Friday, April 25, 2014

Bundy, New York Times, and The Truth

Clive Bundy: Racist?
No: Victim of New York Times
Smear and Distortions
The first question which comes to mind:

What is the New York Times?

That's a legitimate question, since the paper which claims to run "All the News that's Fit to Print" has turned into another propaganda machine which puts out "All the News that Fits the Democratic Print".

Case in point, the "racist" Cliven Bundy, who "suggested" that black people would have been better off staying slaves.

At least, the reporter gives that impression from the copy printed on April 23.

Before taking down the aggressive agenda from the foremost liberal mouth-piece in American journalism, here are couple other remarks worth noting:

Mr. Bundy’s standoff with federal rangers — propelled into the national spotlight in part by steady coverage by Fox News — has highlighted sharp divisions over the power of the federal government and the rights of landowners in places like this desert stretch of Nevada, where resentment of Washington and its sprawling ownership of Western land has long run deep.

While the reporter wants to present Fox News as some kind of marginal instigator for this conflict between individual ranchers and the federal government, a better question to ask should be:

Why didn't the New York Times report on the escalating conflicting between the Nevada rancher and the Bureau of Land Management? Too busy playing up Hillary Clinton for 2016? I wonder how much time the New York Times spent praising and unofficially crowning the former Secretary of State for the Presidency, anyway.

The article continues:

“The gather is now over,” said Craig Leff, a deputy assistant director with the Bureau of Land Management. “Our focus is pursuing this matter administratively and judicially.”       
But if the federal government has moved on, Mr. Bundy — a father of 14 and a registered Republican — has not. 
The biggest news element in that statement should be the fact that a private militia of farmers and ranchers from all over the country rallied next to Bundy and stood up to the federal government, forcing them to back away. Was this a righteous cause? Does Bundy owe taxes? And even if Bundy is in the wrong on a financial matter, did the Bureau of Land Management handle this conflict appropriately? The Times reporter could have recognized the wise discretion of the federal authorities to deescalate a trying, tension situation.
Instead, the report tells us that Bundy is a Republican. Seriously? How is the party affiliation relevant? The article never answers those questions, but instead, reports some of the most edited, and thus distorted, remarks yet:

“I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro,” he said. Mr. Bundy recalled driving past a public-housing project in North Las Vegas, “and in front of that government house the door was usually open and the older people and the kids — and there is always at least a half a dozen people sitting on the porch — they didn’t have nothing to do. They didn’t have nothing for their kids to do. They didn’t have nothing for their young girls to do.
“And because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do?” he asked. “They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton. And I’ve often wondered, are they better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things, or are they better off under government subsidy? They didn’t get no more freedom. They got less freedom.”
Wow! Controversial comments, to say the least. No wonder some Republican leaders are backing away from the guy.
But should they be so quick to distance themselves from editorialized remarks?
Bundy was not talking about all African-Americans.
He did point that they did not have much to do.
He denounced government subsidy, otherwise known as welfare. An African-American conservative activist, Star Parker, has denounced welfare, too. Is she racist?
And because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do?” he asked. “They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton.
The cotton remark was really foolish. But does that make Bundy a racist?
Before liberals jump up and downed with feigned outrage, they need to explain this remark plus the Great Society welfare state which accompanied it:
"We'll have those n-ggers voting for us for the next two hundred years." -- Lyndon Baines Johnson
Now, Bundy said "Negro". Outdated, but racist? Democratic President Johnson said "n-gger", patently offensive.
And to this day, the mainstream media refuses to call out the racist undercurrents of the LBJ's Great Society and War on Poverty, both of which turned became the Great Failure and a War on (Minority) Prosperity.
When will the New York Times call out the dark vein of intolerance which defines the Democratic Party?
Back back to Bundy, and the political correctness mantra of the New York Times. . .
Speaking of Political Correctness, was it not the African-American neurosurgeon, Dr. Ben Carson who denounced political correctness as very dangerous, because it prevents people from being able to talk to each other? By the way, Dr. Carson was the keynote speaker at the 2013 National Prayer breakfast, where a white US Senator from Alabama introduced him, and where the President of the United States, a man of mixed African-American heritage who went to Harvard and served as a state senator before becoming a US Senator himself, sat by and heard another African-American, one of the most distinguished neuro-surgeons in the country, if not the world, give a speech criticizing the President.
How far we have come in this country!
Once again, back to Bundy, the New York Times and the truth.
“And because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do?” he asked. “They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton. And I’ve often wondered, are they better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things, or are they better off under government subsidy? They didn’t get no more freedom. They got less freedom.”
This statement is inartful, to be kind. Slavery is slavery, and welfare is welfare. We should never confuse the two to make a point. More specifically, the focus needs to be about getting people off of welfare, no matter what color a person may be.
But does anyone really believe that Bundy advocates re-enslaving people? Anyone reading such outrageous inferences from that state should consider these remarks, contained in this YouTube clip, which contains the entirely of Bundy's remarks, not just what the New York Times thought was "fit to print":
... and so what I've testified to you -- I was in the Watts riot, I seen the beginning fire and I seen that last fire. What I seen is civil disturbance. People are not happy, people are thinking they don't have their freedoms, they didn't have these things, and they didn't have them.
For the record, what Bundy saw in 1965, Democratic California Governor Pat Brown only saw parts of (because he had been vacationing in Greece at the time). After Brown tried to quell the riots, he asked some of the black residents: "Don't you have enough welfare?" Really! Talk about the Democratic Party's soft bigotry of low expectations.
Then one of the black men the crowd shouted back: "We don't want welfare. We want jobs!"
How about that? Democrats were interested in keeping people dependent (Remember LBJ above), but a man, no matter what is color, does not want to be dependent.
Bundy's remarks continued:
We've progressed quite a bit from that day until now, and we sure don't want to go back. We sure don't want the colored people to go back to that point. We sure don't want these Mexican people to go back to that point. And we can make a difference right now by taking care of some of these bureaucracies, and do it in a peaceful way.

The New York Times reporter should have waited around to get the rest of the story, but didn't, since these revelations would have blasted away any hint of racism. "We have progressed" -- one would think that Progressives would esteem these developments, even coming out of the mouth of a white rancher in Nevada.

Here are some more comments from the "racist" Bundy:

Let me tell, talk to you about the Mexicans, and these are just things I know about the negroes. I want to tell you one more thing I know about the negro. When I go, went, go to Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, and I would see these little government houses, and in front of that government house the door was usually open and the older people and the kids -- and there's always at least a half a dozen people sitting on the porch. They didn’t have nothing to do. They didn’t have nothing for their kids to do. They didn’t have nothing for their young girls to do.

Now all the comments make sense, with the full context provided.

Who wrote the slanted column for the New York Times, anyway?

Perhaps more readers should contact him and ask why he left out all the remarks recognizing the accomplishments of different people in the United States.

 And because they were basically on government subsidy -- so now what do they do? They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never, they never learned how to pick cotton. And I’ve often wondered are they were better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things? Or are they better off under government subsidy?

 You know they didn’t get more freedom, they got less freedom -- they got less family life, and their happiness -- you could see it in their faces -- they wasn't happy sitting on that concrete sidewalk. Down there they was probably growing their turnips -- so that’s all government, that’s not freedom.

Then he talked about Mexican-Hispanic people, and his remarks are enlightened, not offensive at all:

 Now, let me talk about the Spanish people. You know, I understand that they come over here against our Constitution and cross our borders. But they’re here and they’re people -- and I’ve worked side by side a lot of them.

Don’t tell me they don’t work, and don’t tell me they don’t pay taxes. And don’t tell me they don’t have better family structures than most of us white people. When you see those Mexican families, they’re together, they picnic together, they’re spending their time together, and I’ll tell you in my way of thinking they’re awful nice people. And we need to have those people join us and be with us not, not come to our party.

Not only is Bundy not racist, but he has called out much of the hollow talking points from the Democratic Party which has used  time and again to discredit anyone who stands up to Big Government.

The New York Times tried to smear a rancher in Nevada with the race card. What the paper has done instead is besmirch its already dirtied reputation as one more news organ trying to carry the Democratic-liberal-agenda to an audience jaded by the left-leaning bias.

Not "All the News that's Fit to Print" But
"Only the Propaganda that Fits a Dem-Lib-Fraud Agenda"


  1. You are so reliably stupid that it was even odds that you would attempt to blame a newspaper for that racist son of a bitch's heinous remarks. Even your buddies the Kochs and Sean Hannity have run from this ignorant redneck. But not the ol' reliably stupid, fired ex-school teacher Art Schaper! Oh, no, not you, Artie! You, who accepts anonymous emails and fucks up actual policies (the Hatch Act, anyone?) in an attempt to spread lies and bullshit about a friggin' local politician! Not you, Artie, whose special brand of fringe-right wing nuttiness combined with Jesus fever is so fucking stupid as to make your outhouse of a blog a daily stop for me to get my chuckles. It's hilarious! An idiot trying to masquerade as a self-styled Andy Breitbart! It's priceless, unintended comedy and if you didn't actually exist, we'd have to make you up just so we could mock you! The reliably stupid Art Schaper, ladies and gentlemen! Artie--please!--don't ever change!

  2. This post was quite inspiring, which exposes the insipid depths of the national media to spin conservatives as racists, when the charge of racism belongs to the Democratic Party and national elites playing Big Government as Big Panacea.

    Thanks to all the freedom fighters and reporters calling out the "Vainscream Media".!

  3. Jimbo where was your outrage when the black militant called for the killing of cracker babies? I guess 2010 or 2011 is to far in the past. Let me get this straight - The Koch Brothers are evil but George Soros and the Hollywood Liberal Elite and the unions are good? Wasn't it George Soros who collaborated with the Nazis to sell the possessions of fellow jews in 1945 Budapest? Wasn't it George Soros who collapsed 4 or 5 European currencies (one of them being the Britsh pound) in the 1990s. So let me get this straight pushing Karl Marx propaganda but being for free market principles is bad? Who is in bed with the Wall Street Bankers like Goldman Sachs? It is your two heroes windbag Obama and "what does it matter?" Hillary. The most corrupt president in US history who has Nixon wondering from the grave as to why Obama doesn't get the treatment I got. Perhaps the GOP senators in 1974 had more moral values than Harry Reid and his gang. The only reason why Obama hasn't been impeached (there are numerous Constitutional reasons why he should be) is because the Democraps would rather see the Constitution and the seperation of powers destroyed than give Obama the message "Mr. President it is time for you to go". I was watching what used to be the Military Channel and the program on how Hitler came to power. The similarites to the US in 2014 are so strikingly similar. Find some group that you can blame for all the problems like the GOP, white folks, men and let's not forget #1 the evil rich. For Hitler it was the jews and the communists, the gypsies, the slavs in E. Europe etc. Good job, Jimbo keep on hating the dictators of the 20th. Century would be proud of you.

  4. Hey, Anonymous, what's with the Hitler fixation with you drooling tools? Best you can do, huh, Dumb Fuck? (BTW, Artie gets very, very pissy about "anonymous" comments, unless, of course, they act as a "source" to give him "leads" on fake scandals, controversies, etc.--you might want to leave a name next time. Until then, I'll just call you "Dumb Fuck").

  5. This comment from Canada Free Press:

    Located at:

    Posted by: Totsy

    Location: Louisiana, United States

    It's rare that you can get an outlook on something, see it for what it really is and even the Spanish and Black's are realizing that the government is not their friend and then a news media, that should always be unbiased, takes and makes into into something totally different and people who watch these medias take it for the gospel truth. I get a lot of truth from Fox news, from Breitbart but CFP is the only news media that gives you the whole story and I don't, in no way, trust our local medias because it's not too hard to see they are not truthful in a lot of news. Appreciate you highly CFP otherwise a lot of people would be completely "in the dark."


  6. Located at:

    Posted by: greatrighthope
    Location: west coast

    Mr. Bundy's comments were plain spoken and, in reference to African Americans particularly, misguided. However, even without reading the further information, a certain grace should be afforded any individual, even a tough old rancher, on the basis of generation and culture when considering the true meaning behind their words.

    Like a tourist in Europe that doesn't realize Austrians don't speak Austrian there is no malice and no wish to offend. In fact it is just an attempt to add insight that is caught up in a bit of ignorance.

    Does anyone believe that if a black guy had a beer with a Klan member he could show him where he has gone wrong? Me neither. But I am willin ta bet ma bottom dollar that a couple a Buds with any thoughtful African American out on the porch (after the steaks) and Clive would reckon that he coulda used right better words to make his point.

    No malice, no foul. Too bad about Glenn Beck. What's up with him?

    1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  7. Another Comment:

    Posted by: Helen
    Location: USA

    When THEY say 'racist!' You say, "Objection!" "Irrelevant!" And that's what you should do every time the racist project onto you their vile vitriolic hate. FWYI the NYT supported de Fuehrer in WWII! And the KKK is of the Democrats (long ago taken over by the socialist-communist - socialism is more of the creeping seeping poison whereas communism is blatant action in your face!

    Here's a short video from a young black woman on Cliven Bundy's alleged racist remarks.

  8. Another comment from Canada Free Press:

    Located at:

    Posted by: Flo/Az
    Location: Arizona

    The progressive have a way of twisting sentences and this is what has happened. Mr. Bundy had a point and the truth of what is happening or has happened in this country. Who destroyed Detroit, Michigan? Welfare, food stamp, greedy politicians and no self control and bringing children into the world teaching them to get on government subsidizes. If this is harsh but the truth. They are not the only minorities with that problem. The American Indians have not moved forward to be self sufficient and were placed on the reservations. Again the government taught them to rely on The federal government. The illegals aliens from Mexico are getting their hands wet in collecting government subsidizes and are no longer hiding. The federal government has their thumb on minorities and uses us for a pawn getting their agenda implemented. I think this scenarios is what Mr. Bundy was redefining. I truly agree with him!!!

  9. Another comment:

    Located at:

    Posted by: jerry
    Location: illinois...corrupt state

    the leftists cannot bear to hear the truth, they will vilify anyone who trys to enlighten them. the same goes for anyone who has an opinion that THEY do not approve of..just look at the basketball owner who just spoke HIS own opinion of dating a black man. All they know is to call names and never will they allow you to have a different opinion than THEIRS.

  10. Another Comment:

    Located at:

    Posted by: joe
    Location: usa

    The main point is Mr. Bundy never, never advocated sending black people back to the slavery.
    He was discussing FAMILY and black FAMILY has practically ceased to exist with US Govt. liberal/progressive/Democrat Party welfare assistance. The Party has subtracted FAMILY quite effectively from the black people receiving Govt. subsidy, and Big Govt. encourages abortions.
    I think Mr. Bundy was using History to prove his point that FAMILY brings the greatest happiness to mens hearts regardless of their plight. The blacks had strong FAMILIES while slaves and into our modern times up until the time the FAMILY units of the black dissolved which Mr. Bundy attributes to Govt. welfare. He is not alone in the view that Govt. welfare has destroyed FAMILY cohesion and for that reason the young males, due to the lack of a father at home end up incarcerated. They didn't have a father at home.
    By looking at what Mr. Bundy is saying from his perspective he is discussing FAMILY and why FAMILY is so important and in even the roughest circumstances brings happiness to men and it brought happiness to the blacks even as they were treated as chattel during that period of our countries history.
    Bottom line, the idiots at the NYT's who claim he is endorsing black people return to slavery are insane. They are just demonizing Mr. Bundy because Senator Reid showed the country he is such a traitor and made such a fool of himself in trying to please his Chicom pals by attempting to run Mr. Bundy off his land.