It's real funny how big an issue goofball makes of Tea Partiers bringing guns to political rallies, but yet he turned the other way after the illegal aliens in arizona rioted and attacked the police after the immigration got passed. Also where was he when the black panthers tried to scare people away from the voting booths?? The hypocricy is overwhelming with this democract clown - along with the rest of the neo-marxist left.
@RetSquid You allude to "over-time" being some type of point in the favor of control. But it's not. Not even close.
-
I'll tell you what. If you can quote me the paragraph where he accounts for the invention and mass production of hollowpoints rounds...then I'll give his study a serious look. But that in itself is a HUGE factor. I'd MUCH rather take an FMJ through the ribs lung and out the back, in like a pin out like a pin vs in like a pin and out like a softball.
Q: Why is it the right side talks about guns so much? A: The left sides do too! Q: They do? A: Yeah! When they're saying how we shouldn't be so loose with our guns!
And I love how he went through the list of examples the first time, and then when assclown tries to rebut the second time he swaps out half the list for new names he didn't even list the first time. I mean cmon man, that's an absolute and genuine overkill. I know that Chris PLANNED it too. "I'll say these ones first, and I'll say these ones the second time he brings it up."
Every single place that has liberalized gun laws have seen their violent crime rates go down. The places with the highest crime rates also have the strictest gun laws...and are usually run by Liberals.
If you want a complete run-down of all the statistics with plenty of documentation for the claims, read "More Guns/Less Crime" by John Lott. You can also look up one of his lectures on here. This study is peer-reviewed by dozens of Universities.
I have NO idea what the heck you are talking about now.
Every State that has made it easier fro law abiding Citizens to get guns has seen the violent crime rate drop, every place where there are more restrictive gun laws has seen crime rates go up.
OK, The implication here is..."...every place where there are more restrictive gun laws has seen crime rates go up..." (therefore it's clearly and primarily the correlation with the loosened gun laws that's responsible for the drop in crime)
-
There is a peer-reviewed name to this exact peer-reviewed fallacy. But unlike crime in Philly, this fallacy has been around WAY longer.
Some kid was standing beside a shattered window holding a baseball.
But when I point out that when kids break windows they typically RUN, it doesn't seem like such and open shut case anymore.
-
It becomes unclear trying to explain this kids presence here. Plus, he's by himself. Who breaks windows playing catch with themselves? Who even plays catch with themselves? Where's his baseball glove? He could be playing catch without a mit, I guess..,but you can see how, "crime corresponds to gun laws" is an ominous point to attempt.
@RetSquid Who are you to say that there is not an independent variable that is causing the crime drop? How do you know that if the gun laws were strengthened that the crime wouldn't have dropped ANYWAY *PLUS THEN SOME*. How do you know that? And let me tell you something about peer-review. It's a tool, of limit, that scientists use and manipulate to help sort out objective truth from possibility as best as possible. And this is NOT a controlled environment for testing....
@RetSquid "...he covers how he controlled for all those variables." Which variables?
-
I'm 16-5-2 and I could correlate the result of each of those 23 days with anything I wanted that would suit the day. Let's say that gun crime went up shortly after 9/11, that can be explained by the psych of 9/11. If gun crime went down shortly after 9/11 that can be explained by the psych of 9/11. Neither would have anything to do with gunlaws, yet both could be attributed to gun laws if chosen.
@RetSquid So I could cherry pick my way to a perfect correlation as well. It's not hard and it's a form of moving the goalposts. Think about it. If 9/11 caused a flux that favors his point, he conveniently leaves it out as a cause and instead attributes it to gun law. If 9/11 causes a flux that counters the man's point, then he aggressively....how'd you put it? .... "...controls for all those variables."
-
So I ask you. What do you mean by "all those variables". In specific please...
Go look at the book and complain to the dozens of nationally recognized universities that say you are wrong. I will get the book out later, I'm busy right now.
@D33veeoss "Smart people disagree with you" doesn't cut it, and I'll let you drum up all the reasons why that might be the case. Your imagination appears healthy.
-
It was good rappin' with ya though. You take care man.
-
For the record. I don't care about gun laws at this point. I'm only prosecuting where I understand the possibility of fallacy. No more no less.
@RetSquid You made a claim. I'm prosecuting it. No more. No less. I'll tell you what. Don't give me the specifics of the list. We'll leave that aside, it's more or less irrelevant. The reason I asked was to illustrate that it would be impossible to do.
Well, far more people smater than you, or me, agree that he controlled for the variables involved that would make any difference in the findings. That you think there are more, without even seeing what he did is just trolling.
@RetSquid Appeal to authority – (argumentum ad verecundiam) deductively fallacious; even legitimate authorities speaking on their areas of expertise may affirm a falsehood. However, if not using a deductive argument, a logical fallacy is only asserted when the source is not a legitimate expert on the topic at hand, or their conclusion(s) are in direct opposition to other expert consensus. Appeal to authority does not condone to agreeing to the argument.
@RetSquid Those are a few logical fallacies that you're apparently unaware of. If all you can do is point at someone and say, "they know what they're talking about"...then what do I need you for? What good do you do? You make yourself to be an inert bump on an inept log when you appeal to authority.
Argumentum ad populum (appeal to belief, appeal to the majority, appeal to the people) – where a proposition is claimed to be true or good solely because many people believe it to be so
--
Appeal to accomplishment – where an assertion is deemed true or false based on the accomplishments of the proposer.
If all the data bears out the claims made in the argument, it is not a logical fallacy, it is a scientific finding of fact. Until you come up with a better explaination that fits the same facts...but then you would have to actually do some research on the subject and not just blindly attack it.
@RetSquid If you'll agree that a randomly flipped coin 100 times won't come out 50/50, that at some point, it will have 100 heads/100 tails in a row...then I don't see how you could put stock in an UNCONTROLLED experiment. I don't think you appreciate the words "uncontrolled" or "independent variable" when I use them. I suppose then, to you, I might seem like a "high-tech-troll", but really, my I'm just a peer that's reviewing? Someone who can keep up with, and dismantle, bogus claims.
Maybe it's best that from now on you stick to the claims that you yourself produce. If your claims are peer reviewed, then even better.
The wrench that is inherent with this point you're trying to claim as fact, is that it's practical impossible to prove. Not almost impossible. It's full-stop impossible, practically speaking. In imaginary land, anything is possible. In practical land, most things only work one way. The scientific process is the peer I've selected to review you claim.
"The scientific process is the peer I've selected to review you claim."
Exactly, and that process prove the claim that "more guns equals less crime" true. Unless you can come up with an example where that has not happened...
@RetSquid I've given numerous examples of exactly how, where, and why there could be plenty of independent variables to skew the findings. I've shown how this is an UNCONTROLLED study/experiment and with that follows all the issues I've highlighted.
-
If you want just one, then I'll give you one that you named. "Time".
-
Time itself murders the claim. You can't do and experiment, change things, repeat the experiment, and pretend it's got the same variables when it doesn't.
@RetSquid I've given numerous examples of exactly how, where, and why there could be plenty of independent variables to skew the findings. I've shown how this is an UNCONTROLLED study/experiment and with that follows all the issues I've highlighted.
-
If you want just one, then I'll give you one that you named. "Time".
-
Time itself murders the claim. You can't do and experiment, change things, repeat the experiment, and pretend it's got the same variables when it doesn't.
@RetSquid You must not be appreciating how much society changes over time because implicit with the question of, "do tighter/laxer gun laws have a bearing on crime increase/decrease" is something called SOCIETY. How could one ever measure the then and the now and reconcile the factors? A hundred years ago they barely had bolts! Much less the factors motivating everyone to go shoot someone were as much apples and oranges as the difference between the M-11 and the Blunderbuss.
I guess that's what I'm saying. I only need my own experience and any 7th grade math student to affirm that one can't add apples and oranges. x+y = x+y.
And anyone that wants to say, "x+y = gun crime decrease" is easily countered w/ someone to say x+y = gun crime increase. And because we can't ACTUALLY add x+y...the answer is subjective. Never objective. Uncontrolled. Never controlled. The mechanics are simply not there.
-
This is a sloppy claim derived across uncontrolled variables.
@RetSquid "Unless you can come up with an example where that has not happened..." Or put another way, if you think that this question is valid prosecution, then I'll say that there are neon orange marshians on a planet 4 solar systems away...unless you can come up with an example proving that this is not the case.
@RetSquid OK you must have missed the part where I explained the mechanics behind cherry picking here. One more time. Say the psychology behind 9/11 in fact creates more gun crime. Say the author of this book is making the point that the laxed gun laws should be creating less crime. What shows up for your eye to read? Simple. "Due to 9/11 there is more gun violence, but given the what the study appreared to show, the crime is still less than if we still had tight gun laws."
@RetSquid Say that the psychology of 9/11 in fact created LESS gun crime. What shows up for your eye to read? Simple. "Due to the laxed gun laws in JUN '11, we here in 2004, can see that they've had a significant impact on the gun crimes. Especially in New York where traditionally it's been particularly violent."
-
Then introduce a world leading psychologist to explain that people grieving (the nation) are less violent for an amount of time.
@RetSquid And what I'm saying, guy, is that WITHOUT CONTROLLED VARIABLES.......there is NO WAY TO KNOW what facts are or are not cherry picked. It's IMPOSSIBLE. - Maybe I can say this another way.
Let's say I wanted to dismantle the man's claim....there is NO WAY that I could do this. I could prop up any type of contention to his quasi-points and quasi-facts...BUT...I could only do it with the same quasi-points and quasi-facts. This is because of the LACK OF CONTROL.\
@RetSquid He doesn't have to prove that they caused more deaths. He doesn't have to prove they caused less deaths. He doesn't have to prove if it actually made any difference at all. All he has to do is show me that he even had the presence of mind to FACTOR it or even ATTEMPT to factor it.
-
Did he account for the general conduct in public amongst strangers from pre 20th and the no-21st centuries?
You are making claims that he needs to prove things that are not a subject of the book. He doesn't look at Mankind's histroy of violence, just a few decades in the U.S.
NOW, stop throwing crap out here and go research his book before making any more mindless, unwarrented, claims, GO READ THE BOOK.
Like I said, I listed them several times including my 3rd last post I re-listed them because I feared you wouldn't recognize them if they were in front of your face. Do I need to try for a third? - Look. I don't have to read the book. Here is why. It's a "controlled" claim made with uncontrolled variables. It's that simple. - x + y + 5 = 15. - Guess what. x =5 y =10 Or. y = 10 x = 5. - We don't know. - I could right a book to the POLAR, and have some momo think it was fact too.
@RetSquid You shouldnt let your predisposition assign you your loyalties. - You should seek them and weed them out. - They slander our integrity and the human-dynamic of choice and freedom. - Anyway. - Good luck. -
You should really read the book and stop blindly attacking the conclusions without even the slightest attempt to evaluate anything he did. You have no integrity or intellectual honesty.
@RetSquid Incidentally, if me and mine "colonize" your while entire street, at 2:30 in the morning, with night-vision and MP5s...if you live for 20 seconds after hearing your door jams crack and now your house is mine...would you consider that a crime?
-
Home invasion, 1st* murder, forcible confinement (for if I need you to work now my land and paint now my house...or if I want to sell your particularly beautiful wife to my friend)
@RetSquid ...OR...is this type of conduct a "crime" in say 1899 December 31st 11:59PM but not 1900.January 1st 12:00AM.
-
Point being is that "crime" isn't an objective idea that you may use as some point of static measurement like a ruler.
-
So there is the overhanging issue of INDEPENDENT variable, and then there is the issue of TERMS. This definition of "crime" skews the claim of "gun CRIME" heavily because effectively, you're referring to nothing in specific.
@RetSquid Yes, and neon orange aliens exist 2 solar systems away. They don't eat spaghetti because it gives them indigestion. What you have to do is come up with an actual proof where this claim is wrong. Until then, I guess my imagination rules reality.
@RetSquid If I speak of "the best color in the world" or "the best plate in the buffet" or "the most beautiful type of woman" ... Nobody knows what I mean. At all. Even if 2 years ago I was asked these same 3 questions. all 3 could easily be different by now.
-
So.
-
a) how could anyone ever know they've accounted for all the independent variables.
b) how do you define crime, (careful, any subjective reference implodes the control)
@RetSquid Whatever you're saying is "peer-reviewed" can only ever be sloppy at best. It's not a controlled experiment. You can't have gunlaws for one way for 3 years and then switch for the next 5 and say, "oh look! Crimes down! Must have been the gun laws."
-
Either the people who "peer-reviewed" this are inept to the capacity of the term, or more likely, you've *simply"* assigned those 2 words thinking they'd bring more weight to the argument that lax gun laws reduce crime.
You are just like the gun-control nuts who dismissed the study without looking at it. The peer review was done by dozens of Universities. The study covered decades of gun law changes, it is now in it's third edition and has never been refuted.
Uncontrolled means refutation is impossible. Uncontrolled means that the data is not true nor untrue. It means that it's useless if one wants to state any findings as an objective. - Let me give you an example from my world. - When NYK plays on Friday's after a loss, they are 9-0 in this role. When DEN plays on Friday's after a win, they are 9-0 in this role. - Tonight they play. - Who will win? - To answer that question you need to pin down all the independent variables.
@D33veeoss ex. How does NYK play @ DEN? Oh, they're 2-6 in DEN. Hmmm. How does DEN play vs the Knicks? 6-2 vs the Knicks. Wow. OK looking like DEN so far, but DEN has a few key injuries....(NO VALUE).....and the NYK are not playing their potential right now...do they bounce back at home? (NO VALUE) or do they stay cold tonight? (NO VALUE). NYK are 5-1 after 3 straight losses...so that indicates bounce back...even though they're cold right now maybe....(NO VALUE)
Did the ref have a fight with his wife last night and he doesn't wanna go home so he'll drag the game out and call lots of fouls? - Did someone that looks like the DEV pointguard pick on him at school? - ETC ETC ETC I'ts endless. - You CANT account for it all. You can't know which way is up or down .PERIOD. - And that's the point here. - I can make it look like DEN will win this. I can make it look like NYK will win this. - It's up to me. Not the truth. -
@RetSquid It's an UNCONTROLLED solution with uncontrolled variables. Top to bottom. a) society and the way we interact cant be measured.
b) influences that sway one part of society but not the other. Vice versa.
c) THE INTRODUCTION OF HOLLOWPOINTS. I like this one. If he even tried to factor in the amount of mortality pre-hollow and post hollow, then I'd be impressed as it would prove that he GENUINELY was trying to PROVE a point vs make a statement.
@RetSquid I've made you think, and there is enough conversation here for months maybe years. Your short "quasi-rebuttals" are proof I'll only get so far here but I was glad to help plant a garden behind your forehead. Oh be careful little eyes what you read.
Matthews could have just come out and made a speech, but somehow, he's found a way to have a genuine idiot fortify and bolster and highlight his points, in neon glow, thile doing what he thinks is arguing when in fact he's nothing but a confirming resolution to what Chris wants to say. Chris can show pure genius at times. Wow. Just wow. This guy was dismantled eh? Yeah man, pure dismantled.
@RetSquid I'm pretty sure that John Wilkes Booth was none of those categories. Also I'm pretty sure a Leftist would not have assassinated Martin Luther King or Robert Kennedy. Unless you have evidence to prove any of these wrong, your statement is false.
@RetSquid I would engage you in debate if I thought you had even a hint of reality, but clearly you don't.
You just claimed that the only assassination attempts in America's history were made by leftists. And you claimed this on a video about a right wing nut jobs assassination attempt.
@cgord31 Psssssssst....if you leave the definition of "irony" in an attached post, you'll have a better chance of getting a direct answer. Good luck ;)
chris matthews never wins an argument hes a bigot he is the bill o'reilly of the left he just yells and yells and talks over his opponent and calls it winning. he just listed off every assassination attempt in american history going back even to the 1800's. the tea party guy is right there still hasnt been a political assassination in 50 years. it was an attempt on this congresswomans life but lets not forget that the man who subdued the criminal had a gun himself. chris matthews = bill o'reilly
If the tea party is so smart how come they yell out slogans like "take your government hands off of my social secruity!" Or when they compained about obama and taxation when for 90 percent of the tea partiers got a tax cut out of him... please their fucking dumb! And led supported by monied interest like dick army...
Who here believes that if you cut the taxes on the wealthy create any jobs? Answer: tax cuts on rich do not create jobs, it just fattens their wallets. Deregulation jobs? Not always... infact deregulation has made as many jobs over seas that have disapeared over here... why is this good? It only benifits 1 percent of us. Good luck to the wanna bies who will never end up rich because that's how the game is rigged...
@decayingclown Exactly. The rich have had their tax cuts for over a decade now. And these jobs are... ...where? They want to do cheap business in China, let them move there. The tea bagger party just stirs up the bigots. They are less popular than Casey Anthony in the court of public opinion now.
And Obama has been a letdown on many issues, but before the tea baggers point out his low approval ratings in response to my "public opinion" comment, look below Obama's rating. That's where you are.
Last year 600,000 people moved their account to credit unions october last month 650,000 people moved their accounts, I think I'm seeing a trend here...
And my info comes from reuters, ap, the times, and cnn money so not all lyberal news if your wondering... does anyone know how many banks failed this year? 88 and counting... go deregulation... as for taxes everytime the wealthiest among us get a tax cut we poor, working class, and middle have to take up the slack so its for the wealthy to give it back!
Oh yeah altra right wing has done great for the ol us of a... no it hasn't! Record numbers reported of people running away from big banks to put there money in SAFE credit unions because of deregulating numb nut neo cons hundreds of millions of dollars missing from mf global. Fdic only cover $250,000... money gone let's deregulate more so the rich can steal and give themselves bonuses for a job well done...
Left wing idiots. You guys do know that the guy who did this is pshychotic. Nothing to do with the Tea Party. Listen to Chris Mathews argue that the U.S. is the most violent country towards it's leaders. ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME! How can you argue with one so delusional? Chris Mathews was voted as the most irritating cable news host. So if you follow this guy I assume you're and idiot too.
The tea-party guy was indeed owned, but this was not really a proper interview... The guest almost didn't get a chance to speak (thank goodness for that, anyway).
people never admit when they are wrong. when someone provides an argument that should end the conversation, the other person doesnt just concide like they should, instead they just repeat their last previous sentence and play dumb and beat around the bush. if i had a show i would have a clown that comes out and slaps people with a rubber fish when ever they did that. and noone can answer yes or no questions. they give an explanation and never an answer because there ashamed of their own beleifs.
chris matthews is a true american hero. awarded 2 purple hearts and 2 silver stars during his service as a coast guard sniper during operation desert storm. god bless him
the Tea Party guy was making a distinction between Congress and the Executive Branch--that's clear--Chris Matthews chose to ignore that so Chris is actually the stupid one--or else he was just doing his usual Hatchet Job on the Tea Party; ;
Bad-ass....I love a good, historically-factual body check to these TP morons who never seem to know their history. hell I was rattling off assassination attempts right along with Chris after being gob-smacked by such stupidity.
I love the fact that chrissy boy has nothing but hate for the conservative movement! As we grow ill be watching for his head to explode and will be smiling when it does!!
You republicans are so fukking dogshit on the foot stupid it is scary. You dont know fuk, you dont do fuk, you donat say fuk. Yer all a buncha inbread loudmouth half queer dripping bags of fuk
@GdHS54 - What are you talking about? Im not a conservative. Lighten up for christsake. Just because I think Chris Matthews has a man crush on Obama doesnt make me a conservative.
Yeah Chis, they flaunt them, but you miss the point. If something where to go wrong, even if they didn't like your political views, they would save your ass.
Wouldn't it have been better if passengers and the pilot on the 911 flghts were armed. Like Archie Bunker said. "the way to prevent hi-jacking is Arm all your passengers."
@Bluedog309 im goin off from ur comment about abolishing the 2nd Ammendment. the NRA is full of nuts who thinks everyone should be allowed to hav AKs and M16s
@Bluedog309 The Germans still had no way to revolt and still look at the soviet union wen stalin was in power. Wat about more importantly ur protection from criminals. They will hav guns no matter wat, they will get them somehow no matter wat. Banning guns will jus allow criminals 2 hav guns and not law abiding citizens. Dnt complain wen a criminal is pointing a knife at u or breaks into ur home and u hav nothing to protect urself. That is probly the most impoatnt reason y guns shouldnt b banned
@TheBukes92 - This is a discussion. Throwing out names like dick sucker and moron when trying to make your point just makes you look like an immature ignoramous. Grow up and speak like an adult and people you encounter in life may begin to take you seriously.
@Richardgwm Wow um ok u fucking Large gov. dick sucker. U r such a moron. Nazi germany repealed the right to bear arms and look wat happend. Soviet union did the same thing and millions of its own citizens were killed by Stalin. O ya, and dont complain wen ur life is in danger by a criminal who WILL have a gun. Takn away guns only allows criminals to have them moron. So how the hell will u defend urself. Bc by the time the police arrive, they will find u dead on the street or in ur home
@TheBukes92 You republicans are so fukking dogshit on the foot stupid it is scary. You dont know fuk, you dont do fuk, you donat say fuk. Yer all a buncha inbread loudmouth half queer dripping bags of fuk
@saucyjackattak ur calling me stupid but u carry a gu and say repeal the 2nd amendment. You might as well wear a shirt that has contradiction on it. Ur even more retarded thinking im republican, im independent asswipe. Ya lets repeal guns, sounds like a great utopia where you cant defend urself!
@TheBukes92 I didnt say anything about repealing the 2nd amendment. Im a "flaming libtard" and I pack a sw .40 where ever I go and most of the "libs" I know own guns also. I think Fox and Limbau and the rest of the clowns you watch may be misinforming you. Wake up fuksandwich. Your being lied to.
@saucyjackattak THen why are you attacking me for defending the 2nd amendment against that moron? Refresh my memory bc i dont rembember talking to u before. Please i never watch FOX or even limbaugh anymore. Both sound like morons. Even though i cant stand MSNBC & liberalism, they seem smarter than FOX. so im not being lied to bc i even heard Matthews on live tv say hed rather have cops randomly search ppl on the streets to see if they had a gun. Its even on youtube.
Tea party members are conservative brainwashing closeminders who don't even know what they're talking about. I remember watching a documentary where they were interviewing a tea party member who was speaking against socialism saying "why should we support it? that's what we were fighting against in WW2, the USSR". the USSR were actually allies of the US in WW2 and socialism is a good thing, because it is an humanitarian ideology. If you want to criticize or comment, STUDY FIRST!
See the video titled, "Chris Matthews rips Tea Party Express co-founder Sal Russo". It's hilarious. It shows how unintelligent Michele Bachmann is and also shows how verbally impotent Sal Russo is. These are people selected to represent a movement that prides itself on being morally and intellectually superior.
“Never retreat Nancy, just reload. The most productive Speaker of the House in modern history has no reason to retreat from leading her caucus...Republican's cannot point to a single legislative success in the last two years... For now, they are all puffed up over their recent elections, but they had better study their history... they will [not] hold on to the...majority for long.”
Posted by "Mimiyo" on the Huffington Post 2 months ago & still on the Huffington Post to this day.
Good for the Tea Party the 2nd Amendment allows you to carry those weapons to town hall meetings. There are allot of SEIU members at the Democratic ones. The Tea Party must be armed to protect themselves from violent communist lefties. Remember it was lefties who made the film Death Of A President which was about the assassination of George W. Bush and Raul Emanual Shouting Dead Dead about ''Nat Landow, Cliff Jackson! and Bill Schaefer! Dead!'' Shouldn't Emanual be arrested for threats.
Pretty sure Chris is missing the overall point, which is the simple fact that even if you outlaw the presence of guns at political rallies, you're only affecting the law abiding citizens. If someone wants to murder (more or less harm) a political figure by bringing a gun, do you think they will obey the law of not bringing a gun if it's outlawed? No. They wont. And the only thing the law will have done was disarm the men and women who could have stopped him.
@ClearSkyline That doesn't change the fact that this Tea Bagger looked like a complete idiot on National TV, and the overall point is not that criminals can still bring guns to political rallies. The point, that Chris states in this video, is why should anyone bring a gun legally or illegally to a political rally? The only reason a gun owner would bring a gun to a rally is 1) to make a political statement or 2) because they are listening to these right wing Tea party nuts telling them to do so.
@DigitalThrowUp Open carry is a right in the way that voting is a right, also rights must be exercised lest they be marginalized and then dispensed with by the weasels in government. Remember that eternal vigilance is the price of Freedom!
@ClearSkyline There were more than one citizen at this rally with a gun and did not use it in defense of themselves or the public. Look, I respect the 2nd amendment and all that and I am not for abolishing gun ownership, but a lot of people are not utilizing this 2nd amendment as it was intended.
@DigitalThrowUp That is just the same arguement you spineless libs use on abortion. "Well I PERSONALLY hate abortion but that does not mean I can deny a womens' right to choose". "Personally I respect the Second Amendment and the Constitution as long as it agrees with My views. Too bad. Conservatives are taking back the Govt.. Get used to it. If someone kicks in your back door, (as they did mine), hit them with a broom until the police get there. In my case only one of the two was walking.
It's real funny how big an issue goofball makes of Tea Partiers bringing guns to political rallies, but yet he turned the other way after the illegal aliens in arizona rioted and attacked the police after the immigration got passed. Also where was he when the black panthers tried to scare people away from the voting booths?? The hypocricy is overwhelming with this democract clown - along with the rest of the neo-marxist left.
Malarkey31 1 week ago in playlist Chris Matthews
Chris Matthews makes more Freudian slips then anyone i have ever seen.
TheToadmode 1 month ago
this guy they have is obviously a shill
TheToadmode 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheToadmode
And by "shill," I take it you mean "typically illiterate, uninformed, dumbass Tea Party member."
Pizuzuzimmer 1 month ago
this guy they have is obviously a shill
TheToadmode 1 month ago
Tea Partiers are dangerous lunatics, plain and simple. And DUMB, holy frikkin' jesus are they DUMB!!
hznfrst 2 months ago
@hznfrst dangerous? how, pray tell?
jesusmetal92107 2 weeks ago
@RetSquid You allude to "over-time" being some type of point in the favor of control. But it's not. Not even close.
-
I'll tell you what. If you can quote me the paragraph where he accounts for the invention and mass production of hollowpoints rounds...then I'll give his study a serious look. But that in itself is a HUGE factor. I'd MUCH rather take an FMJ through the ribs lung and out the back, in like a pin out like a pin vs in like a pin and out like a softball.
-
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@D33veeoss
Asked and answered.
RetSquid 2 months ago
@D33veeoss
All the crimes discussed in the book were crimes long before, and long after, the study was completed.
RetSquid 2 months ago
Q: Why is it the right side talks about guns so much? A: The left sides do too! Q: They do? A: Yeah! When they're saying how we shouldn't be so loose with our guns!
-
Classic lol
D33veeoss 2 months ago
And I love how he went through the list of examples the first time, and then when assclown tries to rebut the second time he swaps out half the list for new names he didn't even list the first time. I mean cmon man, that's an absolute and genuine overkill. I know that Chris PLANNED it too. "I'll say these ones first, and I'll say these ones the second time he brings it up."
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@D33veeoss
Every single place that has liberalized gun laws have seen their violent crime rates go down. The places with the highest crime rates also have the strictest gun laws...and are usually run by Liberals.
RetSquid 2 months ago
@RetSquid Well that settles it! There couldn't possibly be any other contributing factors. Case Closed. Well done Watson.
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@D33veeoss
If you want a complete run-down of all the statistics with plenty of documentation for the claims, read "More Guns/Less Crime" by John Lott. You can also look up one of his lectures on here. This study is peer-reviewed by dozens of Universities.
RetSquid 2 months ago
@RetSquid They put gunshops on ever second corner in the ghettos. But oh yeah, I forgot, that's not an access issue, that's a genetics issue right?
-
That's rhetorical by the way. That means you don't have to answer because you're not needed to help make/counter the point.
-
And that's peer reviewed too.
-
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@D33veeoss
I have NO idea what the heck you are talking about now.
Every State that has made it easier fro law abiding Citizens to get guns has seen the violent crime rate drop, every place where there are more restrictive gun laws has seen crime rates go up.
RetSquid 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
OK, The implication here is..."...every place where there are more restrictive gun laws has seen crime rates go up..." (therefore it's clearly and primarily the correlation with the loosened gun laws that's responsible for the drop in crime)
-
There is a peer-reviewed name to this exact peer-reviewed fallacy. But unlike crime in Philly, this fallacy has been around WAY longer.
Some kid was standing beside a shattered window holding a baseball.
Must've been him right? Clearly...
D33veeoss 2 months ago
But when I point out that when kids break windows they typically RUN, it doesn't seem like such and open shut case anymore.
-
It becomes unclear trying to explain this kids presence here. Plus, he's by himself. Who breaks windows playing catch with themselves? Who even plays catch with themselves? Where's his baseball glove? He could be playing catch without a mit, I guess..,but you can see how, "crime corresponds to gun laws" is an ominous point to attempt.
-
For instance...
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@RetSquid Who are you to say that there is not an independent variable that is causing the crime drop? How do you know that if the gun laws were strengthened that the crime wouldn't have dropped ANYWAY *PLUS THEN SOME*. How do you know that? And let me tell you something about peer-review. It's a tool, of limit, that scientists use and manipulate to help sort out objective truth from possibility as best as possible. And this is NOT a controlled environment for testing....
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@D33veeoss
Go read the book, he covers how he controlled for all those variables.
RetSquid 2 months ago
@RetSquid "...he covers how he controlled for all those variables." Which variables?
-
I'm 16-5-2 and I could correlate the result of each of those 23 days with anything I wanted that would suit the day. Let's say that gun crime went up shortly after 9/11, that can be explained by the psych of 9/11. If gun crime went down shortly after 9/11 that can be explained by the psych of 9/11. Neither would have anything to do with gunlaws, yet both could be attributed to gun laws if chosen.
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@RetSquid So I could cherry pick my way to a perfect correlation as well. It's not hard and it's a form of moving the goalposts. Think about it. If 9/11 caused a flux that favors his point, he conveniently leaves it out as a cause and instead attributes it to gun law. If 9/11 causes a flux that counters the man's point, then he aggressively....how'd you put it? .... "...controls for all those variables."
-
So I ask you. What do you mean by "all those variables". In specific please...
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@D33veeoss
Go look at the book and complain to the dozens of nationally recognized universities that say you are wrong. I will get the book out later, I'm busy right now.
RetSquid 2 months ago
@RetSquid Remember, "I concede the point", is a perfectly valid answer.
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@D33veeoss "Smart people disagree with you" doesn't cut it, and I'll let you drum up all the reasons why that might be the case. Your imagination appears healthy.
-
It was good rappin' with ya though. You take care man.
-
For the record. I don't care about gun laws at this point. I'm only prosecuting where I understand the possibility of fallacy. No more no less.
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@D33veeoss
So you are an high tech troll.
RetSquid 2 months ago
@RetSquid You made a claim. I'm prosecuting it. No more. No less. I'll tell you what. Don't give me the specifics of the list. We'll leave that aside, it's more or less irrelevant. The reason I asked was to illustrate that it would be impossible to do.
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@RetSquid So if your claim is objectively factual, just answer the following then, if you can. Simple question for you.
-
"...he covers how he controlled for all those variables."
-
Explain:
a) what are ALL the variables that could influence the findings regarding the communication between gun laws and crime,
b) how could anyone ever know that they've accounted for them ALL
-
Could even *1* unseen/unmanaged/uncontrolled factor turn this study on it's head?
-
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@D33veeoss
Well, far more people smater than you, or me, agree that he controlled for the variables involved that would make any difference in the findings. That you think there are more, without even seeing what he did is just trolling.
RetSquid 2 months ago
@RetSquid Trolling is positing to illicit your reaction. It's a petty and inverted form of ad hominem.
-
What I'm after is your answers. My questions are designed to illicit your answers. Upon interaction, neither, one, or both of us, will grow.
-
That's how this works. It's the nature of the communication between 'information' and 'the sentient mind'.
-
So simply show how anyone could possibly know that all the independent variables are accounted for.
-
I've shown how they can't.
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@RetSquid Appeal to authority – (argumentum ad verecundiam) deductively fallacious; even legitimate authorities speaking on their areas of expertise may affirm a falsehood. However, if not using a deductive argument, a logical fallacy is only asserted when the source is not a legitimate expert on the topic at hand, or their conclusion(s) are in direct opposition to other expert consensus. Appeal to authority does not condone to agreeing to the argument.
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@D33veeoss
It is an appeal to the facts, which bear out his arguments.
Let me know which variables that would have any impact on his study that he has not accounted for.
RetSquid 2 months ago
@RetSquid Appeal to authority – where an assertion is deemed true because of the position or authority of the person asserting it.
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@RetSquid Those are a few logical fallacies that you're apparently unaware of. If all you can do is point at someone and say, "they know what they're talking about"...then what do I need you for? What good do you do? You make yourself to be an inert bump on an inept log when you appeal to authority.
-
Here's another:
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@RetSquid
Argumentum ad populum (appeal to belief, appeal to the majority, appeal to the people) – where a proposition is claimed to be true or good solely because many people believe it to be so
--
Appeal to accomplishment – where an assertion is deemed true or false based on the accomplishments of the proposer.
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@D33veeoss
If all the data bears out the claims made in the argument, it is not a logical fallacy, it is a scientific finding of fact. Until you come up with a better explaination that fits the same facts...but then you would have to actually do some research on the subject and not just blindly attack it.
RetSquid 2 months ago
@RetSquid If you'll agree that a randomly flipped coin 100 times won't come out 50/50, that at some point, it will have 100 heads/100 tails in a row...then I don't see how you could put stock in an UNCONTROLLED experiment. I don't think you appreciate the words "uncontrolled" or "independent variable" when I use them. I suppose then, to you, I might seem like a "high-tech-troll", but really, my I'm just a peer that's reviewing? Someone who can keep up with, and dismantle, bogus claims.
D33veeoss 2 months ago
Maybe it's best that from now on you stick to the claims that you yourself produce. If your claims are peer reviewed, then even better.
The wrench that is inherent with this point you're trying to claim as fact, is that it's practical impossible to prove. Not almost impossible. It's full-stop impossible, practically speaking. In imaginary land, anything is possible. In practical land, most things only work one way. The scientific process is the peer I've selected to review you claim.
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@D33veeoss
"The scientific process is the peer I've selected to review you claim."
Exactly, and that process prove the claim that "more guns equals less crime" true. Unless you can come up with an example where that has not happened...
RetSquid 2 months ago
@RetSquid I've given numerous examples of exactly how, where, and why there could be plenty of independent variables to skew the findings. I've shown how this is an UNCONTROLLED study/experiment and with that follows all the issues I've highlighted.
-
If you want just one, then I'll give you one that you named. "Time".
-
Time itself murders the claim. You can't do and experiment, change things, repeat the experiment, and pretend it's got the same variables when it doesn't.
D33veeoss 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RetSquid I've given numerous examples of exactly how, where, and why there could be plenty of independent variables to skew the findings. I've shown how this is an UNCONTROLLED study/experiment and with that follows all the issues I've highlighted.
-
If you want just one, then I'll give you one that you named. "Time".
-
Time itself murders the claim. You can't do and experiment, change things, repeat the experiment, and pretend it's got the same variables when it doesn't.
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@RetSquid You must not be appreciating how much society changes over time because implicit with the question of, "do tighter/laxer gun laws have a bearing on crime increase/decrease" is something called SOCIETY. How could one ever measure the then and the now and reconcile the factors? A hundred years ago they barely had bolts! Much less the factors motivating everyone to go shoot someone were as much apples and oranges as the difference between the M-11 and the Blunderbuss.
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@D33veeoss
Again, you are displaying your ignorance of the arguments made in the book. Go read it and THEN we can have an intelligent conversation about it.
RetSquid 2 months ago
I guess that's what I'm saying. I only need my own experience and any 7th grade math student to affirm that one can't add apples and oranges. x+y = x+y.
And anyone that wants to say, "x+y = gun crime decrease" is easily countered w/ someone to say x+y = gun crime increase. And because we can't ACTUALLY add x+y...the answer is subjective. Never objective. Uncontrolled. Never controlled. The mechanics are simply not there.
-
This is a sloppy claim derived across uncontrolled variables.
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@RetSquid "Unless you can come up with an example where that has not happened..." Or put another way, if you think that this question is valid prosecution, then I'll say that there are neon orange marshians on a planet 4 solar systems away...unless you can come up with an example proving that this is not the case.
-
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@D33veeoss
Except that there is NO data on your planet and ALL the data here says that more guns means less violent crime.
SFbAj-75R-A
RetSquid 2 months ago
@RetSquid OK you must have missed the part where I explained the mechanics behind cherry picking here. One more time. Say the psychology behind 9/11 in fact creates more gun crime. Say the author of this book is making the point that the laxed gun laws should be creating less crime. What shows up for your eye to read? Simple. "Due to 9/11 there is more gun violence, but given the what the study appreared to show, the crime is still less than if we still had tight gun laws."
-
-
OR
-
-
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@RetSquid Say that the psychology of 9/11 in fact created LESS gun crime. What shows up for your eye to read? Simple. "Due to the laxed gun laws in JUN '11, we here in 2004, can see that they've had a significant impact on the gun crimes. Especially in New York where traditionally it's been particularly violent."
-
Then introduce a world leading psychologist to explain that people grieving (the nation) are less violent for an amount of time.
Particularly NY where 9/11 happened.
-
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@RetSquid And what I'm saying, guy, is that WITHOUT CONTROLLED VARIABLES.......there is NO WAY TO KNOW what facts are or are not cherry picked. It's IMPOSSIBLE. - Maybe I can say this another way.
Let's say I wanted to dismantle the man's claim....there is NO WAY that I could do this. I could prop up any type of contention to his quasi-points and quasi-facts...BUT...I could only do it with the same quasi-points and quasi-facts. This is because of the LACK OF CONTROL.\
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@D33veeoss
Find, show what data he cherry-picked and how it effected the conclusions.
RetSquid 2 months ago
@RetSquid He doesn't have to prove that they caused more deaths. He doesn't have to prove they caused less deaths. He doesn't have to prove if it actually made any difference at all. All he has to do is show me that he even had the presence of mind to FACTOR it or even ATTEMPT to factor it.
-
Did he account for the general conduct in public amongst strangers from pre 20th and the no-21st centuries?
-
Even I can't handicap for that.
-
I'd LOVE to know how he resolved this I.V.
-
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@D33veeoss
You are making claims that he needs to prove things that are not a subject of the book. He doesn't look at Mankind's histroy of violence, just a few decades in the U.S.
NOW, stop throwing crap out here and go research his book before making any more mindless, unwarrented, claims, GO READ THE BOOK.
RetSquid 2 months ago
Dozens if not 100s of issues with the uncontrolled I.V. *MUST* penetrate and dismantle the resolution of this man's findings.
-
"It appears maybe it's possible that perhaps tighter/laxer gun laws effect gun crime in this or that way................"
-
But that's it. That's all he gets to say. Anything more is thoroughly prosecuted because it's absolutely uncontrolled.
-
It's like trying to pin a murder on someone that can be shown to have been in Italy, Peru and Kenya at the time.
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@D33veeoss
As I have said, go find what variables that would have an effect on his findings that he does not account for and get back to me.
RetSquid 2 months ago
D33veeoss 2 months ago
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@D33veeoss
You should really read the book and stop blindly attacking the conclusions without even the slightest attempt to evaluate anything he did. You have no integrity or intellectual honesty.
RetSquid 2 months ago
@RetSquid Incidentally, if me and mine "colonize" your while entire street, at 2:30 in the morning, with night-vision and MP5s...if you live for 20 seconds after hearing your door jams crack and now your house is mine...would you consider that a crime?
-
Home invasion, 1st* murder, forcible confinement (for if I need you to work now my land and paint now my house...or if I want to sell your particularly beautiful wife to my friend)
-
Crime?
-
OR...
-
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@RetSquid ...OR...is this type of conduct a "crime" in say 1899 December 31st 11:59PM but not 1900.January 1st 12:00AM.
-
Point being is that "crime" isn't an objective idea that you may use as some point of static measurement like a ruler.
-
So there is the overhanging issue of INDEPENDENT variable, and then there is the issue of TERMS. This definition of "crime" skews the claim of "gun CRIME" heavily because effectively, you're referring to nothing in specific.
-
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@D33veeoss
What you have to do is come up witha actual example where the claim is wrong.
RetSquid 2 months ago
@RetSquid Yes, and neon orange aliens exist 2 solar systems away. They don't eat spaghetti because it gives them indigestion. What you have to do is come up with an actual proof where this claim is wrong. Until then, I guess my imagination rules reality.
-
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@D33veeoss
Let me know when you have some peer-reviewed data on that claim.
RetSquid 2 months ago
@RetSquid If I speak of "the best color in the world" or "the best plate in the buffet" or "the most beautiful type of woman" ... Nobody knows what I mean. At all. Even if 2 years ago I was asked these same 3 questions. all 3 could easily be different by now.
-
So.
-
a) how could anyone ever know they've accounted for all the independent variables.
b) how do you define crime, (careful, any subjective reference implodes the control)
-
Good luck.
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@RetSquid Whatever you're saying is "peer-reviewed" can only ever be sloppy at best. It's not a controlled experiment. You can't have gunlaws for one way for 3 years and then switch for the next 5 and say, "oh look! Crimes down! Must have been the gun laws."
-
Either the people who "peer-reviewed" this are inept to the capacity of the term, or more likely, you've *simply"* assigned those 2 words thinking they'd bring more weight to the argument that lax gun laws reduce crime.
-
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@D33veeoss
You are just like the gun-control nuts who dismissed the study without looking at it. The peer review was done by dozens of Universities. The study covered decades of gun law changes, it is now in it's third edition and has never been refuted.
RetSquid 2 months ago
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@D33veeoss ex. How does NYK play @ DEN? Oh, they're 2-6 in DEN. Hmmm. How does DEN play vs the Knicks? 6-2 vs the Knicks. Wow. OK looking like DEN so far, but DEN has a few key injuries....(NO VALUE).....and the NYK are not playing their potential right now...do they bounce back at home? (NO VALUE) or do they stay cold tonight? (NO VALUE). NYK are 5-1 after 3 straight losses...so that indicates bounce back...even though they're cold right now maybe....(NO VALUE)
-
D33veeoss 2 months ago
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@RetSquid It's an UNCONTROLLED solution with uncontrolled variables. Top to bottom. a) society and the way we interact cant be measured.
b) influences that sway one part of society but not the other. Vice versa.
c) THE INTRODUCTION OF HOLLOWPOINTS. I like this one. If he even tried to factor in the amount of mortality pre-hollow and post hollow, then I'd be impressed as it would prove that he GENUINELY was trying to PROVE a point vs make a statement.
-
Anyway. I'm good for now.
-
D33veeoss 2 months ago
@RetSquid I've made you think, and there is enough conversation here for months maybe years. Your short "quasi-rebuttals" are proof I'll only get so far here but I was glad to help plant a garden behind your forehead. Oh be careful little eyes what you read.
D33veeoss 2 months ago
Matthews could have just come out and made a speech, but somehow, he's found a way to have a genuine idiot fortify and bolster and highlight his points, in neon glow, thile doing what he thinks is arguing when in fact he's nothing but a confirming resolution to what Chris wants to say. Chris can show pure genius at times. Wow. Just wow. This guy was dismantled eh? Yeah man, pure dismantled.
D33veeoss 2 months ago
All of the assassins or attempted assassins in the U.S. were either Leftist/Liberal or apolitical.
RetSquid 2 months ago
@RetSquid I'm pretty sure that John Wilkes Booth was none of those categories. Also I'm pretty sure a Leftist would not have assassinated Martin Luther King or Robert Kennedy. Unless you have evidence to prove any of these wrong, your statement is false.
rohirrim90 2 months ago
@rohirrim90
I will modify my statement, they were all leftist/liberal, democrats, racist or apolitical. none were Conservative/Republican. Is that better?
RetSquid 2 months ago
@RetSquid WOW, that is just flat out wrong. is the world flat as well you moron?
cgord31 2 months ago
@cgord31
Show how it is wrong.
RetSquid 2 months ago
@RetSquid I've got better things to do. Look it up, it's common knowledge.
cgord31 2 months ago
@cgord31
Ahh, yes, the 'common knowledge' lie. YOU have to support your statement, not me.
RetSquid 2 months ago
@RetSquid I would engage you in debate if I thought you had even a hint of reality, but clearly you don't.
You just claimed that the only assassination attempts in America's history were made by leftists. And you claimed this on a video about a right wing nut jobs assassination attempt.
Do you understand the irony in that?
cgord31 2 months ago
@cgord31
You didn't read my entire post, Leftists/anarchists, Democrat/Liberal or insane/apolitical.
You also didn't watch the video, there WAS no assassination attempt, it was one black man legally carrying a rifle outside a rally.
RetSquid 2 months ago
@cgord31 Psssssssst....if you leave the definition of "irony" in an attached post, you'll have a better chance of getting a direct answer. Good luck ;)
D33veeoss 2 months ago
Mr Matthews wasn't there movie made called death of a president that had George bush being shot and killed by liberal
hellraiser6391 2 months ago 2
@Packerd01
Half the tea party doesn't even understand the Constitution if they did they would asking for repeal of the patriot act and tsa
hellraiser6391 2 months ago
chris matthews never wins an argument hes a bigot he is the bill o'reilly of the left he just yells and yells and talks over his opponent and calls it winning. he just listed off every assassination attempt in american history going back even to the 1800's. the tea party guy is right there still hasnt been a political assassination in 50 years. it was an attempt on this congresswomans life but lets not forget that the man who subdued the criminal had a gun himself. chris matthews = bill o'reilly
lalem91 2 months ago
If the tea party is so smart how come they yell out slogans like "take your government hands off of my social secruity!" Or when they compained about obama and taxation when for 90 percent of the tea partiers got a tax cut out of him... please their fucking dumb! And led supported by monied interest like dick army...
decayingclown 3 months ago
Who here believes that if you cut the taxes on the wealthy create any jobs? Answer: tax cuts on rich do not create jobs, it just fattens their wallets. Deregulation jobs? Not always... infact deregulation has made as many jobs over seas that have disapeared over here... why is this good? It only benifits 1 percent of us. Good luck to the wanna bies who will never end up rich because that's how the game is rigged...
decayingclown 3 months ago
@decayingclown Exactly. The rich have had their tax cuts for over a decade now. And these jobs are... ...where? They want to do cheap business in China, let them move there. The tea bagger party just stirs up the bigots. They are less popular than Casey Anthony in the court of public opinion now.
And Obama has been a letdown on many issues, but before the tea baggers point out his low approval ratings in response to my "public opinion" comment, look below Obama's rating. That's where you are.
SpahnRanch1969 3 months ago
Last year 600,000 people moved their account to credit unions october last month 650,000 people moved their accounts, I think I'm seeing a trend here...
decayingclown 3 months ago
And my info comes from reuters, ap, the times, and cnn money so not all lyberal news if your wondering... does anyone know how many banks failed this year? 88 and counting... go deregulation... as for taxes everytime the wealthiest among us get a tax cut we poor, working class, and middle have to take up the slack so its for the wealthy to give it back!
decayingclown 3 months ago
Oh yeah altra right wing has done great for the ol us of a... no it hasn't! Record numbers reported of people running away from big banks to put there money in SAFE credit unions because of deregulating numb nut neo cons hundreds of millions of dollars missing from mf global. Fdic only cover $250,000... money gone let's deregulate more so the rich can steal and give themselves bonuses for a job well done...
decayingclown 3 months ago
Left wing idiots. You guys do know that the guy who did this is pshychotic. Nothing to do with the Tea Party. Listen to Chris Mathews argue that the U.S. is the most violent country towards it's leaders. ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME! How can you argue with one so delusional? Chris Mathews was voted as the most irritating cable news host. So if you follow this guy I assume you're and idiot too.
damuddydog 3 months ago
The Teabaggers are a joke. A sick, stupid, bad joke.
OregonDARRYL 4 months ago
The tea-party guy was indeed owned, but this was not really a proper interview... The guest almost didn't get a chance to speak (thank goodness for that, anyway).
danielfact 4 months ago
I like at 4:42 he just closes his eyes
KingPiccolo001 4 months ago
he is way too aggressive an interviewer
donnyab 4 months ago
people never admit when they are wrong. when someone provides an argument that should end the conversation, the other person doesnt just concide like they should, instead they just repeat their last previous sentence and play dumb and beat around the bush. if i had a show i would have a clown that comes out and slaps people with a rubber fish when ever they did that. and noone can answer yes or no questions. they give an explanation and never an answer because there ashamed of their own beleifs.
bigcheesy95 4 months ago
I didn't realize how much violence there was in America against the government.
Typhoonbladefist 5 months ago
@Typhoonbladefist There isn't. You just got a dose of left wing propoganda.
damuddydog 3 months ago
@damuddydog either way, I think we need more, maybe congress will listen.
Typhoonbladefist 3 months ago
Comment removed
Typhoonbladefist 5 months ago
chris matthews is a true american hero. awarded 2 purple hearts and 2 silver stars during his service as a coast guard sniper during operation desert storm. god bless him
temujin667 5 months ago
ha ha gulp
MegaLink117 5 months ago
And people wonder why people are upset about people bringing guns whenever Obama makes a public apperance? Ignorance is bliss I guess...
NUTCASE71733 5 months ago
Wow. This guy is so wishy-washy, and a blatant liar to boot. HOW can people follow morons like this? I just really, really don't understand.
CanadianBroad2008 5 months ago
Wow, I dont like Chris at all but he just destroyed this poor guy.
adknerr 6 months ago
HEY CHRIS KISS MY ASS YOU DUMB FUCK THE TEA PARTY DOES NOT ENDORSE VIOLENCE YOU DUMB FUCK
slayerkendra 6 months ago
@slayerkendra The dumb fuck are the tea baggers.
jrwel14 6 months ago
@slayerkendra u mad? hahahahahaha. propaganda exposed!!!!
partyman10226 5 months ago
Irregardless????..... I'm done.
ijreilly01 6 months ago
the Tea Party guy was making a distinction between Congress and the Executive Branch--that's clear--Chris Matthews chose to ignore that so Chris is actually the stupid one--or else he was just doing his usual Hatchet Job on the Tea Party; ;
mrbriscoe2001 6 months ago
What assassination attempt is not serious???????????
Nagelshube 6 months ago
Beat the $@#% out of him Chris Mathews...... haha Hes one of the most vile evil tools of the evil republican party.
Gades117 6 months ago
The REAL T Party HATES HATES HATES this sellout MFer. He is to the REAL T Party what Newt Gingrich was to the Young Republicans.
tanksbb 6 months ago
Chris Mathews is a joke.
TheyCallMeDirty1 6 months ago
0:42 Chris is shaking his head. Judson is a stupid motherfucker.
luxeballer15 7 months ago
Comment removed
luxeballer15 7 months ago
Chris just stole that morons lunch
liverleef 7 months ago
USA, over 15000 murders per year.
We should not be aloud to go out armed without a written consent
from our mother.
Matshoppahulle 7 months ago
Bad-ass....I love a good, historically-factual body check to these TP morons who never seem to know their history. hell I was rattling off assassination attempts right along with Chris after being gob-smacked by such stupidity.
AngeliqueStP 7 months ago
I love the fact that chrissy boy has nothing but hate for the conservative movement! As we grow ill be watching for his head to explode and will be smiling when it does!!
pianomanroc 7 months ago
You republicans are so fukking dogshit on the foot stupid it is scary. You dont know fuk, you dont do fuk, you donat say fuk. Yer all a buncha inbread loudmouth half queer dripping bags of fuk
saucyjackattak 7 months ago
haha chris thinks mexico hasnt had as many assination attempts as us? chris you're a joke sorry.
jsteel89 8 months ago
Chris looked very old in this clip. Poor thing. He needs a tingle down that leg to get him going.
gombis666 8 months ago
@gombis666 Not relevant to the point he was making.
GdHS54 6 months ago
@GdHS54 - well, it's relevant to Chirs Matthews - im sure he'd agree.
gombis666 6 months ago
@gombis666 Not relevant to the to the discussion.
GdHS54 6 months ago
@GdHS54 - Tingle-tingle....mwah.
gombis666 6 months ago
@gombis666 Lol, I love how being rational trumps Conservative immaturity.
GdHS54 6 months ago
@GdHS54 - What are you talking about? Im not a conservative. Lighten up for christsake. Just because I think Chris Matthews has a man crush on Obama doesnt make me a conservative.
gombis666 6 months ago
Yeah Chis, they flaunt them, but you miss the point. If something where to go wrong, even if they didn't like your political views, they would save your ass.
asleeperj 8 months ago
Wouldn't it have been better if passengers and the pilot on the 911 flghts were armed. Like Archie Bunker said. "the way to prevent hi-jacking is Arm all your passengers."
crobarus 9 months ago
The guy has a kick ass tie, you got to give em that!
calimar28 9 months ago
@Bluedog309 im goin off from ur comment about abolishing the 2nd Ammendment. the NRA is full of nuts who thinks everyone should be allowed to hav AKs and M16s
TheBukes92 9 months ago
@Bluedog309 then explain selfprotection. police wnt b around each corner
TheBukes92 9 months ago
@Bluedog309 The Germans still had no way to revolt and still look at the soviet union wen stalin was in power. Wat about more importantly ur protection from criminals. They will hav guns no matter wat, they will get them somehow no matter wat. Banning guns will jus allow criminals 2 hav guns and not law abiding citizens. Dnt complain wen a criminal is pointing a knife at u or breaks into ur home and u hav nothing to protect urself. That is probly the most impoatnt reason y guns shouldnt b banned
TheBukes92 9 months ago
@TheBukes92 - This is a discussion. Throwing out names like dick sucker and moron when trying to make your point just makes you look like an immature ignoramous. Grow up and speak like an adult and people you encounter in life may begin to take you seriously.
DigitalThrowUp 9 months ago 12
@DigitalThrowUp your right this is a discussion, shut the fuck up dick sucker moron.
temujin667 7 months ago
@DigitalThrowUp Well said.
6stringsamurai7 5 months ago
Repeal the 2nd Amendment.
Richardgwm 10 months ago
@Richardgwm Wow um ok u fucking Large gov. dick sucker. U r such a moron. Nazi germany repealed the right to bear arms and look wat happend. Soviet union did the same thing and millions of its own citizens were killed by Stalin. O ya, and dont complain wen ur life is in danger by a criminal who WILL have a gun. Takn away guns only allows criminals to have them moron. So how the hell will u defend urself. Bc by the time the police arrive, they will find u dead on the street or in ur home
TheBukes92 9 months ago
@TheBukes92 You republicans are so fukking dogshit on the foot stupid it is scary. You dont know fuk, you dont do fuk, you donat say fuk. Yer all a buncha inbread loudmouth half queer dripping bags of fuk
P.S. I carry a gun you fukking inbread fukbag
saucyjackattak 7 months ago
@saucyjackattak ur calling me stupid but u carry a gu and say repeal the 2nd amendment. You might as well wear a shirt that has contradiction on it. Ur even more retarded thinking im republican, im independent asswipe. Ya lets repeal guns, sounds like a great utopia where you cant defend urself!
TheBukes92 7 months ago
@TheBukes92 I didnt say anything about repealing the 2nd amendment. Im a "flaming libtard" and I pack a sw .40 where ever I go and most of the "libs" I know own guns also. I think Fox and Limbau and the rest of the clowns you watch may be misinforming you. Wake up fuksandwich. Your being lied to.
saucyjackattak 7 months ago
@saucyjackattak THen why are you attacking me for defending the 2nd amendment against that moron? Refresh my memory bc i dont rembember talking to u before. Please i never watch FOX or even limbaugh anymore. Both sound like morons. Even though i cant stand MSNBC & liberalism, they seem smarter than FOX. so im not being lied to bc i even heard Matthews on live tv say hed rather have cops randomly search ppl on the streets to see if they had a gun. Its even on youtube.
TheBukes92 7 months ago
I completely agree with Chris Matthews here, but he is a terrible interviewer.
He never lets anyone talk.
This is a problem in not just this interview, but every interview he conducts.
Richardgwm 10 months ago
Tea party members are conservative brainwashing closeminders who don't even know what they're talking about. I remember watching a documentary where they were interviewing a tea party member who was speaking against socialism saying "why should we support it? that's what we were fighting against in WW2, the USSR". the USSR were actually allies of the US in WW2 and socialism is a good thing, because it is an humanitarian ideology. If you want to criticize or comment, STUDY FIRST!
awesomlycoolvlog 10 months ago
See the video titled, "Chris Matthews rips Tea Party Express co-founder Sal Russo". It's hilarious. It shows how unintelligent Michele Bachmann is and also shows how verbally impotent Sal Russo is. These are people selected to represent a movement that prides itself on being morally and intellectually superior.
emmettk 10 months ago
chris mathews does not understand the 2nd amendment
lobo9er 10 months ago
in the tea party, facts dont matter, everybody is ill-informed, and nobody questions the teachings of ronald reagan.
DrNHand1994 1 year ago 3
@DrNHand1994 And GWB. Where were these pinheads when Bush was fucking up the country?
RealTime88 1 year ago
I think he forgot to mention Abraham Lincoln, JFK, and President McKinley. At least I think he did.
Killzoneguy117 1 year ago
I don't know what Tea Party Nation is but Ron Paul is the Founder of The Tea Party.
DanielDamascusKimery 1 year ago
Tea Party=KKK
fleiva30 1 year ago
“Never retreat Nancy, just reload. The most productive Speaker of the House in modern history has no reason to retreat from leading her caucus...Republican's cannot point to a single legislative success in the last two years... For now, they are all puffed up over their recent elections, but they had better study their history... they will [not] hold on to the...majority for long.”
Posted by "Mimiyo" on the Huffington Post 2 months ago & still on the Huffington Post to this day.
CornFedArmen 1 year ago
Good for the Tea Party the 2nd Amendment allows you to carry those weapons to town hall meetings. There are allot of SEIU members at the Democratic ones. The Tea Party must be armed to protect themselves from violent communist lefties. Remember it was lefties who made the film Death Of A President which was about the assassination of George W. Bush and Raul Emanual Shouting Dead Dead about ''Nat Landow, Cliff Jackson! and Bill Schaefer! Dead!'' Shouldn't Emanual be arrested for threats.
galorize12rt 1 year ago
@galorize12rt You are a buffoon!
theworldwillknowme 1 year ago
@galorize12rt Who is 'Raul Emanual'?
whiteliberal1 1 year ago
Is this the same Chris Mathews who suggested to his audience doing harm to Rush Limbaugh. Boy if only.......to Mathews.
galorize12rt 1 year ago
Comment removed
galorize12rt 1 year ago
Pretty sure Chris is missing the overall point, which is the simple fact that even if you outlaw the presence of guns at political rallies, you're only affecting the law abiding citizens. If someone wants to murder (more or less harm) a political figure by bringing a gun, do you think they will obey the law of not bringing a gun if it's outlawed? No. They wont. And the only thing the law will have done was disarm the men and women who could have stopped him.
ClearSkyline 1 year ago
@ClearSkyline That doesn't change the fact that this Tea Bagger looked like a complete idiot on National TV, and the overall point is not that criminals can still bring guns to political rallies. The point, that Chris states in this video, is why should anyone bring a gun legally or illegally to a political rally? The only reason a gun owner would bring a gun to a rally is 1) to make a political statement or 2) because they are listening to these right wing Tea party nuts telling them to do so.
DigitalThrowUp 1 year ago
@DigitalThrowUp Open carry is a right in the way that voting is a right, also rights must be exercised lest they be marginalized and then dispensed with by the weasels in government. Remember that eternal vigilance is the price of Freedom!
AR15fan 1 year ago
@ClearSkyline There were more than one citizen at this rally with a gun and did not use it in defense of themselves or the public. Look, I respect the 2nd amendment and all that and I am not for abolishing gun ownership, but a lot of people are not utilizing this 2nd amendment as it was intended.
DigitalThrowUp 1 year ago
@DigitalThrowUp That is just the same arguement you spineless libs use on abortion. "Well I PERSONALLY hate abortion but that does not mean I can deny a womens' right to choose". "Personally I respect the Second Amendment and the Constitution as long as it agrees with My views. Too bad. Conservatives are taking back the Govt.. Get used to it. If someone kicks in your back door, (as they did mine), hit them with a broom until the police get there. In my case only one of the two was walking.
madisonelectronic 1 year ago