Posted on 04/25/2014 12:35:38 PM PDT by ColdOne
(CNSNews.com) - Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy made his offensive remarks about blacks and slavery on Saturday, but it took four days for his remarks to finally appear in the New York Times.
According to the April 24 New York Times article, Bundy promised to continue holding a daily news conference, even after his standoff with federal agents ended: "[O]n Saturday, it drew one reporter and one photographer, so Mr. Bundy used the time to officiate at what was in effect a town meeting with supporters, discussing, in a long, loping discourse, the prevalence of abortion, the abuses of welfare and his views on race."
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
No, he did not. A question is not an offensive remark.
Maybe he should have claimed victory and just gone back to ranching.
Bundy needs to stick to what he knows best, his own land issues. He is not a well spoken man with well formed opinions that he can share with the press. In other words, Bundy is not ready to be a prime time political pundit.
On the other hand, I resent Republicans who are ready t o put him in the middle of the circular firing squad.
Bundy needs to stick to what he knows best, his own land issues. He is not a well spoken man with well formed opinions that he can share with the press. In other words, Bundy is not ready to be a prime time political pundit.
On the other hand, I resent Republicans who are ready t o put him in the middle of the circular firing squad.
Setup with Harry Reid? Not sure the day Reid went on the domestic terrorist rant but be assured he knew about the racist comments before and arranged for it to be released after his rant.
It is obvious that a lot of pundits and politicians can’t tell the difference between empathy and racism. He was empathizing with the plight of black Americans that went out of the slavery frying pan and into the liberal welfare fire.
Concur, but I full well believe he was set up by the reporter. Kind of a 'rose colored glasses' thing. Can I say 'colored'???
Autonomic reflexes. They are in a rush to be the first to distance themselves from anything with keywords in them such as 'negro' 'slave' or 'conservative'...
It took them that long to figure out where to take the statement out of context to make him look bad.
“Not sure the day Reid went on the domestic terrorist rant but be assured he knew about the racist comments before and arranged for it to be released after his rant.”
Reid said that on Thursday, Bundy wondered on Saturday, and several more times since.
Really!
Who gave Bundy any authority to speak for those who were there to protest the Government excessive use of force?
These issues walk fine lines.
Cowboys may not be well spoken & eloquent, but unlike politicians, bureaucrats & dirty grey ladies, cowboys tell the truth. That’s why those of us raised in a gentler, kinder era hold them in high regard.
Any way you slice it, not being paid for working is inferior to being paid for not working. In the first scenario, they were slaves; in the second, they are masters. I'm sure Bundy is a great cattleman, but he stinks at logic.
Although it’s become commonplace, why do we have America’s premier news outlet and the majority Senate leader pooling all their resources to attack one individual.
Me thinks it’s like Mr. Smith goes to Washington where it wasn’t the lone Congressman could do but what those idiotic people might get from it /sarc
They needed time to edit to suit their agenda.
Both Susan Jones of CNW and Beck seem to share the belief anytime the New York Times makes an accusation particularly when it applies negatively to a conservative subject or personality it should be attributed to the Times as reporting a fact. Look at this lead..
Nevada rancher Clivens Bundy made his offensive remarks about blacks etc.
The facts are and the lead should have read.
New York Times allegations of rascist remarks were made by the contraversial Nevada rancher Clivens Bundy involved in a land dispute with the Obama regime after The Times had sat on the story for four days.
It is obvious that a lot of pundits and politicians can’t tell the difference between empathy and racism. He was empathizing with the plight of black Americans that went out of the slavery frying pan and into the liberal welfare fire.
Oh, yeah. Claiming, or even suggesting that blacks would be better off as slaves again is showing real empathy for them. sarc/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.