Posted on 04/26/2014 10:39:08 AM PDT by xzins
A prominent black leader is coming to the defense of embattled Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, who was pilloried on Thursday after the New York Times published a quote by him referencing slavery.
“He wasn’t talking so much about black folks, but about the harm and damage that the leftist socialism has done to blacks,” said former U.N. Ambassador Alan Keyes, who also is a columnist for WND.
Ammon Bundy, Cliven Bundy’s son, told WND that the quotes were taken out of context and that his father was commiserating over the poor situation in which blacks find themselves because of oppressive government programs, regulations and practices.
Keyes said that was evident.
“I find it appalling that we basically have a history of the leftist liberalism that wants to extinguish black people by abortion [and] destroying the family structure,” Keyes told WND. “All of these things if you just look at the effects, you would say this was planned by some racist madman to destroy the black community.”
Then when somebody comes along to comment on that damage, the leftists all scream “racism,” he said.
“I think it’s time somebody started to recognize the racism that exists in its effects – the hard leftist ideology using the black community for their sacrificial lamb, for their sick ideology. It’s time we called them what they are,” he said.
“Now it’s racist to point it out.”
(Excerpt) Read more at libertynewsonline.com ...
Maybe people like that get paid per word or number of posts.
I tend to agree with your general point - I believe we destroy the evil by a focused laser, not with the locomotive you mentioned elsewhere.
Take Jackie Robinson - if he had blown up over his mistreatment, which anybody would say he had every right to do, he would not have accomplished what he did. He focused on making his point in the way he was capable of making it - on the field. Once that laser punched through, the wall began to crumble - and all those terrible rules he had to abide by came tumbling down eventually.
That’s how I see this situation - Bundy should focus his attention and ire where he is capable of punching through - on his grazing rights and the mistreatment by BLM. Punching that through in this high profile situation would go a long way toward destroying those rules. Those “rules” are there because they work for the liberals, when we win in spite of the rules, the rules begin to crumble.
But the truth did not advance the ball - period! He has lost support, rightly or wrongly, and he has voluntarily given the left ammunition.
See - here you are arguing whether or not Bundy told the truth - and that has no bearing on his case. His case, the tyrannical violation of his grazing easement, would be the beginning of a flood - if not for this distraction. All the passion has dissipated from those with large enough microphones to make a difference. It is fruitless to argue whether or not they should have been so affected, they were - that’s the truth, it is reality. His could have been the high-profile case to start the dominoes falling on top of the BLM and other federal agencies.
So what, his words were true? What good did it do? Strategically, it doesn’t matter what millions of Americans agree with - what matters is what advances the ball. This didn’t.
No kidding. I was called a racist for my comments.
bump for later
In part I quote this.
BTW -I admire Cliven Bundy in what he's doing, has done and is trying to do... but I think he foolishly made a large strategic mistake.
I would think that most contributors here would rather Rancher Bundy had not brought up the negro situation. However in the application of the First Amendment to the Constitution, he is perfectly within his rights.
Now this poses a distinct divide in thinking here. Sadly it is between two factions who generally love their country. The two trains of thought seem to be this:
(1) Use the First Amendment and go ahead and "damn the torpedoes."
(2) Carefully play the game to avoid the politically correct ninnies and much of a corrupt media.
Ok, so Rancher Bundy spoke out as he saw fit. To use that delightful phrase, they were "on him like wheat on rice." It is a matter of tactics and one which I am unable to define which is the best one. The rhetorical question is: How best to beat the rotters who despise ordinary Americans. Law abiding folks who just speak their piece.
These are times to try men's souls.
Thomas Paine (1739-1809)
If we do not hang together we shall surely hang apart.
Benjamin Franklin (1766-1790).
Oh lordy, forgive the rant.
If they really want to stamp out what they keep calling racism we’re going to have to get honest with each other and come to some understandings and work out the misunderstandings between our races. There are master at workt trying to keep the dissension going for profit and political reasons. We need to identify them and call them on it.
‘“I find it appalling that we basically have a history of the leftist liberalism that wants to extinguish black people by abortion [and] destroying the family structure,” Keyes told WND. “All of these things if you just look at the effects, you would say this was planned by some racist madman to destroy the black community.”’
BINGO!
“Oh lordy, forgive the rant” LOL - forgiven.
No doubt, Bundy has the right.
The reasons I say it was poor strategy are these:
1 - he had support flocking to his side - some of it from some pretty big microphones capable of pushing it over the top - they have fled, rightly or wrongly, they are gone.
2 - the liberals and Reid are using his statements (twisting them to be sure, but predictably) to discredit him and to change the focus to something they are more able to control.
3 - there was no possible upside.
See my earlier response evoking Jackie Robinson. He didn’t damn the torpedoes, but followed unjust discrimination rules so as not to become the issue, in order to win his fight and helped destroy those very rules he had to chafe under.
That was overturned. They tried to go back to claims court on issues they said were not addressed, but were denied. They also appealed to Supreme Court but their case was not accepted. Seems to be over.
http://americanstewards.us/hage-v-us/191-other-documents/493-hage-v-united-states
There are links to documents as well as the summary.
Bundy is still alive.
That's better than it has worked out for others.
As long as he is news, he will likely stay alive.
What you don't get is that the Federal tactic is one of isolation and elimination. Bundy has not been isolated unless those who recognize what is going on leave. If you want to leave, remember what Sam Adams said, and go.
Bundy also understands a lone rancher, even with his family and a few thousand supporters isn't going to be able to change things. He understands that unless people --and a lot of them-- recognize that the Federal overreach goes far beyond one rancher in Nevada, he is going to be eliminated--so he pointed out the largest group, being done the greatest harm, at the expense of the most people in hopes (perhaps) of getting a wider base of support.
Well, we see what happened. The enemedia played the dog-eared racism card, the pundits scattered, and people all over are decrying Bundy for touching on the unspeakable subject, even though they had to edit his remarks to make him look like he might be racist so they could fling the label at him.
Understand? NO, I don't think so.
You are one of the ones with your panties screwed up because it might look like Bundy made a racist remark and now you can't support him. You are all hung up on appearances and not on substance, and in a world where appearances are what the media slaps up on the news or misquotes in print, the media can change those at will.
That is EXACTLY what the enemies of freedom want. They WANT people to run from the issue of how LBJ and the Democrats put a significant portion of a demographic back on the plantation.
They want the taxpayers to look away, even barely a week since tax day, and not see how the trillions they have contributed has gone to the destruction of the family--how instead of John Boy and the Waltons, the poor in this family have become da hood, bastardy, and mayhem, and the taxpayers gladly won't look, because with the excuse that it is racist to do so, they can ignore the destruction, safe in the illusion that the 'poor' are taken care of by the Government, that their tax money goes for something good.
With the guidance of the MSM, they will flee back to the comfort of their own chains and ignore the disquiet that comes from standing on the brink of realizing that things are not as they should be.
Instead of bearing the standard, those content to settle for the meme flee the flag.
Instead of saying, YES! this is the largest group in Federal Bondage (next to the taxpayer), they'll howl that he had the temerity to point it out.
The man is trying to stay alive. Like most of the Cowboys I have known, he is probably shocked by the number of people who would cut and run from the issue: Federal overreach-- especially when he brings up the most glaring example.
Yet the pansy pundits and summer soldiers tiptoe around that same issue and would let Bundy be thrown to the wolves.
What winnable battle? What issue is small enough to win and yet large enough to demand the Government change? What issue affects enough people to have gravitas, but not enough to be too big? It isn't grazing rights, because most of the people will say "they came for the cattle ranchers, but I wasn't one of those..."
The BLM will be back at the Bundy Ranch--that's guaranteed-- if they aren't pooping and snooping in the hills already. When you and others like you let the demonization proceed, they'll make their move. It'll be tragic: a fire, a 'gas explosion', whatever, and the people who perpetrate it will investigate it and tell us what a tragedy it was.
To win, to stop the Government from seizing land, giving private property away (Riverton, Wyoming), and other outrageous excesses, will take millions of people, not just the handful there, and Bundy pointing out that despite the illusion of 'freedom', we are all slaves to the Government, should be the standard to bear, even as we focus on this small fight.
Instead, you run from the colors to await a smaller battle instead of try to rally support for the larger fight coming.
If you play along with the agitprop and let Bundy be marginalized, rather than focus while he tries to wake people up, the only question is one of who will be next?
Two different cases - the one you cite is, indeed, the counter-suit, Hage v U.S., which was narrowly defined and argued regarding water rights.
The one I cited was the original case brought against Hage, U.S. v Hage, which is the much larger, and more important, case. I mistakenly assumed it was the counter-suit because of the heat with which the judge reprimanded the feds.
I’m not sure of where the case you cited stands, since it was remanded back for reconsideration - given the strength of the judge’s ruling in U.S. v Hage, I would be interested in hearing how it turned out.
Sorry - you don’t understand the first point of my argument. I have never once concerned myself with whether or not the remarks were racist. That has no bearing on the situation. What they were was distracting. So don’t try to put me in your easy little box so you can beat me about the head and shoulders - I’m not that guy, and you have know clue about who I am.
I don’t care WHAT he said, I care that he said something off-topic that had no upside, and was predictably incendiary.
We can’t win the fight by taking on lightbulbs and toilets, and land, and automobiles, and handouts, etc. etc. etc all at once. We CAN win by focusing on the most winnable and eroding the feds’ wrongful exercise of power. Then on to the next, and the next and the next.
Or, we can fight them all at once and make no progress. Bundy tried to broaden the front, when a focused victory was close.
Please try to understand my argument before trying to refute it. I am not making the argument you seem to think I am, nor am I motivated by the things you think I am.
No, YOU didn’t expand the fight - Bundy tried to in a strategically bad move.
Yes, I will.
Bundy knows this and isn't trying to broaden the scope of the fight, but to get more support, more people aware that they are affected, more people who will stand up and fight their own battles when that time comes and still lend the support of numbers now.
The more people who are aware, the less likely Bundy fades off the front page into the abyss of media obscurity to be dealt with by the Government in the shadows.
You are thinking tactically, Bundy strategically. We have fought the little fights, some wins, some losses, and while we congratulate ourselves on occasion for cutting a wart off the nose of the beast, the beast is bigger than ever.
Personally, I don't agree with his timing, either, but we are where we are, and opportunity knocks.
Yep ... long past time to call bullcrap EVERY TIME some leftist creep tries to play the race card.
No, you misread me and the situation.
You cannot win the larger war without winning this. I have never said this was it - win this and walk away, so don’t bother tossing that tripe again.
Bundy was winning, the folks were coming to his support in droves, he had media megaphones on his side, it was becoming a big deal. There was no need to try to get a larger army, it was moving his way - and a groundswell was building. No more.
Let’s just see where this goes. If Bundy continues to gather momentum and wins his point and helps the larger fight - I will be the first to admit I was wrong. If Bundy becomes a footnote, without credibility, his case dead and forgotten, or at least unremarked, then you admit you were wrong.
I think, just by watching the threads here and watching other news sources, that I am pretty safe.
I think we are trying to fight the same battle here. If you are familiar with the Hage case, it was a resounding victory for Hage and a serious thumping of BLM, USFS, and one other federal agency, I believe. The judge handed them a serious defeat. But it was done without any but the vitally interested (like my brother) knowing anything about it - wart on the nose of the beast.
Bundy was getting attention, and support, lots of it, which is why his timing, as you say, was so bad. This was shaping up to be a very public thrashing of the BLM, Harry Reid and the feds. I think that moment has passed us by now, sadly; and for no good reason.
I think, realistically, that the Red River grab is the next best chance.
He doesn't need any more there, the BLM backed down (for now).
But if any result there is going to matter, then there needs to be a larger campaign against Federal Overreach.
Which is precisely why the MSM had to edit his remarks and then claim they were not something they were not. Even the edit didn't hold up to the racism smears if you thought about it.
I don't think Bundy has been as hurt here as the (Democrat and shaky 'little c' conservative) media would have us think.
Even his bodyguard came out and said he is no racist, Alan Keyes supports him, and the battle lines have been drawn along the ranks of the usual suspects--again.
The resistance to the Red River land grab attempt is riding the groundswell Bundy started, but his later remarks may yet produce beneficial spinoffs in a multi-front conflict which affects virtually everything. Property rights are just what is most visible at the moment.
Whether his ranch is taken away, whatever happens to him, he will remain relevant for getting the issue of Federal Overreach in the open and for showing the people that if they can muster enough, good enough, determined enough people in protest--and get the word out, even armed Government agents will back down.
The battles of Lexington and Concord were hardly serious victories in and of themselves, but the shot heard around the world changed the shape of the conflict to come.
While the current fights are over Federal Land Grabs, if anything is to be more than a footnote, there will be many more fights on many more fronts before this is over.
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.