MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead'

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead'

    In Response to Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead':
    [QUOTE]OMFG, you pin-heads are debating a single word, and whether it proves someone is right or wrong! What are you all, congressmen?  You lefties are so afraid of anyone with any kind of momentum against the President, that you pull a "Mathews" at the drop of a hat. You really don't want anyone to open up the "fact-check" book on the state of the union speech do you?  Or how 'bout the latest CBO estimates on HCR and the spending levels.  didn't think so... So, is Bachman the next Palin?  Will the left go out of their way to try and make her look bad? Are you all that afraid?  seems so to me......
    Posted by dazydo[/QUOTE]

    I am not afraid, but I am concerned about elected represenatives having such a primitive and inaccurate view of our history.  These are the same people who seek to rely on "Original Intent" in the law and want us to get back to our founding principles.  But if they have no idea what actually happened in the history of our nation then they have no basis for making their political pronouncements.  Aren't you concerned with idiots in positions of power?  I bet you have a list on the Left, but I assure you being stupid is not restricted to one political persuasion.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead'

    In Response to Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead':
    [QUOTE]It's about Bachmoon's statement that: '...the Founding Fathers..'. She didn't say 'some'. 'a few' or even 'most'. She was referring to all of them. Was Lincoln also 'obviously wrong', then? Lincoln referred to the "fathers of the government" ; he didnt say some, or even 'most'....
    Posted by BobinVa[/QUOTE]

    Was Lincoln "obviously wrong" in this view?

    Also from the Lincoln/Douglas debates:

    "I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality." 

    He was a man of his time, a great man, a great American, but he was hardly perfect.  He made mistakes.  Everyone does.

    And you may be convinced of his rightness in all things, but he still lost this election.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from RevWright. Show RevWright's posts

    Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead'

    In Response to Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead':
    [QUOTE]OMFG, you pin-heads are debating a single word, and whether it proves someone is right or wrong! What are you all, congressmen?  You lefties are so afraid of anyone with any kind of momentum against the President, that you pull a "Mathews" at the drop of a hat. You really don't want anyone to open up the "fact-check" book on the state of the union speech do you?  Or how 'bout the latest CBO estimates on HCR and the spending levels.  didn't think so... So, is Bachman the next Palin?  Will the left go out of their way to try and make her look bad? Are you all that afraid?  seems so to me......
    Posted by dazydo[/QUOTE]

    Congressmen... no. Just anal about delfecting and obfuscating the topic.
    This thread and their words prove nothing.
     They will do anything to defend this.. pretender.
    Grumpy old men.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead'

    In all fairness, "balloonhead" is too nice.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead'

    In Response to Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead':
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead' : Congressmen... no. Just anal about delfecting and obfuscating the topic. This thread and their words prove nothing.  They will do anything to defend this.. pretender. Grumpy old men.
    Posted by RevWright[/QUOTE]

    Anything useful to say Rev?  No?   Thought so. 
     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead'

    In Response to Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead':
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead' : Gotta love it when a whacko wingnut refers to the history of the US as 'obfuscating' a subject. It just epitomizes the whacko wingnuts disdain for facts and their lack of knowledge of anything American. Too elitist for them... They prefer to invent their own alternate reality. Freakin' priceless.
    Posted by 12-Angry-Men[/QUOTE]

    Rev is a one note wonder.  His only concern is to get that Black guy out of the White House.  Everything else is irrelevant.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead'

    Well, getting away from the interesting historical debate on slavery(yawn), and back to Mathews calling her a "ballonhead":  This is the progressive stance on everything.  don't argue, insult. 

    This type of divisive language ONLY emanates from the left.  It is the progressives that are responsible for the uncivil tone in political discourse.  Arue the tone, the language, but never argue the point. 

    Show me the divisive language form a public figure since the AZ incident.  It is ALL progressive mouthpieces seizing the opportunity of the crisis to label all the language of their opponents as verboten.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from -Q. Show -Q's posts

    Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead'

    If michelle bachman along with the likes of sarah palin are the best hope for the tea partying republican party - then these neo-cons are much more out of the mainstream than I previously gave them credit for
    as bachman once said to her congressional constituents in MN. "I want my congressional district to be armed and dangerous....."


     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead'

    In Response to Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead':
    [QUOTE]Well, getting away from the interesting historical debate on slavery(yawn), and back to Mathews calling her a "ballonhead":  This is the progressive stance on everything.  don't argue, insult.  This type of divisive language ONLY emanates from the left.  It is the progressives that are responsible for the uncivil tone in political discourse.  Arue the tone, the language, but never argue the point.  Show me the divisive language form a public figure since the AZ incident.  It is ALL progressive mouthpieces seizing the opportunity of the crisis to label all the language of their opponents as verboten.
    Posted by skeeter20[/QUOTE]

    You are soooo twisted.  Beck rails against liberals having Nazi policies on an ongoing basis... but that is not divisive.  Cheney swears at a Democrat on the Senate floor... but that is not divisive.  Multiple conservatives use gun imagery to attack their opposition... but that is not divisive. Objectively all these things are divisive.  But they are not divisive in your world because you agree with these actions.  The end justifies the means. 

    And I am not surprised you have no interest in the history of your country. You certainly have shown little awareness of the important issues that have shaped who we are.  You can't know where you are going unless you know where you have been.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from whatnow4. Show whatnow4's posts

    Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead'

    Reuben you are full of it.  Now claiming the 3/5 clause was an attempt to ensure slavery.  Or at least that is what you imply. 

    Tell me Reuben, why was the 3/5 clause put in the costitution?

    It was not as you claim. 

    Bachmann was right.  Period.  Do you know the real reason why the Civil War occurred?  Hint, it has something to do with Kansas and their right as a State to control their destiny.  And it was not about slavery being legal. 

    Anybody with basic knowledge of our founding fathers knows what Douglas said is spot on. 

    And yet, Al Gores father still tried to fight for slavery as a Dem how many years later? 
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from whatnow4. Show whatnow4's posts

    Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead'

    And before that Do oosh 12 angry strawmans me. . . . .Kansas was blocked from being a slave state.  The Feds were not going to allow them to choose.

    The South in an attempt to keep populations similar thought Kansas had a right to choose.  Strong States vs Strong Fed. . . .ring a bell? 

    But at that point the Feds decided NO MORE SLAVE STATES.  Now, I am sorry, but does that sound like an attempt to perpetuate slavery?

    Idiots! And f off 12 Angry.  Every one of your posts are filled with strawman insults and bs.  You really have no llife and no intellect.  So don't bother responding to anything I post. 
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from BilltheKat. Show BilltheKat's posts

    Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead'

    In Response to Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead':
    [QUOTE]Well, getting away from the interesting historical debate on slavery(yawn), and back to Mathews calling her a "ballonhead":  This is the progressive stance on everything.  don't argue, insult.  This type of divisive language ONLY emanates from the left.  It is the progressives that are responsible for the uncivil tone in political discourse.  Arue the tone, the language, but never argue the point.  Show me the divisive language form a public figure since the AZ incident.  It is ALL progressive mouthpieces seizing the opportunity of the crisis to label all the language of their opponents as verboten.
    Posted by skeeter20[/QUOTE]





    nope, nothing divisive here....

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from APerfectCircle. Show APerfectCircle's posts

    Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead'

    This type of divisive language ONLY emanates from the left.


    To be fair....it's coming from BOTH sides. Always has, always will
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from APerfectCircle. Show APerfectCircle's posts

    Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead'

    Divisive comments on the right are warnings to the people that the left are going to take away their freedom and destroy their country.  


    That sounds awfully familiar. I recall many on the Left saying the Right were going to take away their freedoms and destroy the country. in fact many on the Left commented that the Right DID take away their freedoms. Specifically with the Patriot Act. Even though the act passed 98 to 1 in the Senate and then again 89 to 10. Yet it was the Right that was responsible for their "freedoms being taken away".
    Both sides are guilty.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead'

    In Response to Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead':
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead' : You are soooo twisted.  Beck rails against liberals having Nazi policies on an ongoing basis... but that is not divisive.  Cheney swears at a Democrat on the Senate floor... but that is not divisive.  Multiple conservatives use gun imagery to attack their opposition... but that is not divisive. Objectively all these things are divisive.  But they are not divisive in your world because you agree with these actions.  The end justifies the means.  And I am not surprised you have no interest in the history of your country. You certainly have shown little awareness of the important issues that have shaped who we are.  You can't know where you are going unless you know where you have been.
    Posted by Reubenhop[/QUOTE]

    You may disagree with him, but he backs it up with research, unlike the progressives. 
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead'

    In Response to Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead':
    [QUOTE]This type of divisive language ONLY emanates from the left. To be fair....it's coming from BOTH sides. Always has, always will
    Posted by APerfectCircle[/QUOTE]

    Not since AZ.  It is not an even-steve thing.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead'

    In Response to Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead':
    [QUOTE]Reuben you are full of it.  Now claiming the 3/5 clause was an attempt to ensure slavery.  Or at least that is what you imply.  Tell me Reuben, why was the 3/5 clause put in the costitution? It was not as you claim.  Bachmann was right.  Period.  Do you know the real reason why the Civil War occurred?  Hint, it has something to do with Kansas and their right as a State to control their destiny.  And it was not about slavery being legal.  Anybody with basic knowledge of our founding fathers knows what Douglas said is spot on.  And yet, Al Gores father still tried to fight for slavery as a Dem how many years later? 
    Posted by whatnow4[/QUOTE]

    Bachman believes that the very people who created our founding documents also worked tirelessly until they ended slavery.  If you believe this statement to be true, you are as absurd as she is.  NO ONE LIVES THAT LONG!

    The 3/5ths Compromise was put into the Constitution to give the South partial credit for slaves for voting purposes.  Because they treated them as property without any real rights the North balked at giving them complete credit.  Thus the South was allowed to get added votes in Congress and in the Electoral College through millions of people who had no influence in or benefit from the political process.   You have a different version?

    There were many reasons for why the Civil War happened.  But the main issue was slavery.  The South was afraid that Lincoln and the Republicans would initiate policies that would take away their rights, including their right to own people.  Lincoln's electoral support was almost solely from the North.  The South sought independence from a government that it felt no longer supported its interests or defended its rights.  Lincoln sought to preserve the Union. Fighting broke out.   War resulted.  Sound right?
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead'

    In Response to Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead':
    [QUOTE]If michelle bachman along with the likes of sarah palin are the best hope for the tea partying republican party - then these neo-cons are much more out of the mainstream than I previously gave them credit for as bachman once said to her congressional constituents in MN. "I want my congressional district to be armed and dangerous....."
    Posted by -Q[/QUOTE]


    how about the WHOLE quote?

    "In March 2009,  Bachmann said she wanted Minnesotans "armed and dangerous on this issue of the energy tax because we need to fight back."

    Metaphore, anyone?
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from APerfectCircle. Show APerfectCircle's posts

    Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead'

    Not since AZ.  It is not an even-steve thing.



    I didn't realize we were only able to look at little pockets of time. In order to measure things correctly there needs to be a bigger dataset. On the whole, both sides are guilty of being divisive.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead'

    In Response to Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead':
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead' : You may disagree with him, but he backs it up with research, unlike the progressives. 
    Posted by skeeter20[/QUOTE]

    No he does not.  He invents research.  The man is a huckster fraud.  

    The Nazi theme he enjoys is particularly reprehensible as it demeans the true horror of that regime and denigrates the memory of the millions of victims of Hitler and his minions.  He even tried to implicate Soros in the Holocaust, this despite the fact that he was a 13 year old Jew in hiding from the Nazis. Simply despicable.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from BobinVa. Show BobinVa's posts

    Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead'

    "Bachman believes that the very people who created our founding documents also worked tirelessly until they ended slavery.  If you believe this statement to be true, you are as absurd as she is.  NO ONE LIVES THAT LONG!"


    Reuben stays with the mistaken notion that Bachman didnt know when the Civil War occurred that ended slavery. Spin it in the worst way toward Bachman .  Michele Bachman specifically mentioned John Adams and John Quincy Adams as among the Founders. Is she allowed to mention John Quincy Adama, even though he was President in the 1800s...Does that mean she is ignorant of history?
     
    Most people are ignorant of  American history, and just assume the Founders were all pro slavery.   Lincoln believed , and his research backed up , that most of those who signed the Constitution wanted to set slavery on a course to extinction.
    That is what Bachman was referring to. 

     We could have a similiar long thread on how the President thinks there are 57 states....He must believe that, he said it, literally, right? Spin , spin spin.
      
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead'

    In Response to Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead':
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead' : You may disagree with him, but he backs it up with research, unlike the progressives. 
    Posted by skeeter20[/QUOTE]

    Is that why the three major rabbinical organizations have come out publicly and requested Beck and FoxNews to stop with all the specious comparisons to "Nazis"...saying in no uncertain terms how disrespectful (and historically inaccurate) it is to holocaust survivors and jews in general...??
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead'

    In Response to Re: MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes ballistic, calls Bachman a ' balloonhead':
    [QUOTE]"Bachman believes that the very people who created our founding documents also worked tirelessly until they ended slavery.  If you believe this statement to be true, you are as absurd as she is.  NO ONE LIVES THAT LONG!" Reuben stays with the mistaken notion that Bachman didnt know when the Civil War occurred that ended slavery. Spin it in the worst way toward Bachman .  Michele Bachman specifically mentioned John Adams and John Quincy Adams as among the Founders. Is she allowed to mention John Quincy Adama, even though he was President in the 1800s...Does that mean she is ignorant of history?   Most people are ignorant of  American history, and just assume the Founders were all pro slavery.   Lincoln believed , and his research backed up , that most of those who signed the Constitution wanted to set slavery on a course to extinction. That is what Bachman was referring to.   We could have a similiar long thread on how the President thinks there are 57 states....He must believe that, he said it, literally, right? Spin , spin spin.   
    Posted by BobinVa[/QUOTE]

    The fact that she lumped John Quincy with his father as a Founder Father further shows she does not know her history.  The son was not involved in creating our founding documents: he was too young. And he also was not involved in actually ending slavery as he was long dead when this was accomplished. And she (and you) are wrong about the fight to end slavery. Very few politicians actively sought the extinction of slavery (as opposed to limiting its growth) during the period leading up to the war. Lincoln himself did not support abolitionism prior to his election. Abolitionism was considered radical and unacceptable to the vast majority of Americans.  People may have hoped slavery would go away, but by 1860 it was firmly entrenched and it would only be uprooted once Lincoln looked at the issue anew in the context of the bloodiest war in American history.  

    Too many conservatives don't know their history.  It is complicated and does not easily fit their black/white, good guy/bad guy world view.  So they bend it or gloss over it to serve their needs. 
     

Share