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.
“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.