Chris Matthews Hammers Tea Party Leader Over Bachmann's

Post Reply New Topic

And who are "you three?" I'm a history major, you arrogant little punk. My cat has a better understanding of history than Bachmann does.

Three most likely means Chevand, you, and myself.

Which is pretty laughable.

I'm a history major myself. And listening to Bachmann practically made my head spin off my shoulders.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Indeed it is.

Now, Inuyasha, admittedly, I'm not a student of history like Orwell is-- but I'd say I know more than my fair share of it. Considering he was, you know, not quite 9 years old when the Declaration of Independence was signed, I would say John Quincy Adams was not one of the Founding Fathers, as Bachmann stated. You know who was, though? Lyman Hall, the man who would be the namesake of Hall County, Georgia, where I spent much of my childhood. Lyman Hall was one of three signers of the Declaration of Independence in the delegation from Georgia, and yes, he was a slave-owner. As Matthews pointed out on his show the other day, so were four of our first five Presidents.

To say that these men were "working tirelessly" to abolish slavery, when it took, as I said before, 80 years and a bloody Civil War to finally put it into legally binding text, is absolutely ludicrous.

Must be one smart cat, does he do your homework for you?

@ Chevand

She never said the founding fathers were saints, nor did she deny they were not hypocrits at times. The reason there was the compromise on slavery was so that the fledgling country wouldn't fall apart. The northern states were pointing out that you can't use African Americans to up the total of representatives and electoral votes you got if they were not people. If they were people then they need to be freed immediately. They ended up with the compromise and language in the Constitution that forbid it to be re-examined until years later when they hoped cooler heads would prevail.

Unfortunately it took the overreach of the pro-slavery Supreme Court to galvenize Northerners and the resulted in the first Republican Presidential Candidate to become President of the United States to start to bring about the end of slavery. Yeah while Abraham Lincoln was originally just out to preserve the union, it ended up being the war that ended slavery.

Another interesting tidbit is that northerners wanted African Americans whom served in the United States Armed Forces during the Civil War to be treated as citizens of this country and who gave a **** what color their skin was. They had fought and bled for the United States, and they and other veterans deserved to have their needs considered before special interests.

Bachmann is talking about the good things that signers did, she isn't bending over backward trying to point out each individual fault of these individuals to try to discredit them to serve some far left interest.

So yeah, I'm going to continue to say that she has a much better understanding of history than Chris Matthews and the three of you do.

Your still ignoring the fact that she credited the founders with eliminating slavery. She simply didn't say any of that other stuff. And the fact is, she has chosen not to respond to Mathews over her own words.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

She is no more or less intelligent than the typical housecat. She has enough intellect to remember to eat out of her food bowl and s**t in the litter box, not the other way around.


None of that was in Bachmann's comments. She claimed the Founders, particularly J.Q. Adams, worked tirelessly to put an end to slavery. This is false: a number of the Founders not only owned slaves for their personal estates, but were even active in the slave trade (eg Hamilton). And J.Q. Adams was not a Founding Father. All of the Founding Fathers were dead before the slavery issue was resolved.


And you're going to continue to be wrong, but why should this issue be any different from dozens of others where you uphold clearly nonsensical counterfactual beliefs?

American history isn't even my field. I think I only have about six credits in US history, and only in survey courses. Just the basic general knowledge that I can't help but obtain when I Iive here is still well beyond Bachmann's demonstrated understanding.

The compromise settled on by the Founders lead to the Civil War which killed over 620,000 Americans and maimed another 1.5 million. This war casualties than another other war fought by this nation.

ruveyn

So much for the wisdom of the founding fathers in ending slavery.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

And it could be argued they did eliminate our enslavement to the British Government.

Furthermore, the keeping the slavery issue open and not settling it, one could argue it set the stage for Abraham Lincoln getting elected and the resulting Civil War that ended up ending slavery.

@ Orwell

How about you stop with your partisan rant already. You just spew off mocking her without stopping to think about context and what she meant. What next you going bananas about her use of commas like you tried to do to me earlier?

It would be a stretch to argue that even if it was what Bachmann said. But she said nothing of the kind, so at this point it's just a desperate attempt to cover for someone who obviously knows no American history.


Do you have a point?


Partisan rant? Facts are facts; and Bachmann does not know the basic facts.


The context is this idiotic cult the right wing has founded. The context makes this much worse, not better. Out of context, it's just a gaffe. OK, Bachmann said something stupid, misstated an aspect of US history, big deal, move on. In context, it shows how delusional the Right has become in their idol-worship centered around some semi-mythical notion of "The Founders."

But I'm sure you have a different story. Go ahead, explain the "context" and "what [Bachmann] meant." You can't possibly do a worse job at that than Sal did. Surely you can't deny that this was, at the very least, a gaffe? She was just flat wrong on the basic historical facts.

Here we come to the truth of the matter, your left wing elitist ideology can't come to grips with the fact that the people rejected left wing brainwashing. So you have to demonize, belittle, etc. the American People.

Also don't bother claiming I'm taking you out of context:

Original Transcript:

Here we come to you making up random crap that has no relation to the previous discussion.


We've been over this before, but my ideology can't simply be called left-wing. I oppose democracy, for crying out loud. No one anywhere near the mainstream left opposes democracy. I've advocated for monarchy before, and that's about as right-wing as it is possible to get.

The only thing you're right about here is that I'm elitist. You bet I'm elitist. The typical human is a pathetically stupid creature.


Again, I'm not the same kind of partisan hack as you are. And what left-wing brainwashing? Right-wingers are the ones who, time and time again, have tried to force their ideology into children's schoolboooks.


The comment you responded to said nothing about the "American People." Quit with your arrogant nonsense that only your psychotic political ideology truly represents "the American People."


Well, your response had next to nothing to do with anything I said, so it wasn't "taking me out of context" as such. It was just making s**t up and going on a random tangent.

Feel free to respond to my question at any point, by the way. What the hell was Bachmann actually talking about there?

WE ARE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE YOU IGNORANT POMPOUS BUFFOON.

And the American people include LEFTISTS and ELITISTS! So there!

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

How did she demonstrate that she is more intelligent than Chris Matthews?