With the usual assist from the left-wing noise machine.
Let’s stipulate that Cliven Bundy is a racist. Let’s also assume, if only to save time, that he’s Islamophobic, homophobic and transphobic. So what? Does that make criticizing the Bureau of Land Management “racist” or “homophobic”?
During my battles with Canada’s “human rights” commissions, defenders of the racket liked to point out that the people it targeted were generally pretty unsavory. And I’d respond that the reason the standard representation of justice in statuary is a blindfolded lady is because justice is supposed to be blind: If you run a red light and hit a pedestrian, it makes no difference whether the pedestrian you hit is Nelson Mandela or Cliven Bundy. Or at least it shouldn’t: one of the basic building blocks of civilized society is equality before the law.
Likewise, if what the Bureau of Land Management is doing is wrong, the fact that Cliven Bundy is a racist sexist homophobe whateverphobe doesn’t make it right – any more than at Ruby Ridge FBI sniper Lon Horiuchi shooting Vicki Weaver in the back of the head as she was cradling her ten-month-old baby and running away from him is made right by the fact that she allegedly had “white supremacist” sympathies. As I wrote last week, I’ve little doubt that, in the era before cellphone video, the bureaucratic enforcers would have been happy to off Bundy and then come up with a reason why it doesn’t matter. At Waco, there were supposedly children being abused. So Generalissimo Janet Reno killed them all, and now they’re not being abused. In that sense, Mr Bundy is a lucky man: He got to live, and to trash his own reputation rather than having the feds do it for him.
Not so fast there, Mark; I wouldn’t assume too much about whether or not the feds “did it for him.”
While I was at the Bundy Ranch on the 19th, I heard that a New York Times reporter who turned out to be Adam Nagourney was in camp seeking an interview with Cliven Bundy. I sought him out and found him and his photographer at the stage area that had been used the day before down by the river for the barbeque. The regular 1:00 PM press conference was in session, and the NYT was the only “press” there, although these sessions have lately been the vehicle by which folks who come to visit get to ask questions of Mr. Bundy.
I knew instantly that Nagourney’s presence meant trouble because the NYT only sends regulars like him when the Mandarin class wants to craft a narrative. I was standing to the rear of the crowd while this was going on, so I didn’t hear much. After it was over I approached Nagourney about the speeches that would be given at five o’clock, including my own regarding the Jenny Award. I gave him my card. He demurred, saying that he had a deadline and wouldn’t be able come to back for the Oath Keeper presentation. He did seem quite rushed. I was perplexed when the article didn’t appear the next day, or the next. I should have realized that he already had his story and that the editors were merely reworking it to seek the maximum political damage that it could do to the “enemies of the people” such as Rand Paul.
Finally, the Grey Lady grunted, strained, and produced this misshapen meme-progeny: “A Defiant Rancher Savors the Audience That Rallied to His Side.”
HOAX EXPOSED: Full Clip Of Cliven Bundy’s Non-Racist, Pro-Black, Pro-Mexican, Anti-Government Remarks Vs. NYTimes’ Deceptively Edited Version
Watch Bundy explain how we need to keep things from going backwards for blacks, and how the Federal government has created a neo-slave class via entitlement dependency that is so bad it is arguably worse than plantation slavery was. It is 100% clear that Cliven Bundy is not saying that blacks should be slaves picking cotton, but that the Federal government has created conditions for them so terrible, that their current situation may actually be worse. (If you are person of low intelligence, the fact that that is his point might be too hard for you to understand.) And he’s not blaming blacks for the issues of abortions, and crime and broken families, he’s blaming the Feds. This is the exact opposite of a racist, this is an advocate for the welfare and best interests of blacks. And just as importantly, you’ll (see) at the end of the video he gives passionate praise and defense of hispanic illegal aliens, lauding them for “better family structures than most white peoples’” Racist? Why is he praising Mexicans as better than whites, if he’s some sort of white supremacist racist?. Take a hike all you lying, character-assassinating, leftist pieces of dog shit.
Seconded, with bells on and magazines loaded.
Guys, while we watch in disgust as weak-kneed “moderate” conservatives predictably skitter away again from principle for their perpetually-hoped-for pat on the head from liberal-fascist diabolicals for being good little PC poodles (a pat on the head they never seem to receive), we need to remember something: all this was inevitable, and it was no accident; this is how our enemies operate.
Anybody who didn’t smell this noxious manipulation coming from a mile away simply hasn’t been paying attention these last several decades. Not to minimize the Phase One victory for the forces of freedom or anything, but it’s still early days here, and the Alinsky-Obama regime hasn’t by any means shot all the bolts from this particular quiver yet. The enemy is playing the long game, of course and as usual; this is battlespace preparation, and nothing more nor less. Remember: all they really have to do is discredit Bundy in the eyes of their own base to adequately justify the action they really want and intend to take. The rest of us can argue about it till the cows come home (sorry) for all they care: Reid and son will have their lucrative ChiCom/green weenie land grab; the BLM will remain every bit as powerful as before; and the Bundys and the militia will still be rendered just as hors de combat, in one way or another.
Media Matters and the NYT are propaganda arms of the federal enemies of Constitutional government; ever-reliable hack Nagourney was sent to the Bundy ranch to gather not news but ammunition for his federal masters. The only proper, the only possible response to every man Jack of them remains: FUCK YOU.
A question for Milquetoast Conservatives update! Still want to play along with them and act all contrite when they hurl the race card in your teeth? Because in the end, you’re going to have to renounce…well, everything before they’re satisfied.
Yet here is the point where, for all its breadth and analytic power, the liberal racial analysis collapses onto itself. It may be true that, at the level of electoral campaign messaging, conservatism and white racial resentment are functionally identical. It would follow that any conservative argument is an appeal to white racism.
That’s Jonathan Chait, pretending to reasonableness while actually…well, I’ll let Tuccile explain it:
Chait then documents some of the more thoroughly dishonest attempts to attribute racist motives to conservatives, especially by MSNBC, whose commentators apparently see hidden hoods in every elephant lapel pin. He also discusses that network’s special ability to get under thin GOP skin.
Chait then goes on to pseudo-scientifically do what he seemed to criticize just paragraphs earlier: link support for not just Republicans but also for small goverrnment ideas to America’s history of slavery. He does this based on one study of political habits and history in counties of the Old South.
And here we are again: No need for debate, it’s all about internalized racism.
Chait is very much a Red Team vs Blue Team thinker—deep down, you’re one, or you’re the other. He marinates at New York Magazine, among like-minded thinkers, for whom small government ideas and the Republican Party have largely been “written out of the American civic religion.” Everybody who disagrees is tainted by slavery in Mississippi.
You go right ahead and denounce Bundy with all your scrawny, dwindling might if you wish. Somberly nod your head in agreement with the spurious and utterly false charge of “racism” on his part and declare him persona non grata, his views “offensive” and “outrageous” and “unacceptable”; lament that maybe there’s some small, infinitesimal grain of truth to them, but that they were expressed “clumsily.” Daintily avert your gaze from the skullduggery–the selective editing, the overplayed hysteria, the obvious core dishonesty–as you try to reestablish your own credibility with people who will never, ever grant you a single shred of it.
But know this: you’re doing their insidious work for them. If the country is to be saved at last, it won’t be because of anything you’ve done; it will be in spite of it. And no thanks whatever will be due you from the people out there who were actually fighting back and enduring the slings and arrows of outrageous liars…while you were diligently helping the archers reload.
No flinching update! As you would rightly expect, Muir gets it. Another question for the MCs: when the hell are you stupes ever going to learn, anyway? Figure it out already, ferchrissakes.