, but racial biases played a central role in justifying it's place and perpetuity in a "free" society. "All men being Equal" would obviously not cover those classified as proto or sub human savage races. At best, they were considered as fractions of a "proper" man, and were still owed their fraction of liberty... and at worst, seen as mere beasts of burden to whom proper men wielded divinely commanded dominion over.
They used everything they could to justify it, just like the nut-job rhetoric of today, racism was particularly bad though ill agree with you, thanks.
i was just on the side of education, the "men of liberty" (from the fathers to lincoln) were not so good as the people of today would like us to beleive, i mean, they did a good job for their time, but i could make a better country then them. One built on (utilitarian) principles.got it written up, ill send it to you.
@EVERYVERSER - My family comes from white indentured servitude, and I don’t see it that way. If you can’t pay your bills, and have to give up your freedom in order to avoid debtor’s prison, than that’s what you have to do. The institution of slavery is much more horrific. I'm not saying your point is invalid though.
Constitutionalism and founding"father" worship is incoherent, but that doesn't mean libertarianism is falsified.
The libertarian movement has had the strategy of being the only movement to actually support that flawed but legal document, which would leave us much better off than we are now but is still no where near perfect, and they are stuck defending it.
That said, most politicians are idiots, and I won't defend them, just my ideas.
This looked no different than what Bill O does on fox news Coctopus what true "ownage" happened here? What that Bachmans a moron oh thats something new.......this wasnt even a fucking debate.
i'm just saying if you're trying to debate a topic you dont pick one unrelated and pointless topic to attack that aggressively and single mindedly if you could win the overall debate.
Man I couldnt agrre more and I fucking hate Bachman but this wasnt ownage when O Reily does this its fucking juvenile (which btw he is) but when Chris Matthews does this hes a genius?
@oraclecrank@C0ct0pusPrime try reading the works of the founding fathers themselves and not the marxist jibberish you learn from most of this country's schools/universities.
he's not addressing the issue that the initial speaker was. focusing on one pointless little issue and ignoring the meaning of the speech is really just stupid.
@anandbhat1989 They need a bit more than that. CA' s new governor needs to remove the TPE HQ from Sacto. This is not about reading, education & is not even close to funny. it is disgusting. I live in an American neighborhood not far from the Statue of Liberty. 120,000 people from 100 countries. Most speak several languages, know their own history & know more about American history than most white Americans will ever know. They came here for our Constitution & some have slaves as ancenstors.
@anandbhat1989 Reading a book isn't enough. They can just read Glenn Beck or Sarah Palin (yes, I can't believe either of these morons actually wrote a book either) or Ayn Rand
Fox "News" once had a female pro-religion "atheist"on one of their programs. It was pretty obivous that she had been hired to distort the image of atheists in America. maybe they deliberately picked Sal Russo in order to slam him. I'm not saying that Matthews is wrong, but this entire discussion seems to be nothing more than a fuck you to the tea party. Even though they deserve it, I hate to see actual journalists lower themselves to the level of fox style bashing.
@ArcaneKarma "no, no, no, what she's saying is that in her family everyone has had given birth at the age of 11 for the past 21 generations..."
LOLOL! She still would be ignorant and wrong since girls 100 years ago reached puberty 2 years later than they do today! LOL! Of course that's just an average so who knows.
Today - Democrat US Senator and former member of the US Senate Judicial Committee Chuck Schumer:
"So I would urge my Republican colleagues, no matter how strongly they feel -- you know, we have three branches of government. We have a House. We have a Senate. We have a president."
We're not talking about 200 year old facts here, we're talking about fundamental US Government structure and principles.
I'll wait with bated breath for Chris Matthews or anyone on this forum to so much as mention it.
The founders worked tirelessly until they defeated slavery? Wow...
It's sad that idiots like Mrs Bachmann can ignorantly spout their revolutionary war fanfiction as if it were real history, proudly declaring that we have risen above and overcome the evils of slavery. The institution was abolished, but the practice continues to this day with more estimated human trafficking going on in the US today than during 1800's, and at worldwide all time high.
It's not just happening in some small third world nation half a world away... it's happening right here in America, and if you compare the cost spent by the US on the war on drugs compared to what we spend to aid in stamping out slave rings... that doesn't speak to our honoring the "tireless dedication of our founders to eradicate it from these shores", now does it?. I've certainly never seen her lift the causes banner.
I'd call her a hypocrite if she wasn't such a imbecile.
Such a perfect example of the problem w/the Teabaggers and Republicans --they h ave no desire to be honest, no respect for truth, and only know how to grasp for power through any means possible.
So if republicans and democrats have gotten the country into so much debt, why does virtually everyone on this forum completely ignore the topic of overspending and mindlessly prattle on about whether or not the founding fathers ended slavery? Seems to me Michele Bachmann is the only one with any common sense, whether accurate in her history lesson or not. At least she realizes what the relevant problem is and wants to do something about it, not defend the failures of either party.
But it do you really think someone who cannot get simple historical facts straight, can solve something as complex as our debt? or do you think its more likely she just says what she thinks her ilk want to hear?
I think a person who recognizes and speaks out about problem has a lot more chance of solving it than a bunch of pseudo-intellectuals who disregard to the problem altogether, and chatter endlessly about pure irrelevance.
@HistorySpeaks4Itself Michele Bachmann's hypocrisy has been exposed over multiple issues.( I will give her credit, she was one of the few who voted against the TARP bill) Conservatives tend to complain about spending when it comes to things like social programs (roughly about 10% of spending) but have started and support things that are the real cause of our debt. i.e. tax cuts for the insanely rich, military complex, the war on drugs e.t.c. ad nauseam
Please break down that 10% to support your argument, with references. Then explain what tax rate you believe is fair for the "insanely rich". Why would anyone want to create a fundamental dependency of an entire nation on an extremely small number of individuals? Is that your idea of a stable society? America was built by free people and opportunity, not dependency and socialism. America is going soft, and it will meet grim reality soon as international "adjustments" take place.
What was the highest taxable rate between 1948 and 1964, one of the most prosperous economic times for the US? Our country is not a pure capitalistic society as you may have been lead to believe, a society built entirely on capitalism is not a society.
@HistorySpeaks4Itself Google "where spending goes to" or something like that. The "small number in individuals" actually have well over 90% of the wealth. You can google that too if you want. How the is that justifiable? How is that good for the country? Sorry no individual "worked" so hard to be worth a billionaire. I say we bring the tax bracket back to the days of Reagen (50% I think) without the loop holes. The top 2% will still have WAY more money then they know what to do with.
So you would like a society that is fundamentally dependent on 2% of it's populations wealth, which they "do not deserve anyways" by your evaluation. None for me thanks.
Nobody cuts through the bullshit like Chris Matthews. This guy had the opportunity to distance himself from the wrong speech of Bachman, and he couldn't do it. He could have clarified the Tea Party's ideas but stayed on script. How odd.
*sarcasm* Gee, I don't see any parallels whatsoever. *end sarcasm* Talk about rewriting history for your own purposes. What's next? Bachmann's gonna say that there are no scientific studies demonstrating the harmful effects of CO2 and its significant role in the greenhouse effect? Oh wait, she already did! Dumb witch...
Did the founding fathers play ANY role in ending slavery by your evaluation?
Hypocrisy check: I'm sure you believe that "global warming" will not be eliminated during our lifetimes - will this mean that Al Gore will have played no role in ending it if that ever happens? Yes, some of the founding fathers had slaves (not all) - but big Al has multiple mansions and personal jets, no?
@HistorySpeaks4Itself I wasn't saying that the founding fathers ended slavery, nor did I say they didn't contribute to abolishing it either. I was paraphrasing Bachmann and comparing it with a 1984 reference, addressing the idea of changing history to suit your own purposes. Second, I'm no fan of Gore, he's a politician with no scientific background. I referred to a previous speech in which Bachmann said that there were no SCIENTIFIC PAPERS on CO2 or climate change. I hope I clarified myself.
So please clarify - how specifically is Bachmann "changing history to suit her own purposes" in regards to the founding fathers and the subject of current government overspending? Her point seems quite obvious to any objective person, that insurmountable federal debt will be comparable to enslaving the country's future generations when they are handed the bill. Somehow, the entire concept is completely disregarded in favor of some irrelevant historical dispute about slavery.
@HistorySpeaks4Itself I agree that the tangent on slavery by Matthews is childish and should've addressed her message, yet I believe that historical accuracy's important. Bachmann appeals to Americans' love for the founding fathers while distorting/ not checking facts in order to support her argument, which is fallacious. It's those kind of things that allow her and others to say things like the founding fathers wanted the US to be a christian nation when there are documents to prove otherwise.
Suggesting that the founding fathers had nothing to do with ending slavery is in my opinion more ignorant than suggesting that they ended it entirely. First of all, "the founding fathers" is not an individual. John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, Patrick Henry, Benjamin Franklin, and many other of the founding fathers vehemently opposed slavery and were extremely instrumental in changing the course of the country and laying the first bricks that would lead to abolition.
@HistorySpeaks4Itself I agree with you completely.Though, I never stated that the founding fathers didn't contributed to abolishing slavery, but rather that they didn't end it. Because I said they didn't end it, doesn't mean I think they had nothing to do with it. Furthermore, I'm fully aware that the founding fathers aren't "an individual"; I don't think I've said otherwise.
Newsflash, geniuses: Michele Bachmann's slavery reference, accurate or not, was not meant to be a US history lesson. I noticed none of you historians seem to have a problem with her fundamental argument which was against current overspending - in fact laughably I don't see a single post on this entire forum that even addresses it. So let's hear it - is there a problem with government overspending - or would you rather play dodgeball like Chris Matthews?
Haha this is great. You can't let these tea party assholes go off on their own irrelevant tangents. You HAVE to control them and check their stupidity.
Bachmann and Palin are fucking clowns with the tea party being the pawns that back them. We don't need far right wingnuts in power, we need MODERATE republicans and MODERATE democrats that are willing to work together. People like this having influence and power is why our government is a big ol' clusterfuck.
This Clip demonstrates why I don't like Chris Mathews. I want to hear what sal has to say but chris cuts him off at every turn. Don't misunderstand I agree with chris I just feel what is the point of having a guest if you won't let him finish a fucking sentence.
cool ich hab was unanständiges entdeckt
FatimaLouisarg37 1 month ago
He BLASTED him.
spacer125 1 month ago
TEA BAGGERS = BUNCH OF STUPID IDIOTS WANNA BE NATIONALISTS!
TheLatinoNation 3 months ago
2:15 - I think she's thinking of Goldilocks and the Three Bears here, not Four Bears...
(Before stupid cunts start correcting me, it's a pun. I'm punning on 'forebears', OK? And I'm riffing on Bachmann's cretinous nature and the way she speaks to people as if she's telling fairy tales to toddlers. I fucking HATE having to explain jokes, but Yanks never get it)
geffel 5 months ago
While I think the 3/5s compromise was a neccesary evil, there's a huge difference between the founding fathers making a (hopefully temporary) concession to unite the nation, and them fighting tirelessly to end slavery.
Now, Thomas Jeffersons dislike of religion... that's when the right stop about the Founding Fathers. I just don't get the FF reverence of the right wing. They were great men, no doubt, but they were still fallible, and products of their time.
Sines314 5 months ago
Cenk Uygur elbow FROM THE SKY!!! ftw! :)
JBrianBooks 6 months ago
Bachmann is such a joke. What happened to passing the torch of liberty to the next generation when you VOTED TO EXTEND THE FUCKING PATRIOT ACT. Also, lets gut social programs, especially now when we need them the most. The working and middle class can just live on the streets. If you want to live a dignified life, well you're just going to have to bootstrap yourself like the grossly wealthy who don't have to pay their share in taxes. Fuck you Bachmann, and fuck you Tea Party (Koch Brothers).
ilackedtheheart 7 months ago
Michele Bachmann is an absolute jabbering idiot. You ask her a question and gives you this long cicular answer that has nothing to do with the question. How anyone could possibly think her and Sarah Palin are people who are smart enough to be president, is beyond me. You want someone who doesn't know where the battles of Lexington & Concord were fought? You want someone who has made a career out of bashing gays?
She's a fucking dolt, and her apologist in this vid is a fucking idiot.
jschultzVII 7 months ago
Only one thing to say about the theocretin party and their chosen reps - 'Who controls the past, controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.' - G. Orwell, 1984. Purposefully obfusticating and bold face lies regarding historic facts should be jailable offenses - especially when it comes from someone who is supposed to display leadership. What a cunt.
rictusgate 7 months ago
COctOpus wrote, "funny how she doesn't just say what she means and needs you to translate." Fair and open-minded people easily understand her. But since you're a belligerent person with a political axe to grind, you choose NOT to understand. Your feigned ignorance is a pathetic tactic that shifts the debate from the substance of her ideas to the fiction of your Leftist memes. Since you can't possible debate her on the issues, you simply dismiss her as an idiot. Easy, yes. Persuasive, no.
stuntbaby63 8 months ago
Our Founding Fathers could only do what was realistic and possible. They knew that slavery was evil, but they also knew it couldn't be abolished overnight. The documents they carefully crafted were a shot of slow-acting poison that would eventually bring slavery to its knees and kill it once and for all. That's what Bachman meant. And Chris Matthews is the idiot. "3/5 of a human being" was not racist; It was ANTI-racist! The owners wanted each of their slaves to count for a full vote.
stuntbaby63 8 months ago
@stuntbaby63 "The documents they carefully crafted were a shot of slow-acting poison that would eventually bring slavery to its knees and kill it once and for all. That's what Bachman meant."
funny how she doesn't just say what she means and needs you to translate.
""3/5 of a human being" was not racist; It was ANTI-racist! The owners wanted each of their slaves to count for a full vote. "
yeah, because the owner got to vote FOR his slaves, of course they wanted more voting power, dumbass.
C0ct0pusPrime 8 months ago 6
@C0ct0pusPrime "yeah, because the owner got to vote FOR his slaves, of course they wanted more voting power, dumbass" Yes, which is exactly my point. If the slaves were given full voting rights, the slave owners' enhanced voting powers would serve the institution of slavery. Chris Matthews portrayed the "3/5 of a human being" law as a racist attempt to certify the sub-human status of blacks. The truth is that it served the abolitionists' agenda and not that of the slaveholders. See?
stuntbaby63 8 months ago
@stuntbaby63 so in your mind the slave owners held the best interest of the slaves first? you think that they used those 3/5 votes to vote NOT to have slaves? where the fuck is your rationality? do you also think that corporations pay their employees top dollar while still trying to make a marginal profit? or do they try to screw the worker in the name of the bottom line? do you support elimination of the minimum wage in order to further screw the living poor too?
wake the fuck up.
C0ct0pusPrime 8 months ago 3
@C0ct0pusPrime wrote, "in your mind the slave owners held the best interest of the slaves first?" No, that's not what I said. The slaveholders wanted each of their slaves to count as a full vote so as to give themselves much greater voting power. The slaves would be forced to vote in support of their owner's pro-slavery agenda. Abolitionists wanted to help the slaves by shrinking the value of their corrupted vote, hence the "3/5 of a human being" classification. Don't you understand?
stuntbaby63 8 months ago
@stuntbaby63 dude, its called the 3/5 COMPROMISE...of course i understand....you seem to think that the history books you read were terribly different from the ones i read...or possibly you want to hear what you like.
either way, peace out.
C0ct0pusPrime 8 months ago
@C0ct0pusPrime wrote, "of course I understand." Apparently you don't because you asked me a question that makes no sense. You wrote, "in your mind the slave owners held the best interest of the slaves first?" The only way this question makes sense is if you thought I was defending the slaveholders. But how could you possibly conclude that when I clearly stated that the slaveholders wanted to exploit their slaves by corrupting their voting rights? Can you explain this, please. Thanks.
stuntbaby63 8 months ago
@C0ct0pusPrime wrote, "do you also think that corporations pay their employees top dollar while still trying to make a marginal profit?" What do the so-called "Eeeeevil Corporations" have to do with anything? I believe in freedom and private ownership. If corporations want to make "unfair" profits by screwing over their employees, then their turnover rate will be so counterproductive that they'll self-destruct. Corporations create jobs, wealth and wonderful stuff. Be grateful for them.
stuntbaby63 8 months ago
Let's get this straight... Yes some founding fathers were against slavery... However Bachman said they abolished slavery which is bs. Secondly, stop defending the guy defending Bachman. It's obvious that he's tiptoeing around every question because the only way to defend her is to not answer the question or lie and appear an idiot, mind you the option he took still made him look like an idiot. Thank you and goodbye
crazymuffin147 9 months ago
lov the music @ the end and the clip from TheYoungTurks funny!
cruelbusiness1984 9 months ago
okay, chris mathews is bein a jerk here. the african descendants weren't totally free until the 1960's. they were indentured servants right after the civil war. they weren't free. they followed the jim crow laws or they were hanged. that's not free. the Sal Russo guy was tryin 2 get that out. outright slavery ended he said and i quote 'well, one kind of slavery ended.' that is accurate chris, slow ur roll. u make us liberals look like bill o'reilly
cruelbusiness1984 9 months ago
@cruelbusiness1984 If Matthews was a little heavy-handed, he had a good excuse in this instance. Russo was given all the chance in the world to try to explain away Bachmann's disingenuous revisionist history. Your factual point that true equal rights under the law occurred only 46 years ago would not have helped Bachmann or Russo because it just makes her assertions that much more ridiculous. Russo was ill-equipped to defend what she said and frankly, it doesn't deserve to be defended by anyone.
emmettk 9 months ago
Spending grows economies. Cuts don't. Republicans are idiots. Democrats are pussies. End.
mw2000 11 months ago
@mw2000 Agreed. I have to admit that I'm embarrassed by the left's utter inability to do exactly what was done here, that is, get in the faces of these dipshits and rub their noses in their stupidity like you would do to a puppy that just piddled the carpet.
They're fucking WRONG. Our damn representatives need to stop being so afraid to say it!
DarthNader26 10 months ago
@mw2000 I agree wholeheartedly. republicans are mother f-in idiots. democrats r mother f-in pussies. its frustrating.
cruelbusiness1984 9 months ago
2:00 Fucking idiot with the visual aids, I think anyone with a brain knows what writing is. I understand Bachmann is excited after recently discovering this cultural phenomenon.
mistacramer 11 months ago 2
Don't blame her guys..... its a common fact that all teabaggers can't read...
SpartanNate007 11 months ago
Where is the clip of the black guys from?
ionykalio 11 months ago
@ionykalio Pooty Tang.......its really funny
SpartanNate007 11 months ago 2
Lesson of this video : You cannot carry on a conversation with a parrot.
Lordgaraj 1 year ago 2
well Iheheheheheh...
soulshadow0907 1 year ago
Bachman brought this on herself. She should read some basic fucking history before opening her mouth. She and Sarah Palin and the stupid people that vote for them are an embarrassment for America. And by the way people, slavery didn't actually end in this country until WW2. Read "Slavery By Another Name" Douglas Blackmon.
slaballinmytrunk 1 year ago
I think that the bitch is retarded for not knowing American history because the opinions of just about everyone in the 18 hundreds would have qualified them as complete assholes by today's standards, including the founding fathers. But what is more important than an ignorance of history is the policy of today, and ending unsustainable spending is incredibly important for the future. Unfortunately the Tea Party doesn't have the first clue as to how we are going to balance our budget, they have...
MacabreManifesto 1 year ago
@MacabreManifesto ...nothing intelligent to put forward. They are for low taxes even though most of our spending is currently mandatory. They've said that they want to slash the military budget, which makes sense. If we only spent a quarter Trillion (1/3 of our current military budget) on the military we'd still be the country with more military spending than any other, by far. But our budget is currently beyond balance unless we jack up taxes and slash military funding, or end social security..
MacabreManifesto 1 year ago
@MacabreManifesto ...not pay out, which is unfair. I think that social security is a pretty stupid system. We should force people to put money away in a bank instead of deliquidizing it into "benefits". When this recession ends we should also increase taxes, they are already pretty low compared to the rest of the world. High taxes in good times, low taxes in bad times, makes sense.
MacabreManifesto 1 year ago
@MacabreManifesto this prevents poor elderly from starving on the streets. social security is needed 2 take care of those who hav no chance 2 set aside money cuz of the back-breakin work it takes just 2 live as working poor. do the math, its hard 4 a 75,000/year income 2 do that, much less the typical working-poor income. its impossible frankly. the system is needed. a society should b judged by how it helps/fails its poor. this system is needed, such intense military is not. $20 million plane..
cruelbusiness1984 9 months ago
@MacabreManifesto: sitting around, never having been used! never. $20 million. that's the unsustainable part. not the programs that takes care of the people who built the country. we all cam from the elderly, we all owe the elderly. that's just facts.
cruelbusiness1984 9 months ago
@cruelbusiness1984 Social security is unsustainable because A. The government had money rolling into it's coffers that it was supposed to keep locked up (or in a bank account so it wouldn't devalue with inflation, but safe none the less) but it spent it, and that means B. social security always assumes that the ratio of people who pay social security to those who use it, will always increase, which it doesn't.
MacabreManifesto 9 months ago
Okay the girl is an idiot but the civil war did not end slavery...wtf? Thats basic American history. People owned slaves for about 3 years after the civil war ending and then the 14 amendment was what ended slavery, not the war.
Arizona4Christ 1 year ago
Comment removed
mueygringo 1 year ago
This was a horrible interview. Chris Matthews conducted this horribly and amounted to a liberal O'Riley.
cooldaddy1234567 1 year ago
@cooldaddy1234567 The difference is that when O'Reilly acts the way he does, he's trying to convince his viewers that he's right by talking over and interrupting his guest's answers. Matthews was interrupting Russo to get an answer because he refused to answer the question, spewed talking points and obvious lies.
ButInTh33nd 1 year ago 6
This comment has received too many negative votes show
bachmann was refering to the founding fathers who fought RELENTLESSLY to abolish slavery b4 during and after the creation of the country,this little fact is overlooked far to often when the 3/5 law is mentioned. Before the ink was dry on the constitution, men were plotting the abolition of slavery in the united states. Another little fact which is often overlooked is that George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and MANY others FREED ALL there slaves upon their death.
shame on you chris
knightflyer10 1 year ago
@knightflyer10 You're an idiot. Thanks to your ignorance and the ignorance of others like you, people like bachmann get into office.
Learn simple grammar, then move on to American history.
C0ct0pusPrime 1 year ago 34
@C0ct0pusPrime hey did you hear people in Texas are re writing history text books because the history is too liberal. so the way I see it, they want to view history in a very colorful limelight on how America was made, how the civil war was fought over state's right when in fact it was not just that, but a human rights, a slave's right.
zarcox1988 1 year ago
@C0ct0pusPrime try reading the works of the founding fathers themselves and not the marxist jibberish you learn from most of this country's schools/universities.
knightflyer10 11 months ago
@C0ct0pusPrime o...and i dont worry about grammar too much on youtube as i do not have too much time to waste on bobo's like u.
knightflyer10 11 months ago
@C0ct0pusPrimeEven my mom, who is a card carrying member of N.O.W., avid follower of chris olberman and probably an even bigger left wing nut job than you!, can tell you that the founding fathers fought virulently over slavery because she went to school BEFORE the leftist revionists took over. It used to be COMMON knowledge! Taught in public schools around the country!...obviously not anymore:( try reading AUTObiographies and not biography or worse yet biographical account (which is code for bs
knightflyer10 11 months ago
@C0ct0pusPrime I wouldn't call him an idiot, and what does grammar have to do with anyone's point? I think Bachman deserves nothing but disdain for the context here, and I think Chris Matthews nails it. But technically she is accurate, but the implication seems to be perverted and disgusting. Some people can't grasp her intended innuendo, I think they should get a chance to explain themselves before being accused of idiocy....like the asshole in the vid that you and Chris expose....thanx
sixtiksix 10 months ago
@sixtiksix "what does grammar have to do with anyone's point?"
when people are trying to act like intellectuals online, it helps to get simple spelling and grammar correct. i mean, i'm basically an opinionated douche, but i at least get simple grammar right.
C0ct0pusPrime 10 months ago
@C0ct0pusPrime Got it....; )
Love your channel
sixtiksix 10 months ago
@C0ct0pusPrime ur not a douche :)
cruelbusiness1984 9 months ago
@knightflyer10 Washington did have a provision in his will that his slaves were to be freed upon his death. Jefferson did not. Neither advocated the abolition of slavery. None of the founding fathers fought RELENTLESSLY to abolish slavery. Ben Franklin was the only one to even advocate it, and he only came to that conclusion shortly before his death.
OdinsOrb 1 year ago
@OdinsOrb Prime try reading the works of the founding fathers themselves and not the marxist jibberish you learn from most of this country's schools/universities.
knightflyer10 11 months ago
@knightflyer10 I have read a fair amount of the works of the founders themselves. Admittedly, I have not read anything they wrote on the subject of slavery specifically. If you could send me a list of any of their writings that contradict anything I said, please do so.
OdinsOrb 11 months ago
@OdinsOrb If you have read ANYTHING by ANY of the founding fathers and you say you didn't come across the subject of slavery then you are A) lying B) mentally polluted C) mistaken about who the author actually was. I.E. you were reading a biographical account and not AUTObiography. In 1774, Benjamin Franklin and Benjamin Rush founded America's first antislavery society; John Jay was president of a similar society in New York. Constitution signer William Livingston also joind
knightflyer10 11 months ago
@knightflyer10 due to the overwhelming numbers of undereducated responses (and a direct request from Odins Orb) to my original post, i will be posting a list of UNpolluted reading material, mostly AUTObiographical and from MY own library, in the near future.
knightflyer10 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@knightflyer10 "If you have read ANYTHING by ANY of the founding fathers ..."
Are you seriously claiming that all of the founding fathers were so preoccupied with slavery that they never wrote about anything else?
My request remains unanswered... If you could send me a list of any of their writings that contradict anything I said, please do so.
OdinsOrb 11 months ago
@OdinsOrb Benjamin Franklin explained that this separation from Britain was necessary since every attempt among the Colonies to end slavery had been thwarted or reversed by the British Crown. In fact, in the years following America's separation from Great Britain, many of the Founding Fathers who had owned slaves released them (e.g., John Dickinson, Ceasar Rodney, William Livingston, George Washington, George Wythe, John
knightflyer10 11 months ago
@knightflyer10 You've probably already heard this from many other people, but... You're a fool. What history are you even reading?
Eaglesfaninca 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Eaglesfaninca @C0ct0pusPrime try reading the works of the founding fathers themselves and not the marxist jibberish you learn from most of this country's schools/universities.
knightflyer10 11 months ago
@Eaglesfaninca Even my mom, who is a card carrying member of N.O.W., avid follower of chris olberman and probably an even bigger left wing nut job than you!, can tell you that the founding fathers fought virulently over slavery because she went to school BEFORE the leftist revionists took over. It used to be COMMON knowledge! Taught in public schools around the country!...obviously not anymore:( try reading AUTObiographies and not biography or worse yet biographical account(which is code for bs
knightflyer10 11 months ago
@knightflyer10 Oh boy. Most of them never even released their slaves. It's nice to here that your Mom listens to "Chris Olbermann", I've never heard of that guy before though. I've heard of Chris Mathews and Keith Olbermann.
Abraham Lincoln must have been really confused.
Eaglesfaninca 11 months ago
@knightflyer10 Shame on you for being an epic fail when it comes to our history.
DastardlyDereK 11 months ago
@knightflyer10 Holy crap. Despite all the BS you spew on this comment. You actually lauded those men for having the "moral integrity" to free their slaves upon their death. "Who cares that they kept them while still alive." That's cool. "Jus' so long as you let'em go after ya' die. Don't want people think'n we'z racist or nothin'."
Thayer79 11 months ago
@knightflyer10
Jefferson only freed 5 of his slaves, all of whom were relatives of Sally Hemings. After Jefferson's death 130 of his slaves were sold at auction, including the wife and children of one of the slaves he freed. This information isn't difficult to find if you bother to look for it. Jefferson was a great man, but mythologizing him, varnishing over his very real moral lapses, or making up a more politically-correct version of his life doesn't help him or anyone else.
oraclecrank 11 months ago
@knightflyer10
So it was ok because they freed them, AFTER THEY FUCKING DIED. Oh how merciful! And you can't do something after you die first of all, but why didn't they free them when they were still alive? BECAUSE THEY WANTED THE SLAVES! You're a fucking retard.
Mattm1986 11 months ago
Chris Matthews is the liberal Bill O' Reilly.
ashhole820 1 year ago
@ashhole820 He actually seems worse based on this clip. I'm kind of embarrassed. We're supposed to be better than that.
Sloth7d 1 year ago
@ashhole820 You are actually comparing JFK to O'Reilly? Seriously, wtf?
splicedenergy 1 year ago
I used to think Fox News was horrible, then I go watch MSNBC and it's even worse.
kzdavis1000 1 year ago
coctopusprime, this is not entertaining or funny AT ALL! I didn't enjoy this.The Tea Party Express should be abolished. These people are are not expressing free speech. THEY ARE SPEWING THE MOST VILE GARBAGE I have ever heard. I'm embarrassed for America. I have a great sense of humor but this is not remotely funny. I went to school in Davis not far from the TPE HQ. My campus is filled w/the brightest minds in the country. The Tea Party recruits the dimmest of light bulbs. Russo is only about $.
eqsmooth 1 year ago
WOW I'm English and I know more about American history than she does!
FetishHero 1 year ago
"We wouldn't have a Tea Party movement if people weren't dissatisfied with Republican policies". - Sal Russo
OK, Sal, then why is the Tea Party supporting Republicans? Why aren't you calling for more Democratic policies? The truth is that the Tea Party is an astroturf movement founded by rich, extreme-right Republicans with the goal of shifting the Republican party further to the right.
fedos 1 year ago 2
its also is kinda cruel to the native americans and the chinese, who were enslaved by the old-world americans that only the africans get recognized as slaves, its also unfair to the white slaves, that slavery is seen as a "racial issue" when it was actually an economic one (as well as a human rights violation).
slavery dates back to the start of civilization, it was always seen as economic, not racial, and the Old-World Americans were no exception.
fuck, history is ugly.
EVERYVERSER 1 year ago
I must point out the minor mistake of Chris Mathews here:
That Slavery was a "racial issue", not true: it was seen as a standard economical policy, to tell the truth, race wasn't that important economically, the first slaves in america (as with most cultures with slavery) were of the same (that is, white) race as the slave masters, (they were called "indentured servants" or just "servants"), the next were the Natives, and then African and Chinese.
EVERYVERSER 1 year ago
Racism just became co-morbid with slavery as African slaves became the most common. (as they were the most economically viable and socially acceptable) ill admit though, racism did contribute to the way the non-white slaves were treated comparatively. Enough that both are associated today.
and Lincoln did not fight the civil war to "free the slaves" even though it was the final result, freeing the slaves was something that he was using to gain support, and even he thought poorly of the Africans.
EVERYVERSER 1 year ago
@EVERYVERSER
That is was entirely a racial issue is untrue, but racial biases played a central role in justifying it's place and perpetuity in a "free" society. "All men being Equal" would obviously not cover those classified as proto or sub human savage races. At best, they were considered as fractions of a "proper" man, and were still owed their fraction of liberty... and at worst, seen as mere beasts of burden to whom proper men wielded divinely commanded dominion over.
Sinuev1 1 year ago
They used everything they could to justify it, just like the nut-job rhetoric of today, racism was particularly bad though ill agree with you, thanks.
i was just on the side of education, the "men of liberty" (from the fathers to lincoln) were not so good as the people of today would like us to beleive, i mean, they did a good job for their time, but i could make a better country then them. One built on (utilitarian) principles.got it written up, ill send it to you.
EVERYVERSER 1 year ago
@EVERYVERSER - My family comes from white indentured servitude, and I don’t see it that way. If you can’t pay your bills, and have to give up your freedom in order to avoid debtor’s prison, than that’s what you have to do. The institution of slavery is much more horrific. I'm not saying your point is invalid though.
ArcaneKarma 1 year ago
28 People couldn't shoot Pooty-Tang. Sa Da Tay
nizocapri 1 year ago
I can't believe that these tea party dumbasses draw so much water in our country...
DamienDoe 1 year ago
This woman? Because our forebears didn't fight slavery, thats why we still have it right.
hydin1 1 year ago
I agree that we are spending too much, but Tea Party politicians are just as full of shit as the rest of them if not more so.
brokenseeker 1 year ago
this is the greatest thing I've ever seen in my life.
huckleberry12 1 year ago
Constitutionalism and founding"father" worship is incoherent, but that doesn't mean libertarianism is falsified.
The libertarian movement has had the strategy of being the only movement to actually support that flawed but legal document, which would leave us much better off than we are now but is still no where near perfect, and they are stuck defending it.
That said, most politicians are idiots, and I won't defend them, just my ideas.
Matthews is a loud propagandist like O'Reilly.
failedassassin 1 year ago
This looked no different than what Bill O does on fox news Coctopus what true "ownage" happened here? What that Bachmans a moron oh thats something new.......this wasnt even a fucking debate.
TCVB91 1 year ago
What.
Are these people even from the fucking U.S?
Aztek92 1 year ago
lol brilliant. what is the clip in the middle from?
crisis123456789 1 year ago
@crisis123456789 - Pootie Tang
ArcaneKarma 1 year ago
@ArcaneKarma thanks
crisis123456789 1 year ago
This is hilarious and so are the edits you made to the video, like the mashup off all his nervous laughs at the end.
KinkyKonnivingKunt 1 year ago
i'm just saying if you're trying to debate a topic you dont pick one unrelated and pointless topic to attack that aggressively and single mindedly if you could win the overall debate.
3csimon 1 year ago
LOL @ cenk at the end. ELBOW FROM THE SKY WASIKTA
t0xb0x 1 year ago 2
@3csimon
Man I couldnt agrre more and I fucking hate Bachman but this wasnt ownage when O Reily does this its fucking juvenile (which btw he is) but when Chris Matthews does this hes a genius?
TCVB91 1 year ago
George Washington worked tirelessly until the age of 133 to see slavery abolished.
oraclecrank 1 year ago 55
This has been flagged as spam show
@oraclecrank @C0ct0pusPrime try reading the works of the founding fathers themselves and not the marxist jibberish you learn from most of this country's schools/universities.
knightflyer10 11 months ago
@oraclecrank
Don't forget the fact that he was 6'20" and weighed a fucking ton...
Jimbochap 11 months ago
@oraclecrank
Yay, just like in the old testament :)
mardastheEitheist 11 months ago
best effin political clip ever!!!!!
mexinthebox 1 year ago
Chris Matthews is finally goes after a conservative. Liberals might be forming a backbone.
fistization 1 year ago
What's the music at the end? I don't recognize it from Dimmu, must be from something else?
TherionNLD 1 year ago
Every day is opposite day for tea baggers.
sdrawkcabgnipytmi 1 year ago
Sad even though MSNBC reportes were right, the reporters of MSNBC behaved just as bad towards their guest, as "FOX News" staff does.
otur1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
well ha ha... pmsl
smoke123455 1 year ago
he's not addressing the issue that the initial speaker was. focusing on one pointless little issue and ignoring the meaning of the speech is really just stupid.
3csimon 1 year ago
@3csimon
Wut? then why did she say it if it was pointless to her speech? Matthews can only assume she fond it somehow meaningful if SHE said it.
Hexdoll 1 year ago
Wow teabaggers need to read a book.
anandbhat1989 1 year ago 35
@anandbhat1989 They need a bit more than that. CA' s new governor needs to remove the TPE HQ from Sacto. This is not about reading, education & is not even close to funny. it is disgusting. I live in an American neighborhood not far from the Statue of Liberty. 120,000 people from 100 countries. Most speak several languages, know their own history & know more about American history than most white Americans will ever know. They came here for our Constitution & some have slaves as ancenstors.
eqsmooth 1 year ago
@anandbhat1989
The only book they need is 'The Good Book," and the best part of it is that you don't need to read it to tote it around like absolute law.
MyOldName 1 year ago 3
@anandbhat1989 Reading a book isn't enough. They can just read Glenn Beck or Sarah Palin (yes, I can't believe either of these morons actually wrote a book either) or Ayn Rand
nylonhead116 1 year ago 3
Fox "News" once had a female pro-religion "atheist"on one of their programs. It was pretty obivous that she had been hired to distort the image of atheists in America. maybe they deliberately picked Sal Russo in order to slam him. I'm not saying that Matthews is wrong, but this entire discussion seems to be nothing more than a fuck you to the tea party. Even though they deserve it, I hate to see actual journalists lower themselves to the level of fox style bashing.
northstarprod 1 year ago
LOL
buktomsin 1 year ago
21 generations??? Gee I didn't know America was founded in 1591! LMAO!
mjh012363 1 year ago
no, no, no, what she's saying is that in her family everyone has had given birth at the age of 11 for the past 21 generations :-p
ArcaneKarma 1 year ago
@ArcaneKarma "no, no, no, what she's saying is that in her family everyone has had given birth at the age of 11 for the past 21 generations..."
LOLOL! She still would be ignorant and wrong since girls 100 years ago reached puberty 2 years later than they do today! LOL! Of course that's just an average so who knows.
mjh012363 1 year ago
OH NO!! HES USING WORDS!!! EVOLUTION IS BS!!! MY TELEPROMPTER IS NOT ADAPTING!!!! [bullshit patriotic rhetoric]!!!!! XD
vorkvoyd 1 year ago
Today - Democrat US Senator and former member of the US Senate Judicial Committee Chuck Schumer:
"So I would urge my Republican colleagues, no matter how strongly they feel -- you know, we have three branches of government. We have a House. We have a Senate. We have a president."
We're not talking about 200 year old facts here, we're talking about fundamental US Government structure and principles.
I'll wait with bated breath for Chris Matthews or anyone on this forum to so much as mention it.
HistorySpeaks4Itself 1 year ago
The founders worked tirelessly until they defeated slavery? Wow...
It's sad that idiots like Mrs Bachmann can ignorantly spout their revolutionary war fanfiction as if it were real history, proudly declaring that we have risen above and overcome the evils of slavery. The institution was abolished, but the practice continues to this day with more estimated human trafficking going on in the US today than during 1800's, and at worldwide all time high.
Sinuev1 1 year ago
@Sinuev1
It's not just happening in some small third world nation half a world away... it's happening right here in America, and if you compare the cost spent by the US on the war on drugs compared to what we spend to aid in stamping out slave rings... that doesn't speak to our honoring the "tireless dedication of our founders to eradicate it from these shores", now does it?. I've certainly never seen her lift the causes banner.
I'd call her a hypocrite if she wasn't such a imbecile.
Sinuev1 1 year ago
Such a perfect example of the problem w/the Teabaggers and Republicans --they h ave no desire to be honest, no respect for truth, and only know how to grasp for power through any means possible.
youtubuzr 1 year ago
Up here in Canada John A Macdonald, as all Canadians know, single-handedly freed each and every slave with his Key of the Beaverking.
lukeyboy5 1 year ago
@lukeyboy5
I doubt it, he was probably too drunk to remember what a slave was.
Xyrosis 1 year ago
@Xyrosis - Common misunderstanding- he was a robot who burned alcohol as fuel
lukeyboy5 1 year ago
Yet another testament to just how stupid, and gullible the American public is considered by or government officials.
HIMOG93 1 year ago
Well Done Chris Mathews, I hate it when poloticians aviod and dodge questions by answering a completely different question.
shandcunt 1 year ago
Republicans are the #1 reason this country is in so much debt.
melowar78 1 year ago
@melowar78
No, republicans and democrats are the reason the country is in so much debt. No offense, but if you believe otherwise you are blind.
HistorySpeaks4Itself 1 year ago
@HistorySpeaks4Itself I said they're the #1 reason. I didn't say they were EXCLUSIVELY the reason.
melowar78 1 year ago
@melowar78
So if republicans and democrats have gotten the country into so much debt, why does virtually everyone on this forum completely ignore the topic of overspending and mindlessly prattle on about whether or not the founding fathers ended slavery? Seems to me Michele Bachmann is the only one with any common sense, whether accurate in her history lesson or not. At least she realizes what the relevant problem is and wants to do something about it, not defend the failures of either party.
HistorySpeaks4Itself 1 year ago
@HistorySpeaks4Itself
But it do you really think someone who cannot get simple historical facts straight, can solve something as complex as our debt? or do you think its more likely she just says what she thinks her ilk want to hear?
Hexdoll 1 year ago
@Hexdoll
I think a person who recognizes and speaks out about problem has a lot more chance of solving it than a bunch of pseudo-intellectuals who disregard to the problem altogether, and chatter endlessly about pure irrelevance.
HistorySpeaks4Itself 1 year ago
@HistorySpeaks4Itself Michele Bachmann's hypocrisy has been exposed over multiple issues.( I will give her credit, she was one of the few who voted against the TARP bill) Conservatives tend to complain about spending when it comes to things like social programs (roughly about 10% of spending) but have started and support things that are the real cause of our debt. i.e. tax cuts for the insanely rich, military complex, the war on drugs e.t.c. ad nauseam
melowar78 1 year ago
@melowar78
Please break down that 10% to support your argument, with references. Then explain what tax rate you believe is fair for the "insanely rich". Why would anyone want to create a fundamental dependency of an entire nation on an extremely small number of individuals? Is that your idea of a stable society? America was built by free people and opportunity, not dependency and socialism. America is going soft, and it will meet grim reality soon as international "adjustments" take place.
HistorySpeaks4Itself 1 year ago
@HistorySpeaks4Itself
What was the highest taxable rate between 1948 and 1964, one of the most prosperous economic times for the US? Our country is not a pure capitalistic society as you may have been lead to believe, a society built entirely on capitalism is not a society.
Hexdoll 1 year ago
@HistorySpeaks4Itself Google "where spending goes to" or something like that. The "small number in individuals" actually have well over 90% of the wealth. You can google that too if you want. How the is that justifiable? How is that good for the country? Sorry no individual "worked" so hard to be worth a billionaire. I say we bring the tax bracket back to the days of Reagen (50% I think) without the loop holes. The top 2% will still have WAY more money then they know what to do with.
melowar78 1 year ago
@melowar78
So you would like a society that is fundamentally dependent on 2% of it's populations wealth, which they "do not deserve anyways" by your evaluation. None for me thanks.
HistorySpeaks4Itself 1 year ago
@HistorySpeaks4Itself I believe the war on terror and the war on drugs has cost a lot of money
shandcunt 1 year ago
Bachman sounds like a wannabe Palin.
capoman1 1 year ago
Nobody cuts through the bullshit like Chris Matthews. This guy had the opportunity to distance himself from the wrong speech of Bachman, and he couldn't do it. He could have clarified the Tea Party's ideas but stayed on script. How odd.
rikjam 1 year ago
lmao where was that clip from
squippy117 1 year ago
The Founding Fathers ended slavery!
Oceania's always been at war with Eastasia!
*sarcasm* Gee, I don't see any parallels whatsoever. *end sarcasm* Talk about rewriting history for your own purposes. What's next? Bachmann's gonna say that there are no scientific studies demonstrating the harmful effects of CO2 and its significant role in the greenhouse effect? Oh wait, she already did! Dumb witch...
AngelsInAbsentia 1 year ago
@AngelsInAbsentia
Did the founding fathers play ANY role in ending slavery by your evaluation?
Hypocrisy check: I'm sure you believe that "global warming" will not be eliminated during our lifetimes - will this mean that Al Gore will have played no role in ending it if that ever happens? Yes, some of the founding fathers had slaves (not all) - but big Al has multiple mansions and personal jets, no?
HistorySpeaks4Itself 1 year ago
@HistorySpeaks4Itself I wasn't saying that the founding fathers ended slavery, nor did I say they didn't contribute to abolishing it either. I was paraphrasing Bachmann and comparing it with a 1984 reference, addressing the idea of changing history to suit your own purposes. Second, I'm no fan of Gore, he's a politician with no scientific background. I referred to a previous speech in which Bachmann said that there were no SCIENTIFIC PAPERS on CO2 or climate change. I hope I clarified myself.
AngelsInAbsentia 1 year ago
@AngelsInAbsentia
So please clarify - how specifically is Bachmann "changing history to suit her own purposes" in regards to the founding fathers and the subject of current government overspending? Her point seems quite obvious to any objective person, that insurmountable federal debt will be comparable to enslaving the country's future generations when they are handed the bill. Somehow, the entire concept is completely disregarded in favor of some irrelevant historical dispute about slavery.
HistorySpeaks4Itself 1 year ago
@HistorySpeaks4Itself This country will collapse in upon itself and dissolve into violent warfare long before the debts cause us problems.
syn010110 1 year ago
@syn010110
Sad but likely true. And it won't just be the USA. Many countries have been riding on fumes for decades, and eventually they will run out of gas.
HistorySpeaks4Itself 1 year ago
@HistorySpeaks4Itself I agree that the tangent on slavery by Matthews is childish and should've addressed her message, yet I believe that historical accuracy's important. Bachmann appeals to Americans' love for the founding fathers while distorting/ not checking facts in order to support her argument, which is fallacious. It's those kind of things that allow her and others to say things like the founding fathers wanted the US to be a christian nation when there are documents to prove otherwise.
AngelsInAbsentia 1 year ago
@AngelsInAbsentia
Suggesting that the founding fathers had nothing to do with ending slavery is in my opinion more ignorant than suggesting that they ended it entirely. First of all, "the founding fathers" is not an individual. John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, Patrick Henry, Benjamin Franklin, and many other of the founding fathers vehemently opposed slavery and were extremely instrumental in changing the course of the country and laying the first bricks that would lead to abolition.
HistorySpeaks4Itself 1 year ago
@HistorySpeaks4Itself I agree with you completely.Though, I never stated that the founding fathers didn't contributed to abolishing slavery, but rather that they didn't end it. Because I said they didn't end it, doesn't mean I think they had nothing to do with it. Furthermore, I'm fully aware that the founding fathers aren't "an individual"; I don't think I've said otherwise.
AngelsInAbsentia 1 year ago
Got to love it when tea baggers get called on their stupidity.
HoodedAtheist 1 year ago
EPIC FUCKING ELBOWZZ
n2thatguy 1 year ago
hahaha nice. he annihilated them hahah epic.
Direksone 1 year ago
Epic. I generally don't like Christ Matthews because I find him to be braying and annoying, but this is freaking great.
mtheory85 1 year ago
Fuck this system, we need a new system, i hope the economy fcks up so we can roll with zeitgeists idea :)
JollSSteR 1 year ago
@JollSSteR
Okay, but first UGU!
Gilbert Gottfried - Death or Ugu
IauthenticI 1 year ago
Newsflash, geniuses: Michele Bachmann's slavery reference, accurate or not, was not meant to be a US history lesson. I noticed none of you historians seem to have a problem with her fundamental argument which was against current overspending - in fact laughably I don't see a single post on this entire forum that even addresses it. So let's hear it - is there a problem with government overspending - or would you rather play dodgeball like Chris Matthews?
Ivorygate 1 year ago
This guy's ability to argue is as bad as nephlimfree's.
x64ghost 1 year ago 4
this made my day, thank you.
AForkSpoon 1 year ago
duh... she got mixed up, she meant that the founding fathers landed on the moon then defeated hitler at the alamo
DontTaseMeBro77 1 year ago
Haha this is great. You can't let these tea party assholes go off on their own irrelevant tangents. You HAVE to control them and check their stupidity.
Argamocrypt 1 year ago
Bachmann and Palin are fucking clowns with the tea party being the pawns that back them. We don't need far right wingnuts in power, we need MODERATE republicans and MODERATE democrats that are willing to work together. People like this having influence and power is why our government is a big ol' clusterfuck.
KitRedFox 1 year ago
This Clip demonstrates why I don't like Chris Mathews. I want to hear what sal has to say but chris cuts him off at every turn. Don't misunderstand I agree with chris I just feel what is the point of having a guest if you won't let him finish a fucking sentence.
dsdougharty 1 year ago
Comment removed
Ivorygate 1 year ago