Watch a C-SPAN Caller Tear Into the Democratic Socialists of America's Co-Chair 89%

By Matt Vespa74%

7/16/2026, 12:15:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 30 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Biased Writer Voice, and Hasty Generalization, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 60.5% saturation with 214 hits. Analysis detected 1,458 faulty-reasoning hits from 354 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 81.9% and a BS Rank of 89% (2,482 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 88.70% of the article peer group.

Here’s the thing, socialists. 
Most people can read a history book. 
Some have fled left-wing hellholes to build a better life here, doing it the right way. 
They know these are failed policies. 
They recognize that the faces of this movement were snake oil salesmen, and that only misery, death, and totalitarianism await those foolish enough to follow these people. 
The Democratic Socialists of America’s co-chair was on C-Span’s Washington Journal recently and did not expect this caller, who decided to disembowel the organization’s entire reason for existing. 
DSA co-chair Ashik Siddique just had to sit there and take it, because this woman saw right through him (via Mediaite): 
A female immigrant called into C-SPAN on Tuesday and went off on Democratic Socialists of America co-chair Ashik Siddique for peddling a twisted anti-American ideology that she said only leads to “misery and death.” 
The woman named Denise told Siddique she believed Americans will reject the DSA playbook, despite recent primary victories by socialist candidates. 
“In the U.S. we’re not going to be fooled by people like you, we are not. 
There is a reason why everybody is trying to get here, this is the only place in the world where if you work hard, you can make it,” Denise said. 
“And that’s what I did, coming here with nothing and made it. 
So the idea of democratic socialism is trying to put lipstick on a pig  we’re not going to take it.” 
Denise was then asked where she moved to the U.S. from; she said Haiti. 
Siddique sat quietly as she ripped socialism some more. 
“Socialism is the worst thing that can exist in the world, and they know it,” she said. 
“It leads to misery and death. 
That’s what it is.” 
She added, “There’s a reason why we wanna come here, it’s because you can make it.” 
Nicely done, Denise. 
DSA wants to abolish the Senate. 
It's nonsense. 
I mean, we all know what their game plan is: destroy America from within. 
And they're using the Democrats as their vessel. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 12.4%Matt Vespa: 6.0%Townhall: 5.3%Confirmation Bias12.4%This article: 0.0%Matt Vespa: 0.7%Townhall: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 13.0%Matt Vespa: 2.5%Townhall: 2.8%Availability Heuristic13.0%This article: 4.5%Matt Vespa: 0.8%Townhall: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic4.5%This article: 0.0%Matt Vespa: 1.1%Townhall: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 10.5%Matt Vespa: 0.8%Townhall: 1.7%Overconfidence Bias10.5%This article: 3.4%Matt Vespa: 8.3%Townhall: 11.2%Framing Effect3.4%This article: 0.0%Matt Vespa: 0.4%Townhall: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Vespa: 0.2%Townhall: 0.3%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Vespa: 0.1%Townhall: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 7.9%Matt Vespa: 1.1%Townhall: 1.4%Optimism Bias7.9%This article: 20.6%Matt Vespa: 2.2%Townhall: 1.9%Pessimism Bias20.6%This article: 60.5%Matt Vespa: 14.0%Townhall: 13.5%Negativity Bias60.5%This article: 3.4%Matt Vespa: 1.3%Townhall: 1.8%Self-Serving Bias3.4%This article: 0.0%Matt Vespa: 1.3%Townhall: 1.8%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 2.5%Matt Vespa: 0.1%Townhall: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias2.5%This article: 16.7%Matt Vespa: 4.9%Townhall: 4.6%In-Group Bias16.7%This article: 0.0%Matt Vespa: 2.9%Townhall: 3.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.8%Matt Vespa: 2.0%Townhall: 1.8%Halo Effect0.8%This article: 0.0%Matt Vespa: 1.7%Townhall: 0.9%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Vespa: 0.0%Townhall: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 7.9%Matt Vespa: 1.0%Townhall: 1.3%Recency Bias7.9%This article: 0.0%Matt Vespa: 0.8%Townhall: 0.6%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Vespa: 0.1%Townhall: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 14.7%Matt Vespa: 6.2%Townhall: 5.0%Ad Hominem14.7%This article: 7.6%Matt Vespa: 1.3%Townhall: 2.0%Straw Man7.6%This article: 0.0%Matt Vespa: 3.7%Townhall: 4.4%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 8.5%Matt Vespa: 2.0%Townhall: 1.9%False Dilemma8.5%This article: 2.3%Matt Vespa: 2.2%Townhall: 1.6%Slippery Slope2.3%This article: 0.0%Matt Vespa: 0.3%Townhall: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 30.5%Matt Vespa: 9.4%Townhall: 9.1%Hasty Generalization30.5%This article: 0.0%Matt Vespa: 0.5%Townhall: 0.6%Red Herring0.0%This article: 4.0%Matt Vespa: 1.4%Townhall: 1.3%Bandwagon4.0%This article: 56.8%Matt Vespa: 8.6%Townhall: 11.1%Appeal to Emotion56.8%This article: 8.2%Matt Vespa: 2.4%Townhall: 2.2%Begging the Question8.2%This article: 1.7%Matt Vespa: 1.9%Townhall: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)1.7%This article: 0.0%Matt Vespa: 0.5%Townhall: 0.6%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 11.6%Matt Vespa: 2.0%Townhall: 1.5%Burden of Proof11.6%This article: 0.0%Matt Vespa: 0.1%Townhall: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Vespa: 0.2%Townhall: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 7.9%Matt Vespa: 2.3%Townhall: 1.4%Anecdotal7.9%This article: 0.0%Matt Vespa: 0.2%Townhall: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 5.9%Matt Vespa: 1.8%Townhall: 2.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation)5.9%This article: 0.0%Matt Vespa: 0.0%Townhall: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Vespa: 0.1%Townhall: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Vespa: 0.1%Townhall: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Vespa: 0.0%Townhall: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Vespa: 0.2%Townhall: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 7.1%Matt Vespa: 3.0%Townhall: 3.4%Unattributed Quote7.1%This article: 9.6%Matt Vespa: 2.6%Townhall: 3.0%Quote-first Misdirection9.6%This article: 44.1%Matt Vespa: 18.5%Townhall: 16.1%Biased Writer Voice44.1%This article: 1.7%Matt Vespa: 4.3%Townhall: 5.6%Indoctrination1.7%This article: 0.0%Matt Vespa: 0.7%Townhall: 0.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 25.7%Matt Vespa: 13.0%Townhall: 13.8%Politically Right Leaning Bias25.7%This article: 0.0%Matt Vespa: 4.9%Townhall: 5.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

354 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker34%attributed speech232writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageDenise • 16 words • 0.0% coverageDenise • 30 words • 0.0% coverageDenise • 12 words • 0.0% coverageDenise • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageDenise • 17 words • 100.0% coverageDenise • 6 words • 0.0% coverageDenise • 4 words • 0.0% coverageDenise • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Denise

100%flagged-word coverage
122 attributed words100% of attributed speech94% writer coverage
0%35.0%70.0%Biased Writer Voice-67.2 ptsWriter: 67.2%Denise: 0.0%0.0%Politically Right Leaning -39.2 ptsWriter: 39.2%Denise: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-14.7 ptsWriter: 14.7%Denise: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote+10.5 ptsWriter: 3.4%Denise: 13.9%13.9%Indoctrination-2.6 ptsWriter: 2.6%Denise: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.