Tee bag Hee.

Matthews is a blowhard. If Comcast really wants to send a message, send this buffoon packing.

I hope matthews is the next on off the air!

Now i wonder why there is no one screaming about Maddows moronic statement about missile defense not working..O wait she’s a pundit… Sorta like Coburn screaming about nazis and Beck mentioning it to……. Without double standards, the left would have no standards at all

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh… civility.

“My show is absolutely non-partisan”

Chris “I have a tingle running up my leg” Matthews

MediaiteCensorsSux says:
I hope matthews is the next on off the air!

I couldn’t disagree more. He provides SO much entertainment.

Why go into that cuckoo ‘s nest of a network at all ?

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
“My show is absolutely non-partisan”

Chris “I have a tingle running up my leg” Matthews

Haha non-partisan in that it features Slate, MediaMatters, Salon and Huff Po staffers. Seriously, when almost every segment can be uploaded on the intertubes and laughed at, you have a serious programming issue.

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
MediaiteCensorsSux says:
I hope matthews is the next on off the air!

I couldn’t disagree more. He provides SO much entertainment.

Aren’t you guys hoping for the censure of Matthews then just like those evil liberals?

The_Reasonable_Lib said:
Aren’t you guys hoping for the censure of Matthews then just like those evil liberals?

Disregard, that was meant for the original commenter.

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
MediaiteCensorsSux says:
I hope matthews is the next on off the air!

I couldn’t disagree more. He provides SO much entertainment.

Don’t worry – he’d still have his NBC Sunday show. And that’s totally non-partisan….the Atlantic, BBC, etc.

Poor Mr. Tingles. Ever since Bachmann made fun of him on his own show, he hasn’t been able to focus on anything else. He’s like the dorky kid who is spurned in his attempts to date the pretty girl, and then spends the rest of his life trying to get even. Add in the fact that virtually no one watches his show, and you almost have to feel bad for him. Almost.

Using liberal logic, his unrelenting negative coverage of Bachmann could very well be jeopardizing her life. Perhaps we need a New York Times expose of how Matthews is going to have blood on his hands when one of his nutjob followers inevitably turns to violence.

Sorry UNreasonable lib, you lost me again. You’re going to have to start making sense if you want us to respond to your drivel.

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
“My show is absolutely non-partisan”

Chris “I have a tingle running up my leg” Matthews

Michelle, “I had a tingle in my brain once.”

Balloon-head is no worse than O’Reilly calling people kooks and loons. He called Greyson a lot worse.
But yeah, I wish they would all knock it off.

LOL at the Tea Partiers who couldn’t defend Bachmann’s remarks. Instead he translated what she ‘really meant”
Why the fuck didn’t Bachmann say what she really meant?

Cuz she’s a balloon-head. lolol

That is my question Big Eddie. Why would anyone go on that show
with that nut!
I would have a very hard time Not cuffing his ass around jusy
a little bit for drill!
Don’t go on the show!!
I would also bet good money Michelle Bachmann could kick
“Tingles” fat ass within two rounds

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
Sorry UNreasonable lib, you lost me again. You’re going to have to start making sense if you want us to respond to your drivel.

Please read the subsequent post, Shelly and you’ll see that once again you’re the one not making any sense because I already corrected myself. I suggest you keep trying though, little engine that couldn’t.

Bachman/Romney? Bachman/Huck? Bachman/Pawlenty? Palin/Bachman? Yep, that’s the ticket.

Your man tingles is trying his best to help you out. Clearly the emperor has no clothes. But you shoot the messenger.

RL, you were correcting yourself at the same time I was commenting. Dude you’ve got it bad.

Christie/Ryan 2012!!!

Bachmann believes the founding fathers had a hand in ending slavery; at the very least she is a balloon head. And Russo, this bumbling idiot, couldn’t answer a question to save his life. A fine leader of the tea-bag party without a doubt.

He’s just pissing on Olbermann’s grave and trying to become the liberal voice of MSNBC.

“But at a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized – at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do – it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds.”

How quickly Matthews has forgotten the sentiments expressed in Obama’s Tucson Memorial Speech, or maybe he just dismissed them altogether for his own selfish gains.

Although I agree that the Republicans and the Tea Party are fools to allow Bachmann to speak for them in any way, shape, or form, hysterical name-calling just makes Matthews look unprofessional and desperate.

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
RL, you were correcting yourself at the same time I was commenting. Dude you’ve got it bad.

You can stop deflecting now, Michele. Why then didn’t you correct it? How am i to know that yu were typing as I corrected? All I can do is judge by what is in front of me. Why are you so angry? Is there some kind of problem? Why can’t you be civil?

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
MediaiteCensorsSux says:
I hope matthews is the next on off the air!

I couldn’t disagree more. He provides SO much entertainment.

good point! :)

tatboy said:
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh… civility.

lol @ teabloggers who are ok with “pinhead” but think balloonhead is the end of civility.

Matthews really has a problem with strong conservative pro-life women – his wife must be something else, to live with such a woman-hater. MSNBC needs to counsel Chris – nah- maybe they should just put him in a white jacket and have him hauled away for psychological help.

MSNBC=meltdown, Matthews makes a fool of himself yet again.

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
Christie/Ryan 2012!!!

The_Reasonable_Lib said:
You can stop deflecting now, Michele. Why then didn’t you correct it? How am i to know that yu were typing as I corrected? All I can do is judge by what is in front of me. Why are you so angry? Is there some kind of problem? Why can’t you be civil?

Ryan/Palin = unstoppable

I want Ryan at the head of the ticket because you know those debates would be oh so much fun. :)

UNreasonable Lib, I’m not angry at all. How can I be when I’m in hysterics over your posts?!

Sorry I didn’t feel the need to correct it when I saw you had answered. My apologies, I’m holding a baby so it’s harder to type.

WC in WI, I see your point, but Christie in a debate would be plippin awesome!! His frankness cracks me up!

I think it’s good that Bachmann gave credit to George Washington for freeing the slaves during the Spanish-American War at Fraggle Rock.

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
WC in WI, I see your point, but Christie in a debate would be plippin awesome!! His frankness cracks me up!

Yeah – I “like” Christie, but I’m just not convinced about it all. Anyone who Scarborough likes….makes me question my own political instincts.

I saw the words, ‘Chris Matthews Yells…’ and a huge smile came over my face. Yes, he knows what all Lib hacks know…Liberalism is one huge ‘Epic Fail,’ and ‘yelling’ is all these limp-wrists have left. An absolutely beautiful thing to witness, whether from Matthews or fellow rabies-filled hacks like Schultz, Olbermann, Krugman (he who yelleth in printeth). Awesome to see!

WC in WI, yeah I don’t know alot about his social standing, though I heard he did speak at the pro-life rally (that got almost 0 media coverage), but I love alot about him.

Huckabee, Romney? These guys are opportunists who blow wth the wind and change their stories all the time.

More than anything I hear people crying out that we need a PROVEN, HONEST, CONSISTENT candidate who strictly abides by the letter of the Consitution.

The Democrats are wrong about virtually everything in their rhetoric EXCEPT they oppose our ruinous, endless foreign wars and abuses of civil liberties. (Not enough vote the rehetoric, but that’s the part of the rhetoric they get right.)

The Republicans are completely wrong about endless, ruinous foreign wars that are turning us into a police state. The part of their rhetoric that is on the mark is the push for smaller, Constitutionally-limited government. (And again, few vote the rhetoric, but that’s the part of the rhetoric they get right.)

So, is there ANYONE out there who is PROVEN on getting these issues right, and PROVEN ON VOTING ENTIRELY CONSISTENTLY WITH HIS RHETORIC? Someone who opposed the undeclared wars and the Patriot Act? Someone who hasn’t wavered on voting against reckless spending and unConsitutional abuses of Federal power?

Google Ron Paul. The REAL anti-establishment candidate.

Tee Hee Bag (the running time on the video is 9:12 NO COINCIDENCE)

SarahP. said:
Bachmann believes the founding fathers had a hand in ending slavery; at the very least she is a balloon head.

.
“Slaveholders among prominent Founding Fathers
slaveholders1 non-slaveholders
Founding Father state Founding Father state
Charles Carroll Maryland John Adams Massachusetts
Samuel Chase Maryland Samuel Adams Massachusetts
Benjamin Franklin Pennsylvania Oliver Ellsworth Connecticut
Button Gwinnett Georgia Alexander Hamilton New York
John Hancock Massachusetts Robert Treat Paine Massachusetts
Patrick Henry Virginia Thomas Paine Pennsylvania
John Jay New York Roger Sherman Connecticut
Thomas Jefferson Virginia
Richard Henry Lee Virginia
James Madison Virginia
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney South Carolina
Benjamin Rush Pennsylvania
Edward Rutledge South Carolina
George Washington Virginia
1Held slaves at some point in time.

In his initial draft of the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson condemned the injustice of the slave trade and, by implication, slavery, but he also blamed the presence of enslaved Africans in North America on avaricious British colonial policies. Jefferson thus acknowledged that slavery violated the natural rights of the enslaved, while at the same time he absolved Americans of any responsibility for owning slaves themselves. The Continental Congress apparently rejected the tortured logic of this passage by deleting it from the final document, but this decision also signaled the Founders’ commitment to subordinating the controversial issue of slavery to the larger goal of securing the unity and independence of the United States.

Nevertheless, the Founders, with the exception of those from South Carolina and Georgia, exhibited considerable aversion to slavery during the era of the Articles of Confederation (1781–89) by prohibiting the importation of foreign slaves to individual states and lending their support to a proposal by Jefferson to ban slavery in the Northwest Territory. Such antislavery policies, however, only went so far. The prohibition of foreign slave imports, by limiting the foreign supply, conveniently served the interests of Virginia and Maryland slaveholders, who could then sell their own surplus slaves southward and westward at higher prices. Furthermore, the ban on slavery in the Northwest tacitly legitimated the expansion of slavery in the Southwest.

Despite initial disagreements over slavery at the Constitutional Convention in 1787, the Founders once again demonstrated their commitment to maintaining the unity of the new United States by resolving to diffuse sectional tensions over slavery. To this end the Founders drafted a series of constitutional clauses acknowledging deep-seated regional differences over slavery while requiring all sections of the new country to make compromises as well. They granted slaveholding states the right to count three-fifths of their slave population when it came to apportioning the number of a state’s representatives to Congress, thereby enhancing Southern power in the House of Representatives. But they also used this same ratio to determine the federal tax contribution required of each state, thus increasing the direct federal tax burden of slaveholding states. Georgians and South Carolinians won a moratorium until 1808 on any Congressional ban against the importation of slaves, but in the meantime individual states remained free to prohibit slave imports if they so wished. Southerners also obtained the inclusion of a fugitive slave clause (see Fugitive Slave Acts) designed to encourage the return of runaway slaves who sought refuge in free states, but the Constitution left enforcement of this clause to the cooperation of the states rather than to the coercion of Congress.”

THEY HAD EVERYTHING TO DO WITH IT EVEN THOSE THAT OWNED SLAVES.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/1269536/The-Founding-Fathers-and-Slavery

Michelle “Chicken Little” Bachmann shows off her version of history.

Maybe she is a victim of “No Child Left Behind”….

ChrisNH said:
I saw the words, ‘Chris Matthews Yells…’ and a huge smile came over my face. Yes, he knows what all Lib hacks know…Liberalism is one huge ‘Epic Fail,’ and ‘yelling’ is all these limp-wrists have left. An absolutely beautiful thing to witness, whether from Matthews or fellow rabies-filled hacks like Schultz, Olbermann, Krugman (he who yelleth in printeth). Awesome to see!

You are projecting. Far right wing whack jobs, such as yourself Chris are all talk and limp wrist-ed. Not to mention the fact that you’ve got the IQ of of a rabbit pellet.

No one is commenting on the point of the entire segment? Regardless of Matthews style and whether or not you hate his guts, Bachmann is wrong wrong wrong and knows zero about slave history. She comes off in that clip as an ignorant American woman. As an educated American woman, she is a complete fool in that clip. Complete and total. I wonder if she flunked basic American history?

Grammie said:
.
“Slaveholders among prominent Founding Fathers
slaveholders1 non-slaveholders
Founding Father state Founding Father state
Charles Carroll Maryland John Adams Massachusetts
Samuel Chase Maryland Samuel Adams Massachusetts
Benjamin Franklin Pennsylvania Oliver Ellsworth Connecticut
Button Gwinnett Georgia Alexander Hamilton New York
John Hancock Massachusetts Robert Treat Paine Massachusetts
Patrick Henry Virginia Thomas Paine Pennsylvania
John Jay New York Roger Sherman Connecticut
Thomas Jefferson Virginia
Richard Henry Lee Virginia
James Madison Virginia
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney South Carolina
Benjamin Rush Pennsylvania
Edward Rutledge South Carolina
George Washington Virginia
1Held slaves at some point in time.

In his initial draft of the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson condemned the injustice of the slave trade and, by implication, slavery, but he also blamed the presence of enslaved Africans in North America on avaricious British colonial policies. Jefferson thus acknowledged that slavery violated the natural rights of the enslaved, while at the same time he absolved Americans of any responsibility for owning slaves themselves. The Continental Congress apparently rejected the tortured logic of this passage by deleting it from the final document, but this decision also signaled the Founders’ commitment to subordinating the controversial issue of slavery to the larger goal of securing the unity and independence of the United States.

Nevertheless, the Founders, with the exception of those from South Carolina and Georgia, exhibited considerable aversion to slavery during the era of the Articles of Confederation (1781–89) by prohibiting the importation of foreign slaves to individual states and lending their support to a proposal by Jefferson to ban slavery in the Northwest Territory. Such antislavery policies, however, only went so far. The prohibition of foreign slave imports, by limiting the foreign supply, conveniently served the interests of Virginia and Maryland slaveholders, who could then sell their own surplus slaves southward and westward at higher prices. Furthermore, the ban on slavery in the Northwest tacitly legitimated the expansion of slavery in the Southwest.

Despite initial disagreements over slavery at the Constitutional Convention in 1787, the Founders once again demonstrated their commitment to maintaining the unity of the new United States by resolving to diffuse sectional tensions over slavery. To this end the Founders drafted a series of constitutional clauses acknowledging deep-seated regional differences over slavery while requiring all sections of the new country to make compromises as well. They granted slaveholding states the right to count three-fifths of their slave population when it came to apportioning the number of a state’s representatives to Congress, thereby enhancing Southern power in the House of Representatives. But they also used this same ratio to determine the federal tax contribution required of each state, thus increasing the direct federal tax burden of slaveholding states. Georgians and South Carolinians won a moratorium until 1808 on any Congressional ban against the importation of slaves, but in the meantime individual states remained free to prohibit slave imports if they so wished. Southerners also obtained the inclusion of a fugitive slave clause (see Fugitive Slave Acts) designed to encourage the return of runaway slaves who sought refuge in free states, but the Constitution left enforcement of this clause to the cooperation of the states rather than to the coercion of Congress.”

THEY HAD EVERYTHING TO DO WITH IT EVEN THOSE THAT OWNED SLAVES.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/1269536/The-Founding-Fathers-and-Slavery

Now I understand why you, an uneducated balloon head supports your own kind. Good God, were you home schooled?

The Tea Weasel said:
Michelle “Chicken Little” Bachmann shows off her version of history

I believe it is the other way around Tea weasel, it is YOU & your lefty budies who are showing us your version of history.

BFD said:
I think it’s good that Bachmann gave credit to George Washington for freeing the slaves during the Spanish-American War at Fraggle Rock.

Almost as funny as your avatar quipping “”When the stock market crashed, Franklin D. Roosevelt got on the television and didn’t just talk about the, you know, the princes of greed. “

BatBoy said:
I believe it is the other way around Tea weasel, it is YOU & your lefty budies who are showing us your version of history.

WTF is a “budie”?

Pray tell B-Boy, what is my “version of history”. I go by what I was taught in school, but I suppose that is too left leaning for a wingnut (?).

got to love the non-partisan chris matthews,

I am pretty confident Chris Tingles is a gonner’ too.

There are many more on the chopping block as well.

timzank said:
Almost as funny as your avatar quipping “”When the stock market crashed, Franklin D. Roosevelt got on the television and didn’t just talk about the, you know, the princes of greed. ”

Here’s the difference. He immediately corrected himself. You assholes never do.

The Tea Weasel said:
I go by what I was taught in school,

There lies the issue!

The Tea Weasel said:
I go by what I was taught in school, but I suppose that is too left leaning for a wingnut (?).

sb “left -leaning “

BatBoy said:
There lies the issue!

So you prefer what Rush and Glenn teach you over what is taught over at the university?

That clarifies things…..now you should help 2012 find the wheel that fell off her house and she will help you find the wheel that fell off yours….

tingles is such an ass. This meme against Bachman is no different than that against Palin–>FEAR

man, i am really wondering about that poor guy. he obviously doesnt even listen, he cant comprehend a complex thought. i listened to what she said. she said “they work tirelessly to try to eradicate slavery”. and mentioned john adams specifically. who actually did try to get it eliminated. and the whole deal with the expansion of slavery in the territories. and the arguments. and the compromise that the northern states had to make to get the constitution ratified, by allowing slavery to continue, holding their noses the whole time. and then working behind the scenes to stop its expansion and eradicate it in the 15 states it existed. he is totally either unable to discern her point. of the constant struggle of the anti-slavery forces against the pro-slavery (or shall i say states rights) forces. FROM THE FORMATION OF THE COUNTRY. which led to the civil war. 60 years of that struggle coming to a unfortunate yet perhaps inevitable head. or he doesnt KNOW what she is talking about. is completely ignorant of historical facts. that poor dude is decaying, disintegrating in front of our eyes. its so friggin weird. like he is screaming for help. right on tv. “i am going nuts!”. maybe that was the tingle. all his brain matter dropped to his shoes. from his head. i seems somebody on the set would take him aside, and say”ahem, ya know, uh, chris…..”. help him. they let him go. and replay it at 7pm, again. the fact he calls her names and all that is inconsequential really. he’s wrong. she’s right. and HE is calling her a bubble head, or whatever he rants about. new tne of civility i guess. its fantasy land. god help us.

Chris is accurate. Bachman has no idea of our history. Its really simple.

FredCPA said:
man, i am really wondering about that poor guy. he obviously doesnt even listen, he cant comprehend a complex thought. i listened to what she said. she said “they work tirelessly to try to eradicate slavery”. and mentioned john adams specifically. who actually did try to get it eliminated. and the whole deal with the expansion of slavery in the territories. and the arguments. and the compromise that the northern states had to make to get the constitution ratified, by allowing slavery to continue, holding their noses the whole time. and then working behind the scenes to stop its expansion and eradicate it in the 15 states it existed. he is totally either unable to discern her point. of the constant struggle of the anti-slavery forces against the pro-slavery (or shall i say states rights) forces. FROM THE FORMATION OF THE COUNTRY. which led to the civil war. 60 years of that struggle coming to a unfortunate yet perhaps inevitable head. or he doesnt KNOW what she is talking about. is completely ignorant of historical facts. that poor dude is decaying, disintegrating in front of our eyes. its so friggin weird. like he is screaming for help. right on tv. “i am going nuts!”. maybe that was the tingle. all his brain matter dropped to his shoes. from his head. i seems somebody on the set would take him aside, and say”ahem, ya know, uh, chris…..”. help him. they let him go. and replay it at 7pm, again. the fact he calls her names and all that is inconsequential really. he’s wrong. she’s right. and HE is calling her a bubble head, or whatever he rants about. new tne of civility i guess. its fantasy land. god help us.

Facts just get them confused and critical thought..never happen

I love it when Tweetie goes off on people. It is called Hardball!

“Let me tell you something. Do you know that you have been deceived and cheated? You have been told that this government was intended from the beginning for white men, and for white men exclusively; that the men who formed the Union and framed the Constitution designed the permanent exclusion of the colored people from the benefits of those institutions. Davis, Taney and Yancey, traitors at the south, have propagated this statement, while their copperhead echoes at the north have repeated the same. There never was a bolder or more wicked perversion of the truth of history. So far from this purpose was the mind and heart of your fathers, that they desired and expected the abolition of slavery. They framed the Constitution plainly with a view to the speedy downfall of slavery. They carefully excluded from the Constitution any and every word which could lead to the belief that they meant it for persons of only one complexion.”

Chris Matthews is wrong…Slavery was ruled illegal in parts of the before 1787…slavery was illegal in the Ohio River Valley…that’s why they ultimately had the “fugitive slave law” because there were “freemen” in the northern states and slaves in the southern states..and their skin color was the same.

“Even before the 1787 Constitutional Convention, the Confederation Congress had been forced to deal with the issue of slavery in the Northwest Territory, northwest of the Ohio River. The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 forbade slavery in the territories and states that would be created (Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin). As a concession to the South, the ordinance included a Fugitive Slave Law to ensure runaway slaves would be returned to their owners if caught in the northwest.”

That means that some of the “founders” made slavery illegal in parts of the USA…Michele is right.

Obeezy said:
Obeezy says:
January 25, 2011 at 7:39 pm

.
I know.

What more could we have asked of our Founders? An accommodation with slave owners, or the South, was absolutely necessary to form the country.

They crafted a document that was so finely tuned, and very deliberately, that in it was the very means to end slavery. Also, some of those very same slave holder Founders were complicit in the deal.

Sal and me were in the YR group in Monterey, Ca. in 1968.
I am going to talk to him tomorrow and tell him to never go on with Matthews. It is a waste of time.

Guess who this piece of human excrement Matthews had lunch with today before his show?
Answer here:
http://tinyurl.com/668mj2h

I was once asked “Is it alright to teach black children that slave owners were great men?” And my answer was “Would you teach Jewish children that Hitler was a great man?” Well according to Michele Bachmann the white men who wrote the constitution was all great men who were trying to abolish black slavery in America. None of them were slave owners. Gee, I wonder, where did Michele get her education in history?

Oxy Con, the pictures that WZ comes up with are (to quote a very wise woman) flippin funny!

FredCPA said:
man, i am really wondering about that poor guy. he obviously doesnt even listen, he cant comprehend a complex thought. i listened to what she said. she said “they work tirelessly to try to eradicate slavery”. and mentioned john adams specifically. who actually did try to get it eliminated. and the whole deal with the expansion of slavery in the territories. and the arguments. and the compromise that the northern states had to make to get the constitution ratified, by allowing slavery to continue, holding their noses the whole time. and then working behind the scenes to stop its expansion and eradicate it in the 15 states it existed. he is totally either unable to discern her point. of the constant struggle of the anti-slavery forces against the pro-slavery (or shall i say states rights) forces. FROM THE FORMATION OF THE COUNTRY. which led to the civil war. 60 years of that struggle coming to a unfortunate yet perhaps inevitable head. or he doesnt KNOW what she is talking about. is completely ignorant of historical facts. that poor dude is decaying, disintegrating in front of our eyes. its so friggin weird. like he is screaming for help. right on tv. “i am going nuts!”. maybe that was the tingle. all his brain matter dropped to his shoes. from his head. i seems somebody on the set would take him aside, and say”ahem, ya know, uh, chris…..”. help him. they let him go. and replay it at 7pm, again. the fact he calls her names and all that is inconsequential really. he’s wrong. she’s right. and HE is calling her a bubble head, or whatever he rants about. new tne of civility i guess. its fantasy land. god help us.

it’s a shame cuz you seem like a smart guy and all you guys do is apologize for the dimwits leading your teaparty. she said john quincy adams who more than 10 years before the civil war.
what the hell is wrong with you people?

TfT said:
Matthews really has a problem with strong conservative pro-life women – his wife must be something else, to live with such a woman-hater. MSNBC needs to counsel Chris – nah- maybe they should just put him in a white jacket and have him hauled away for psychological help.

MSNBC=meltdown, Matthews makes a fool of himself yet again.

stupidity…he has a problem with stupid people. stupid has no gender.

Tyrone Copper said:
I was once asked “Is it alright to teach black children that slave owners were great men?” And my answer was “Would you teach Jewish children that Hitler was a great man?”

George Washington = Hitler. F*cking brilliant, Tyrone.

Pablo said:
George Washington = Hitler. F*cking brilliant, Tyrone.

Sure looks like the NAACP thinks so. http://tinyurl.com/6399c36

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
Oxy Con, the pictures that WZ comes up with are (to quote a very wise woman) flippin funny!

Yeah, Zip has the funniest shopped pics!

Tyrone Copper said:
I was once asked “Is it alright to teach black children that slave owners were great men?”

BTW, who the hell asked you that, Tyrone? Smells like bullshit to me.

Gay Chrissy ‘Tingles & Thrills’ Matthews really must hate Michele Bachmann. He goes after her every night he is on. He can’t stand the fact that she is hundreds times more popular than he is. Course he is not popular with anyone. The goofy Chrissy acts like he is on the verge of a mental meltdown and in need of the guys in white coats carrying the leather and canvass straight jacket. Chrissy seriously needs a rubber walled room with a strap-in bed.

Hey Chrissy, get over it.. Congresswoman Michele Bachmann is a thousand times smarter than your sorry rear. But, to give you a tiny bit of recognition, you probably do know the names of more movies than you do. And of course based on what you tell people each night, it is the movies where you got your education. Movies from the 1920′s and 1930′s. Chrissy you need to wake up and smell the coffee. You are so out of touch with America and its citizens.

Tyrone Copper said:
I was once asked “Is it alright to teach black children that slave owners were great men?” And my answer was “Would you teach Jewish children that Hitler was a great man?” Well according to Michele Bachmann the white men who wrote the constitution was all great men who were trying to abolish black slavery in America. None of them were slave owners. Gee, I wonder, where did Michele get her education in history?

She would be dumb if she said any of that but of course she didn’t.

The Tea Weasel said:
So you prefer what Rush and Glenn teach you over what is taught over at the university?

Having seen both “sides”, I wouldn’t toss a university education, but Glenn and Rush are very good – and certainly a counter to the uber-Leftism that pervades campuses.

WildMan said:
Gay Chrissy ‘Tingles & Thrills’ Matthews really must hate Michele Bachmann. He goes after her every night he is on. He can’t stand the fact that she is hundreds times more popular than he is. Course he is not popular with anyone. The goofy Chrissy acts like he is on the verge of a mental meltdown and in need of the guys in white coats carrying the leather and canvass straight jacket. Chrissy seriously needs a rubber walled room with a strap-in bed.

Hey Chrissy, get over it.. Congresswoman Michele Bachmann is a thousand times smarter than your sorry rear. But, to give you a tiny bit of recognition, you probably do know the names of more movies than you do. And of course based on what you tell people each night, it is the movies where you got your education. Movies from the 1920’s and 1930’s. Chrissy you need to wake up and smell the coffee. You are so out of touch with America and its citizens.

I agree. Mathews must wake up each day thinking about her.

I already miss Bathtub boy.

SarahP. said:
You are projecting.

You done masturbating to Obama tonight, small Lib child? That speech was laughable…full of polite golf-match applause. “We’re gonna control the deficit, but on the other hand we’re still gonna spend on useless union hacks who can help get me re-elected in 2012 even though I don’t deserve it.”

Go to bed, small communist child; your special-Ed bus comes early.

Is calling a congresswoman a balloon head part of NBC news standards? According to Big Ed, it is. Would he call a man a balloon head? MSNBC is such a joke and comcast knows it. They won’t fire anybody but their will be a code of conduct that all talent must adhere to. It will be hard for this cast of clowns to follow.

This from a party which has a Congressman that is genuinely concerned that landing Marines on Guam could tip the island over. You’d think they would be smart enougn not to bring up intelligence.

DaMav said:
This from a party which has a Congressman that is genuinely concerned that landing Marines on Guam could tip the island over

.
And another one who wanted to know if the Mars Rover would go take some pictures of the flag planted by Armstrong?

Compare those to a statement that could be parsed the wrong way and the reaction it got.

I give BHO a D tonight. He showed up and gave a speech that was worse than useless.

WildMan said:
Gay Chrissy ‘Tingles & Thrills’ Matthews really must hate Michele Bachmann. He goes after her every night he is on. He can’t stand the fact that she is hundreds times more popular than he is. Course he is not popular with anyone. The goofy Chrissy acts like he is on the verge of a mental meltdown and in need of the guys in white coats carrying the leather and canvass straight jacket. Chrissy seriously needs a rubber walled room with a strap-in bed.

Hey Chrissy, get over it.. Congresswoman Michele Bachmann is a thousand times smarter than your sorry rear. But, to give you a tiny bit of recognition, you probably do know the names of more movies than you do. And of course based on what you tell people each night, it is the movies where you got your education. Movies from the 1920’s and 1930’s. Chrissy you need to wake up and smell the coffee. You are so out of touch with America and its citizens.

mathews also knows that john quincy adams was not a founding father and it was the civil war that ended slavery.
you sir are an idiot.

Grammie said:
.
And another one who wanted to know if the Mars Rover would go take some pictures of the flag planted by Armstrong?

Compare those to a statement that could be parsed the wrong way and the reaction it got.

I give BHO a D tonight. He showed up and gave a speech that was worse than useless.

parsed the wrong way? c’mon grammy, you’re smarter than that. how about a little intellectual honesty.

ChiliPeppersFan said:
mathews also knows that john quincy adams was not a founding father

.
I posted an excerpt from a much longer article that explained this.

The Founding Fathers, including some who owned slaves and did not necessarily intend to divest themselves of them, crafted the Constitution so that there no chance that it could later on NOT be applied to former slaves.

They set a date certain to stop the importation of slaves.

The 3/5 rule was carefully crafted so that it limited Southern power (representation) in the new government and did not deny any future rights to slaves.

They did not overturn those laws that states had enacted declaring certain territories as “free”.

I’m not an historian but that doesn’t prevent me from using this computer to refresh and learn anew. I suggest you try it.

BTW, did she actually say John Q was a Founding Father or did she mention him after and use the word “forbear”?

ChiliPeppersFan said:
parsed the wrong way? c’mon grammy, you’re smarter than that. how about a little intellectual honesty.

.
Here you go Chili from the horse’s mouth:

““Bachmann (R-MN) also noted how slavery was a ’scourge’ on American history, but added that ‘we also know that the very founders that wrote those documents worked tirelessly until slavery was no more in the United States.’

‘And,’ she continued, ‘I think it is high time that we recognize the contribution of our forbearers who worked tirelessly — men like John Quincy Adams, who would not rest until slavery was extinguished in the country.’”

If I remember my English lessons from 60+ years ago correctly the clause following “forbearers” denotes who, John Q, she was talking about. The use of “forebearers” separates John Q from “Founding Fathers”/

As I said, she was guilty of phrasing that could be mistakenly parsed.

Chris Matthews, have you forgotten we have a President who thinks we have 57 states. Check it out here, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpGH02DtIws . John Quincy Adams died in 1848, BEFORE the Civil War, and he had been active in anti slavery issues in his many positions up to his death. So slavery had been a battle point for many years before the Civil war and was a contentious matter and, yes, it took the Civil War to bring the issue to an end. But many people had fought in many ways against slavery LONG before the Civil War. From a biography on John Quincy Adams, compiled at, http://www25.uua.org/uuhs/duub/articles/johnquincyadams.html , the following ” The loss brought Adams a temporary sense of relief. However, after a brief retirement Adams was persuaded to run for Congress as a Representative from Massachusetts. While he had always been ambivalent about political life, he accepted, in part both to seek revenge on his enemies and to restore his tarnished reputation. Adams was elected, and he retained the office for seventeen years, 1831-48, until his death. It was during these years that he gained his greatest political respect, by defending, successfully, the rights of the African captives who in 1839 overwhelmed the crew of the Spanish slave ship Amistad, by opposing, unsuccessfully, the Mexican War and statehood for Texas, and by opposing, again unsuccessfully, the gag rule denying the right of petition on issues involving slavery. In the end, however, his opposition to the gag rule can be counted as successful, for his unwavering efforts against slavery had a powerful effect that outlived him. ” I think it would help if liberals such as Chris Matthews did a little more studying of issues then to sit their and flap those lips echoeing in words their lack of intellect and intelligence.

chilipeppersblowing fire out your ass again. I bet that tingling thrill Chrissy Matthews gets up his leg is you crawling up there to get up close and personal with Chrissy. I bet you and Chrissy really enjoy watching those old 1920′s black & white films together. You little sissified girlie boy happens to be the real idiot. You just happened to look in the mirror as you were typing out that post and didn’t realize the idiot was you. Now go back to your boyfriend Chrissy and enjoy the rest of the evening you little limp wristed clown.

For a little more fuel in the fire against Chris Matthews lack of intelligence and his obvious lack of knowledge about slavery, Civil War, John Quincy Adams and the founding fathers, go to the links and you will see that anti slavery feelings, commentary and fighting against it, went back to George Washington in 1786. __
http://academic.udayton.edu/race/02rights/slave05.htm#Jay __ and also at __
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Quincy_Adams . Doing my part as a non violent Tea Party sympathiser to educate the ignorant.

gordonbloyershow said:
Sal and me were in the YR group in Monterey, Ca. in 1968.
I am going to talk to him tomorrow and tell him to never go on with Matthews. It is a waste of time.

He never answered the question. He could of just said I don’t agree with her but Republicans have a hard time every saying they make mistakes or criticizing another righty.

OxyCon said:
Guess who this piece of human excrement Matthews had lunch with today before his show?
Answer here:
http://tinyurl.com/668mj2h

You righties need to work on your photoshop skills.

Tingles obviously has the hots for Michele and that “balloon-head” is a Freudian slip referring to the tiny bulge in his pants from imagining a hot night with the married lady from MN…! Tingles has zero-class and is beginning to resemble that insane congresscritter from TN who called the GOP a Nazi party, obviously suffereing from psychological projection as the demonrats have proved their liberal fascism ten times over in the last decade.

For the NAACP to be offended by George Washington demonstrates the fact that they should have deported ALL slaves and ex-slaves to Liberia, where the average GDP right now is less than $1000/year. Same with Sierra Leone, a colony founded for freed British slaves, where nowadays, kids cut off the arms of adults with chain saws and machetes, because they’re crazy on drugs.

Liberia, Sierra Leone, and the NAACP is what happens when you get a critical mass of s-for-brains untermenschen together to run a country or an organization.

What an obscene joke the NAACP has turned out to be.

Ah, those tolerant liberals.

Maybe MSNBC needs to make Chris Matthews take a breathalyzer before allowing him on the air.

Jim Treacher said:
Maybe MSNBC needs to make Chris Matthews take a breathalyzer before allowing him on the air.

I didn’t actually see this live last night, but have only watched clips and snippets. Matthews seems over-the-top. He often is.

Did you happen to watch O’Reilly last night? I think he was over-the-top as well. There were times I thought he had to be drunk or strung out on some medication. Belligerent. Then, long pauses as he was try to transmit an idea from his head to his mouth.

What was going on?

gordonbloyershow said:
Sal and me were in the YR group in Monterey, Ca. in 1968.
I am going to talk to him tomorrow and tell him to never go on with Matthews. It is a waste of time.

“Sal and I ….”

While you’re at it, I might suggest you speak to HRH Elizabeth II R and suggest that she tell HRH the Prince of Wales to wear pearl grey and not charcoal at the wedding. Charcoal mutes his features.

this kind of thinking is a backward,chris called him out on the fact that ,most of the tea party are empty upstairs.
we cant keep pretending they are on the same level with the other leaders.that is dangerous,the world is a very competitive and smart place.It will be the countrys down fall to let these kind of people in any position above member of the house.I will not even vote for them as a dog walker.we need smart leaders to be able to compete all over the world.

Jim Treacher said:
Maybe MSNBC needs to make Chris Matthews take a breathalyzer before allowing him on the air.

Isn’t the name of his show: “Hardball”? Matthews was utterly flabbergasted that Russo, who previously had a good reputation but has now become a millionaire many times over off of tea party money, would not distance himself from Bachman’s nutty history rewrite.

valkyrie101 said:
but has now become a millionaire many times over off of tea party money

Huh?

Grammie said:
As I said, she was guilty of phrasing that could be mistakenly parsed.

Oh Grammie, they’ve decided what she said and what she actually said doesn’t matter a whit. In fact, it doesn’t even exist anymore. The Big Lie is at work again, creating their TRVTH. Goebbels was a piker.

ChrisNH said:
You done masturbating to Obama tonight, small Lib child? That speech was laughable…full of polite golf-match applause. “We’re gonna control the deficit, but on the other hand we’re still gonna spend on useless union hacks who can help get me re-elected in 2012 even though I don’t deserve it.”

Go to bed, small communist child; your special-Ed bus comes early.

Are you going to cry when Barack Hussein Obama is reelected, douche?

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/robert-schlesinger/2011/01/26/instant-polls-very-positive-for-obama-state-of-the-union

The insta-returns are in and the president knocked the State of the Union out of the ballpark.

[Read a brief history of the State of the Union addresses.]

CBS News’s quickie poll had 91 percent of those watching the speech approving of the president’s performance.

Specifically, 82 percent of those who watched the speech said they approve of the president’s plans for the economy, up from 53 percent who approved before the speech.

CNN also ran an instant poll with its Opinion Research partner. They found that 52 percent of those who had watched the speech had a “very positive” reaction and an additional 32 percent had an “somewhat positive” response. An overall positive mark of 84 percent ain’t bad. And one other figure from deep in the poll: 77 percent said that the speech made them feel “more optimistic” about the country’s direction over the next few years, as opposed to 19 percent who feel more pessimistic. As my bloleague Jamie Stiehm wrote yesterday, presidents succeed when they speak in optimistic tones. (And compare that with Rep. Paul Ryan’s gloomdoggling response.)

No great surprises here. The speech was well-delivered and seemed to be constructed not to pick partisan fights but rather position him as the adult in the room when the inevitable partisan fights do spark in the coming weeks and months.

Pablo said:
Huh?

Surely you are aware that all these astroturf consultants are getting rich off of the tea party?

Unprofessional conduct. Another reason why no one even watches msnbc….

Michele Bachman Gives Chris Matthews a History Lesson

http://bigjournalism.com/driehl/2011/01/25/michele-bachman-gives-chris-matthews-a-history-lesson/#more-162496

Clearly, Chris Mathews will either become more responsible and professional, or he can hang out with Olbermann in the MSNBC firing lounge. He’s definitely next on the ‘chopping block’. Well it’s obvious to everyone but the MSNBC on-air anchors….

MSNBC like all news outlets is in severe cost-cutting mode right now. Let the Chris Mathews firing watch begin….

rocky road said:
Is calling a congresswoman a balloon head part of NBC news standards? According to Big Ed, it is. Would he call a man a balloon head? MSNBC is such a joke and comcast knows it. They won’t fire anybody but their will be a code of conduct that all talent must adhere to. It will be hard for this cast of clowns to follow.

‘Cast of clowns’ is very funny. The Taiwanese video about MSNBC is so spot-on….

I suggest an e-mail campaign aimed at Comcast to get this HATEFUL CREEP Matthews off his Sunday morning show!

One word best characterizes the Progressive Left and their sycophant hacks in the “mainstream media” – DISHONEST!

What does Breitbart’s tea site have to do with teaching Matthews a history lesson! Breitbart’s and Beck’s history does has a nice spin on it! What parts of his own history that are true, don’t always match the topic! Teas stand by a tea site, but would discount any other real fact check site! Matthews was a little harsh on this guy, but the guy couldn’t answer what Bachmann was talking about!

Matthews smears Bachmann over Iowa speech
Posted by therightscoop on Jan 26, 2011

Thankfully hotairpundit clipped 2 minutes out of the 9 minute segment so I wouldn’t have to watch the whole thing! In this clip, Matthews calls Bachmann a balloon head: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOn2K7IYJC0&feature=player_embedded

First of all she never indicated that the founders eliminated slavery in their lifetime. It might sound like she’s inferring that but anyone who has studied history even a little knows that slavery was around much longer than that. And I’m pretty sure she knows that too. What they did do, as Beck pointed out on his show this morning, was end the slave trade. They also worked toward the end of slavery even though they couldn’t abolish it which is why they instituted the 3/5ths provision in the Constitution. If slaves were counted as one whole person, then slave owners in the South would have had more representatives in Congress and slavery would have been much more difficult to abolish. It’s not because they thought that a slave had the intrinsic value of 3/5ths of a person that they wrote it that way, but because they wanted to end slavery. But Matthews’ ignorance of this is why he is a balloon head. Actually he’s a balloon head for more reasons than this, but for the sake of being civil I’ll leave it there.

http://www.therightscoop.com/matthews-smears-bachmann-over-iowa-speech

Yay for Chris Matthews. Thanks, Chris, for warming that empty space in our hearts aching for Keith Olberman. I love seeing these teabagger clowns get rolled through the flames.

Everybody continues to get bent out of shape over slavery.  Nobody cares…it’s over…let it go.  

Maybe, in his shake-down of Mrs.Backmann, he could have enlightened us on just why slaves were counted as 3/5 a person. Maybe Mr.Matthews should listen to his own advise about educating himself on what he founding fathers did, and why.

Pablo said:
Oh Grammie, they’ve decided what she said and what she actually said doesn’t matter a whit. In fact, it doesn’t even exist anymore. The Big Lie is at work again, creating their TRVTH. Goebbels was a piker.

.
Pablo has nailed this one down.

CAconservative said:
Maybe, in his shake-down of Mrs.Backmann, he could have enlightened us on just why slaves were counted as 3/5 a person. Maybe Mr.Matthews should listen to his own advise about educating himself on what he founding fathers did, and why.

Among white men, and not including slaves, the population of the north, the non-slave states, was greater than in the slave south. Electoral votes are calculated by statewide population. The south was afraid the north would use this electoral advantage to legislate away slavery. The south wanted 5/5ths of a person so that their statewide populations would be greater, thereby getting enough electoral votes to block legislation to abolish slavery. The north did not want to count slaves as a person, or citizen, because, ironically, that would allow the south to block efforts to bring legislative abolition, and otherwise give more power to the south than their population of free white men would otherwise bring. Thus, 3/5ths of a person as a compromise by the north. As it turned out, that was too much of a concession by the northerners who wanted a union of all the colonies, by the southerners who threatened to block a union without concessions. Of course the south used this power to block abolition for another 75 or so years.

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
Michele Bachman Gives Chris Matthews a History Lesson

http://bigjournalism.com/driehl/2011/01/25/michele-bachman-gives-chris-matthews-a-history-lesson/#more-162496

Are you still posting this nonsense? a ridiculous contrived argument is not better than no argument.

Calvin said:
Matthews smears Bachmann over Iowa speech
Posted by therightscoop on Jan 26, 2011

Thankfully hotairpundit clipped 2 minutes out of the 9 minute segment so I wouldn’t have to watch the whole thing! In this clip, Matthews calls Bachmann a balloon head: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOn2K7IYJC0&feature=player_embedded

First of all she never indicated that the founders eliminated slavery in their lifetime. It might sound like she’s inferring that but anyone who has studied history even a little knows that slavery was around much longer than that. And I’m pretty sure she knows that too. What they did do, as Beck pointed out on his show this morning, was end the slave trade. They also worked toward the end of slavery even though they couldn’t abolish it which is why they instituted the 3/5ths provision in the Constitution. If slaves were counted as one whole person, then slave owners in the South would have had more representatives in Congress and slavery would have been much more difficult to abolish. It’s not because they thought that a slave had the intrinsic value of 3/5ths of a person that they wrote it that way, but because they wanted to end slavery. But Matthews’ ignorance of this is why he is a balloon head. Actually he’s a balloon head for more reasons than this, but for the sake of being civil I’ll leave it there.

http://www.therightscoop.com/matthews-smears-bachmann-over-iowa-speech

Another contrived nonsensical defense.
Yes the Southern states wanted to count the slaves to increase their POLITICAL power and the northern states wanted to count the slaves as 0, so to retain more POLTICAL power. It wasn’t about ending slavery.

She was WRONG, and glaringly so. Just admit it and move on.

valkyrie101 said:
Among white men, and not including slaves, the population of the north, the non-slave states, was greater than in the slave south. Electoral votes are calculated by statewide population. The south was afraid the north would use this electoral advantage to legislate away slavery. The south wanted 5/5ths of a person so that their statewide populations would be greater, thereby getting enough electoral votes to block legislation to abolish slavery. The north did not want to count slaves as a person, or citizen, because, ironically, that would allow the south to block efforts to bring legislative abolition, and otherwise give more power to the south than their population of free white men would otherwise bring. Thus, 3/5ths of a person as a compromise by the north. As it turned out, that was too much of a concession by the northerners who wanted a union of all the colonies, by the southerners who threatened to block a union without concessions. Of course the south used this power to block abolition for another 75 or so years.

The south also used this power to elect Jefferson , a slaveholder , as president.
and then there’s this
Of the first five presidents, four owned slaves. All four of these owned slaves while they were president.

Of the next five presidents (#6-10), four owned slaves. Only two of them owned slaves while they were president.

Of the next five presidents (#11-15), two owned slaves. Both of these two owned slaves while they were president.

Of the next three presidents (#16-18) two owned slaves. neither of them owned slaves while serving as president.

The last president to own slaves while in office was the twelfth president, Zachary Taylor (1849-1850).

The last president to own slaves at all was the eighteenth president, Ulysses S. Grant (1869-1877).

So twelve of our presidents owned slaves and eight of them owned slaves while serving as president.

bobmoses said:
Ah, those tolerant liberals.

And polite, too.

BlackWidow said:
I love it when Tweetie goes off on people. It is called Hardball!

More like “no balls.”

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ga-supreme-court/1197596.html

Chris Matthews is the most disgusting person on t.v., well since Keith Olbermann got the boot.

MSNBC is going down the septic tank with all the hypocracy and disgusting rhetoric which their pundits/commentators/political analysts. Maybe that is why MSNBC got rid of Olbermann because Olbermann did some self reflecting after the horrific shootings in Tuscon and wanted to change MSNBC’s direction with all the hypocracy & political rhetoric by taking the Pledge – never mind, it was probably because Keith Olbermann lost what was left of his ability to think after Bill O’Reilly scored the upcoming interview with President Obama and at all times, just moments before Super Bowl Sunday.

It indeed does seem that President Obama is fed up with the rhetoric (political and otherwise) especially coming out of the mouths and fingers of his fellow Dems, as he said to all of America at the Memorial in Tuscon, Arizona on January 12, 2011, and that went for MSNBC as well – just ask Olbermann.

Chris Matthews needs to learn how to treat his GUESTS, he is beyond rude and frankly needs to go keep Olbermann company for a while and do some self reflecting.

Come on MSNBC can’t you see that America and the World at large is tired of the way you do business and and allow your pundits to act and treat fellow Americans who happen to have a difference of opinion when it comes to politics, well when it comes to quite a number of things actually. America is divided enough because of the serious ongoing issue of race relations and race card playing, which makes it seem quite achievable to get grown men and women to stop all the political rhetoric, petty name calling (i.e. Balloon head) and down right rudeness, etc. Civility, is this what MSNBC calls civility? Take a look at how Chris Matthews conducted himself in this segment. He doesn’t have an ounce of civility in him imo.

my God sometimes we wonder why we read so many extreme right nuts in this page, we see that our country is moving to a bigot nation, what a shame

Chrissie’s tirade is typical liberal bunk – attribute something to your oppoenent that she did not actually say and go after her for it.

Bachmann did not say that the Founders eliminated slavery, but that one of the Founders, John Quincy Adams, opposed slavery and helped bring about its demise. This is a true fact: “John Quincy Adams (July 11, 1767-February 23, 1848) spent most of his youth and adult life in public service to the United States, as senator, diplomat, secretary of state, president, and congressman. He made his greatest contribution to his country after his presidency, while serving in the United States House of Representatives as a staunch opponent of slavery and expansionist war.”

Clearly the person with a head full of helium, or maybe just hot air, is Chrissie.

On the same show Jonathan Capehart, a columnist for the Washington Post who is himself black, claimed it was racist to call slaves 3/5 of a person. In fact the 35ths compromise was designed to lessen the political power of slave holding states which wanted slaves counted as a whole person. In Capehart’s view granting more power to slave holding states was the better course. But it is Bachmann who is the ballon head for correctly referring to early efforts to end slavery as well as the false claim that John Quincy Adams was a founding father–Bachman called Adams a forefather not a founding father.

ChiliPeppersFan said:
it’s a shame cuz you seem like a smart guy and all you guys do is apologize for the dimwits leading your teaparty. she said john quincy adams who more than 10 years before the civil war.
what the hell is wrong with you people?

ok man. she mentioned one guy by name: john quincy adams. i know wiki is not authoritative, but lets agree its at least close:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Quincy_Adams
specifically the “enemy of slavery” section.
and we do know that there was an accomodation to allow slavery. not all the founding fathers were slave owners or approved of it. many presidents were. so her point that some founding fathers attempted to end slavery would be valid. we also know that 8 northern states by 1804 had abolished slavery by law; does that indicate some founding father attitude toward slavery? i.e. lets say “working to end it”? i dont know if she used the modifier “some” when discussing the founding fathers, but is that REALLY relevent to the greater point? or are you just assuming she doesnt KNOW that some were, some werent. shouldnt we give someone the benefit of the doubt? i mean some congress people think the mars rover can find the astronauts flag, and some think an island can sink with too many people on it. wouldt they be in line for the dumbest prize ahead of someone who perhaps forgot to use a pronoun? i dont know. thats your call. peace bro.

oh and i really dont know why folks on the left dont like to accomodation made. i mean they sacrificed the few (the slaves people hood) for the good of the many: creating and forming the country, greater good for all obviously, some got screwed. aint that what we are supposed to do, under your guys bootheals?? sacrifice for the good of all. some gotta take it on the chin. thats what you preach. hey, some folks just gotta pay a whole lot more taxes for the good of all. some folks just dont count as people for the good of all. similar concepts. both groups, rich people and black folks, have some of their liberty taken away by the state. the blacks took it in arse for all of us. good socialists. and seems the left should like the whole concept. ironic.