Glenn Beck Explodes At Chris Matthews About Bachmann (VIDEO)

[AsahinaKimi]

Glenn Beck exploded at Chris Matthews for his comments denigrating Michele Bachmann and her views of American history.

Matthews called Bachmann a "balloon head" on Tuesday for saying that the Founding Fathers "worked tirelessly to end slavery." He noted that, besides the fact that many of the founders owned slaves, and that slavery only ended nearly a hundred years after the founding of America, slavery was also protected in the Constitution via the three-fifths clause, which stated that slaves would be counted as three-fifths of all other people when it came to determining how many seats in Congress each state was due.

Beck called the attacks on Bachmann "disgraceful" and said they were happening "because she could run for president of the United States and she could win."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/28/glenn-beck-chris-matthews-bachmann_n_815610.html

=================================================================================
HE IS SUCH an ass...

[Whoa_Nelly]

1. Well, now we know for sure

Beck is a Teabagger :eyes:

[Rex]

2. Well at least he isn't telling his followers to kill people, right now.

Fuck Glenn.

[emulatorloo]

3. "she could win!"

Hate to break it to you Glenn, you are a balloon head too.

[Mojeoux]

4. Yeah Glen, that's why. She could win, so when she says stupid stuff, we fear her.

I can't believe he thinks Ms Crazy Eyes, could be the president. Really?
I know we elected Reagen and 2 Bushes, but are we really THIS stupid???

[emulatorloo]

15. Bachmann makes Bush 2 look like a genius. And a moderate.

[JVS]

5. Who knew that the College of the Holy Cross was in the ivy league?

[Cleita]

6. Are there views of history?

I didn't know that. I thought history was facts from sources like documents. Apparently, today you can make up your own facts and you don't need any sources. I think once upon a time it was called historical fiction or in her case fantasy fiction.

[Fuzz]

7. Don't you just LOVE how he picks and chooses parts of the speech?

Americans! your republican politics, not less than your republican religion, are flagrantly inconsistent. You boast of your love of liberty, your superior civilization, and your pure christianity, while the whole political power of the nation, (as embodied in the two great political parties,) is solemnly pledged to support and perpetuate the enslavement of three millions of your countrymen. . . . You profess to believe 'that, of one blood, God made all nations of men to dwell on the face of all the earth,' and hath commanded all men, everywhere to love one another; yet you notoriously hate, (and glory in your hatred,) all men whose skins are not colored like your own. You declare, before the world, and are understood by the world to declare, that you 'hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal; and are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; and that, among these are, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness'; and yet, you hold securely, in a bondage, which according to your own Thomas Jefferson, 'is worse than ages of that which your fathers rose in rebellion to oppose,' a seventh part of the inhabitants of your country.

Fellow-citizens! there is no matter in respect to which, the people of the North have allowed themselves to be so ruinously imposed upon, as that of the pro-slavery character of the Constitution. In that instrument I hold there is neither warrant, license, nor sanction of the hateful thing; but interpreted, as it ought to be interpreted, the Constitution is a GLORIOUS LIBERTY DOCUMENT.

Allow me to say, in conclusion, notwithstanding the dark picture I have this day presented, of the state of the nation, I do not despair of this country. There are forces in operation, which must inevitably, work the downfall of slavery. 'The arm of the Lord is not shortened,' and the doom of slavery is certain. I, therefore, leave off where I began, with hope.


Kind of puts those comments in perspective. Unfortunately his idiot audience will never see it, read it, or even question it.

[bergie321]

8. To be fair to Bachman and Beck

The founding fathers did try to treat slaves as people. They got 3/5 of the way there and I am sure, for Bachman and Beck, a 60% takes a lot of hard work.

:sarcasm:

[JVS]

9. The discourse between the two is too error-prone to be coherent.

John Quincy Adams was a foe of slavery. Bachmnn actually got that right.

John Quincy Adams was not a founding Father. He was 22 at the time of the Constitution's signing. His father, John Adams was a founding father. Bachmann is wrong here.

To speak of the Founding Fathers aggregate as being pro-or anti-slavery is stupid. Polarizing issues don't have a consensus. If you generalize to say that the constitution's framers were pro-slavery because of the 3/5 compromise, then you would have to accept a generalization that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 demonstrated the support of congress for civil rights. Matthews is being glib and innacurate here, and Bachman is white-washing history by choosing a positive example (and one that isn't really relevant for reasons given above) and failing to acknowledge that in order for the issue to require compromise there must have also been some tireless Founding Fathers (I wish I could name them, and the fact that I can't is indicative of a general over-deference to the Founding Fathers in our educational system) who backed slavery to the hilt.

[mzmolly]

10. "she could win"

:rofl:

You keep dreaming Mr. Beck.

[Warren DeMontague]

11. Look.... calling her a "balloon head" IS sort of an unfair insult.

To balloons.

[upi402]

12. Beck is such a loon

If he exploded they'd need a hazmat team to clean than sack of crapsplat up.

[Enthusiast]

13. Fuck that weasel Nazi wannabe. nt

[boston bean]

14. what was he wearing on his hands....

he's a nut bag.