Western States, Leaders, and Citizens Form C.O.W.S in Effort to Reclaim Land and Reign in Federal Control over Western Lands

Posted by Tina

It looks like the Bundy stand-off sparked a lot more than controversy. Leaders from several Western states gathered last weekend in Utah to discuss what they believe has been overreach by the federal government. The summit was planned before the Bundy controversy but the incident added energy as representatives from nine Western states, Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Wyoming, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, and Montana gathered to discuss states rights, the land, and the Constitution:

“It’s time the states in the West come of age,” Idaho Speaker of the House Scott Bedke was quoted as saying, adding that land managed by states was being kept in far better condition than forests and rangeland controlled by the federal government. “We’re every bit as capable of managing the lands in our boundaries as the states east of Colorado.” Others said much of the land should simply be put in private hands, perhaps auctioned off to bidders with the proceeds used to pay down the federal government’s gargantuan and growing debts.

The discussions sparked a new movement of elected officials and citizens, the Coalition of Western States United Against Tyranny (C>O>W>S>) whose mission is: ” to wrest control over the vast expanses of land and wealth in the region that are unconstitutionally claimed by the Washington, D.C.-based political and bureaucratic classes.”

The state of Utah has already taken steps in this direction:

The state of Utah has taken the strongest action thus far toward ensuring that the feds comply. In 2012, lawmakers passed and the governor signed a law demanding that the federal government relinquish control over much of the estimated two-thirds of territory inside Utah’s borders it claims to control. The law specifically cited those agreements from when Utah joined the Union, threatening a lawsuit if Washington, D.C., refuses to comply.

One of the organizers, Rep Shea from the state of Washington, cites the U.S. constitution and the Federalist Papers to justify the demands of the nine western states:

Perhaps the most important issue at play in the whole land issue, though, is the U.S. Constitution. “Article 1 Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution spells out what types of property the federal government can ‘own’,” Rep. Shea continued, pointing out that, outside of a few limited exceptions, it is not constitutional for Washington, D.C., to own or control land — much less half of the Western United States, and as much as 85 percent of some states such as Nevada.

Rep. Shea also pointed to The Federalist, No. 45, which (he notes) “makes clear the intent” of America’s Founding Fathers. “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined,” the document states. “Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.”

All across America there are signs that the people still “…hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness…

Freedom has found itself a few good leaders once again. This is very good news! Put on the coffee I sense morning in America dawning.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

80 Responses to Western States, Leaders, and Citizens Form C.O.W.S in Effort to Reclaim Land and Reign in Federal Control over Western Lands

  1. Harold says:

    ” I am afraid we have awakened a sleeping giant” is a famous quote attributed to Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, after the attack on Pearl Harbor. (The actual quote was said to be “I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve.”)

    Tina, I for one optimistically believe you are right and America is slowly waking up from the continuing lost of freedom and Liberty usurped by a malfunctioning Progressive Liberal ideology.
    Clearly it is people like Harry Reid who have steadily become the true terrorist to America through their deceptive actions(actually lack of) and falsehoods of finger pointing.

  2. J. Soden says:

    The Feds proclaim they own the land, yet do not manage it other than to benefit the Fed bureaucracy.

    Nice to see the States finally stepping up to protect their residents and lands from the overreach of the Foolish Feds.

  3. Tina says:

    Agreed men.

    In Nevada particularly to suggest that cows are somehow “taking” something from the federal government and so the rancher should pay for that taking is absurd. The grasses that grow on that land are barely surviving and are likely helped by the cattle spreading (fertilized) seed. The federal government does nothing.

    Politicians like Reid do arrange for (quid pro quo?) deals for use of federal lands (by Chinese companies)…what is he paying to the government for this use?

    Give your full support to C.O.W.S. and help deliver the management of the Western lands to the states and people!

  4. Chris says:

    “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.”

    http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/04/24/us/politics/rancher-proudly-breaks-the-law-becoming-a-hero-in-the-west.html

    Your hero, ladies and gentlemen.

    • Post Scripts says:

      I know Chris…I heard that. He gives a press conference every day, but the reporters keep dropping off. When he made this doosey he was down to the last reporter. What do you want to bet he’s got more back? lol -jack

      PS Not my hero.

  5. Tina says:

    Fox News:

    Long before Cliven Bundy faced down federal agents in his dispute with the Bureau of Land Management over grazing rights, fellow Nevada rancher Raymond Yowell, an 84-year-old former Shoshone chief, watched as the BLM seized his herd.

    Adding to that, since 2008 they’ve taken his money as well — in the form of a piece of his Social Security checks.

    Yowell’s 132 head of cattle had grazed for decades on the South Fork Western Shoshone Indian Reservation in northeastern Nevada until 2002, when the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) — the same agency at odds with Bundy — seized them. The federal agency sold the cattle at auction and used the proceeds to pay off the portion of back grazing fees it claimed Yowell owed. Once the cattle was sold, the agency sent Yowell a bill for the outstanding balance, some $180,000. They’ve been garnishing his monthly Social Security checks since 2008 to satisfy the debt Yowell says he does not owe.

    “There’s a definite pattern in the West, beginning in the 1990s, maybe in the late ’80s, of what I feel are illegal cattle seizures,” Yowell said. “[Bundy’s case] is the latest example of that pattern.”

    While Bundy is defying the federal agency over fees for grazing cattle on government-owned land, Yowell’s cattle had roamed reservation land. But a 1979 Supreme Court decision held that even land designated for Indian reservations is held in trust for them, and thus subject to BLM regulation. Yowell says treaties that led to creation of the reservation granted him and other herdsmen the right to graze cattle on the land, which they did successfully for decades. The Western Shoshone say they have never relinquished their right to the territory.

    Yowell represented himself in a successful effort to win a federal injunction to stop the BLM from impounding his cattle, as well as a subsequent 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that reversed the lower court. He’s again representing himself in a petition to have the U.S. Supreme Court hear his case, in which he argues his cattle were taken without due process and in violation of multiple treaties.

    “Certainly, due process of law has not been followed in my case,” Yowell told FoxNews.com. “When we were kids going to school, learning the white way, we said the Pledge of Allegiance every morning and one of the things I remember saying is ‘equality and justice for all.’ Well that’s certainly not the case.”

    Our government has become arrogant and abusive…wake up!

  6. Tina says:

    Go ahead Chris, tell us in your own words what is so damned offensive about Bundy’s words?

  7. Peggy says:

    The New York Times is a terrible source of information known for biased editing as much as NBC. I wouldn’t believe anything they write especially with staff connected directly to the WH. They’re just paid propaganda mouth pieces for this administration.

    If the Bundy’s have an unedited audio of the interview I’d like to hear it. Until then I’m reserving my judgment of his supposed statement.

  8. Tina says:

    Peggy he said the words and explained later.

    I’m waiting to hear from Chris before commenting further.

  9. Chris says:

    Tina, if I actually have to explain to you why it’s offensive for an elderly white man to even START a sentence with the phrase “I’ll tell you what else I know about the Negro,” let alone go on to explain that the reason for the black abortion and prison population rate is “because they never learned how to pick cotton,” then go on to entertain the fact that they were better off under slavery than “government subsidy,” which is what Bundy HIMSELF is living off of at the moment…

    …Well, then, I may just have to completely give up on any notions I ever had of you being a reasonable, decent human being.

  10. Chris says:

    Peggy: “The New York Times is a terrible source of information known for biased editing as much as NBC.”

    Yes, the woman who consistently links to birther and 9/11 truther websites is going to tell me that the New York Freaking Times is a terrible source of information.

    I can’t feel anything but pity for people like this at this point.

  11. Tina says:

    The New York Freaking Times is a progressive partisan rag that is so powerful and influential it IS the news…that makes it not only powerful but dangerous to free speech and freedom generally…and that makes it a terrible, agenda driven source.

    One caveat. they have been loosing their shirts for at least a decade so their power is waning, but all of the taking heads at the alphabet channels get their “smarts” from this source. It’s pathetic.

  12. Peggy says:

    I condemn what Bundy said, BUT I also condemn our federal government and the BLM for not deeding land within states to the states and using federal laws to deny states and individuals their property rights.

    States west of the Mississippi should have clear title to their land equal to eastern states.

  13. Tina says:

    Chris as I expected you choose to cop out. “If I have to explain it to you” is a cowardly way to answer the question. I wanted you to tell me in your own words what you heard this man say. There may be a difference between what you think he said and what he was attempting to say.

    Yes the words sound bad. But no more than the words of Robert Byrd.

    And what did Harry Reid mean when he said Obama was a, “light-skinned African American with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one?”

    Or what about Joe Biden’s famous words about Obama:

    “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that’s a storybook, man.”

    Apparently Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Parren Mitchell, Charlie Rangel, Bill Clay, Ron Dellums, George Collins, Louis Stokes, Ralph Metcalfe, John Conyers, Walter Fauntroy, Robert Nix, Charles Diggs, Shirley Chisholm, Gus Hawkins, Cory Booker, Carol Moseley Braun, Mo Cowan, or Rolland Burris to nae a few were not “articulate” or “bright” or “clean” or “nice-looking” enough to consider for higher office.

    See I know Joe didn’t mean to say something disparaging and ugly…something that could be construed as bigoted or racist. But if I didn’t give a damn about finding out what he meant to say and just judged him on the words he used alone I would conclude that he was a bigot and possibly racist.

    It bugs me that people don’t care to know what the man meant by his words and don’t mind saying very damaging things about him without knowing or bothering to ask him!

    Someone writing in the Huffington Post had this to say about Biden’s remark:

    Sure, Biden’s off the cuff remarks are sometimes controversial, but you gotta love the way he adds some humor to the world of politics.

    Gotta love him! He’s funny.

    What I want is for you, and the left generally, to start cutting others the same slack you cut your own.

    Bundy was making the same observation that many others have made including blacks and including about whites. He expressed it badly but he was asking wouldn’t they (wouldn’t anyone) feel better, be happier, if they provided for themselves? Wouldn’t there be less crime and addiction (mothers with broken hearts about how their kids turned out) if the kids saw their parents working and were taught a work ethic? Isn’t there more dignity in working and providing for oneself than there is being on the dole?

    A legitimate thing to wonder about. Especially for an older man, like Byrd, raised in a time when plenty of poor white people picked cotton and nobody thought being on the dole was just another lifestyle!

    I used the words “being on the dole” for a reason. People used to have a work ethic, a moral underpinning, that would prevent them from taking a handout without offering to work for it. Almost everyone in America had that ethic…and we were better off.

    It’s a legitimate question and anyone who was interested in understanding what he said, rather than simply playing PC political games would know it.

    Bundy may have been foolish to have withheld payment but he is not entirely wrong about what the federal government has been doing either. There is more going on here than meets the eye.

  14. Peggy says:

    I also condemn Biden and Reid for their remarks about black individuals and community. They are two of the most powerful men in the US and should be held to a higher standard than a rancher who probably has very little public speaking experience.

    “Harry Reid, the Democrat Senate Majority Leader and the national government’s highest-ranking Mormon, has admitted now remarking apparently with some amazement on the nation’s highest-ranking black Democrat as being notably “light-skinned” and having “no Negro dialect unless he wanted to have one.”

    See more at: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/01/harry-reid-barack-obama.html#sthash.9CQPv7Ed.dpuf

    Joe Biden, “They’re going to put y’all back in chains.”

    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/08/vp-biden-says-republicans-are-going-to-put-yall-back-in-chains/

    Harry Reid’s abuse of power is also making the news again, which should be getting more attention than what rancher Bundy is getting.

    Harry Reid’s Long, Steady Accretion of Power & Wealth:

    “Reid has walked a fine line over the years, occasionally breaking rules or engaging in brazenly unseemly behavior during his pursuit of wealth. Further, he has also used his position to save money in ways that the general public can’t — a practice that creates public relations issues and raises questions about the senator’s ethics. As for any illegal behavior or obvious wrongdoing, Jon Ralston told RCP, “There’s been some smoke but there’s never any fire on that.”

    There is quite a bit of smoke.

    In 1998, Reid invested $400,000 in an undeveloped residential property located on the outskirts of Las Vegas. Reid’s partner in the deal was attorney Jay Brown, whom Ralston describes as a “master manipulator.” Reid transferred his share of the property to a company Brown controlled in 2001. By transferring the land to Brown’s firm, Reid avoided legal liability and some taxes. But Reid didn’t note the transfer — or that he had any stake in the company — in his financial disclosure forms, despite rules requiring such transfers to be reported. By 2004, Brown’s company sold the land, which had been rezoned for a shopping center, and Reid received $1.1 million. He reported the sale as if he had always had control of the property.

    When the Associated Press asked Reid about the deal during a 2006 interview, he hung up on the reporter. A spokesman later said that “there were several legal steps associated with the investment during those years that did not alter Senator Reid’s actual ownership interest in the land.” However, there was no physical proof that Reid had any stake in Brown’s company. The story may have caused Reid public embarrassment — he amended his ethics reports to include the full history of the property — but he walked away from the deal some $700,000 richer.

    That isn’t the only problematic land deal Reid was involved with at the time. In 2002, he put $10,000 into a pension fund controlled by another friend, Clair Haycock. The payment gave Reid a sizable parcel of land in Bullhead City, Ariz. According to the Los Angeles Times, Reid purchased the land for one-tenth of its estimated value (and one-fortieth of what it had sold for a decade earlier). Two actions created suspicion afterward. First, Reid sponsored an $18 million earmark for a bridge that would connect Laughlin, Nev., and Bullhead City. This bridge would likely increase property values in the area. Reid also introduced legislation that would benefit Haycock’s lubricant company. Reid aides denied that his support for the earmark or lubricant dealer bill was related to the land purchase. By 2011, Reid’s initial $10,000 investment was valued at between $250,000 and $500,000. The property did not appear in his 2012 disclosure.”

    Continued: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/04/24/harry_reids_long_steady_accretion_of_power__wealth-2.html#ixzz2zrcsMxtj

    Part two will be released tomorrow.

  15. Dewey says:

    “Go ahead Chris, tell us in your own words what is so damned offensive about Bundy’s words?”

    Really Tina?

    1. If you do not see what is offensive then no sense in explaining.

    2. During the 1st film of this event the Don’t tread on me flag was seen in clips. There is no doubt who those people were.

    3. The man has been freeloading off taxpayers. The grazing fee is very cheap. Around $1.35 per head per month.

    4. The feds do allot of work on that land. I heard from the gentleman who works it.

    5. Cattle are messy, and Elk and Deer type hunters do not like how the cattle chase them off.

    6. Bundy’s family bought the farm around 1948 so he fabricated the whole history.

    The NY times did not make up the story. Bundy had press conferences daily and on that day the 1 and only reporter who showed up was a NY times reporter.

    That reporter had a camera and you can find the tape everywhere.

    That is federal land. The states are not the ol mighty kings. Ya want Federal military protection or shall we just git rid of that them there military and let the TP Militia try to protect themselves from foreign attack, state by state

    Bottom line That guy is a racist and it was all fine and dandy until the dude said the truth on tape.

    Time for the Tea Party just to admit who they are.

    I want every sniper arrested and Bundy as well.

    Real cowards put women on the front lines hoping they get shot. This is the right wing nut jobs militia. The bigots hiding in the hills. Many names.

    If Bundy was a black man would you say the same thing?

    He is an ignorant welfare farmer. Pay the fees. He has no right to use fed land for free.

    For a man to tell every sheriff across the US to unarm the feds?

    Indians had the land first, second the feds. We are the united states of America not the 50 white man states.

    What a load of crap! And yes I saw Tea Party Flags flying. Time to just quit hiding

    The guy talks the whole 14th amendment conspiracy agenda which is Aryan Nation racist. Sovereign citizen blah blah blah.

    The dude said it, went back again and doubled down. I see why he is a true Patriot to the Tea Party and so why not just own it guys.

    He is your hero, fine own it!

  16. Peggy says:

    This young woman, who happens to be black, nails Bundy’s remarks and his fight with an “unjust law.”

    http://www.ijreview.com/2014/04/132334-dont-care-cliven-bundy-racist/

  17. Chris says:

    Tina, my response was not “cowardly.” Your question was stupid. I am done enabling you by responding to questions you already know the answer to. I deal with that from my seventh graders all day, I am not going to put up with it from a grown adult. The response you deserved was far less nice than the response I gave you.

    Even Hannity has condemned this guy’s language as bigoted, and he was his biggest cheerleader. If you can’t bring yourself to do the same, you have a serious problem.

  18. Tina says:

    Asking you to tell me in your own words what you think the man said is “stupid”?

    You don’t respect the language, Chris, and you don’t care to communicate.

    It is communication when we actually attempt to understand the other person.

    Given this level of arrogance I’d say you will not teach; you will do your best to cram your “superiority and worldview down the throats of those equally “stupid” seventh graders.

    And you don’t have to put up with anything, Chris. You have the choice and the freedom to not read or respond.

    “Even Hannity” (Who’s equally stupid agrees with me).

    It is not your practice to give everyone the benefit of the doubt with the same measuring stick. Why would I give rip what you think?

    You know that name you called Pie that I let you get away with…yes, yes you are!

  19. Tina says:

    Peggy, Kira is one smart lady!

    I would not be surprised if whoever asked the question of Bundy was hoping for just this type of answer.

    Do you remember when Connie Chung tried to weasel something damning from Newt Gingrich’s mother? This is standard practice with news makers…people that want to manipulate and control the narrative.

    The government was/is out of line. Legal means are open to them. Slapping a lien on the property and/or attaching his SS or tax return. The media needed a way to further marginalize Bundy.

    The fact that these news makers can forgive and make light of lefties when they make gaffs shows what hypocrites they are but it also shows they are out to slap that racist label on anyone who doesn’t tow the leftist line or fit the “acceptable” image.

    • Post Scripts says:

      It’s just my take… but I see Bundy as foolish, bull headed, bigoted, naïve, old man. He’s fast becoming a very unlikable person. He’s a curmudgeon! He’s a guy who wouldn’t pay the fees to BLM that were reasonable and lawful like the other ranchers and when they (BLM) got tough, he got tougher and things escalated too fast because we are prone to support ranchers, farmers and the elderly when it looks like big government is pushing them around. We’ve seen too many instances of bullying in the past and you know I am no fan of big government. But, Cliven Bundy is not the case to rally behind. He doesn’t have a legal leg to stand on.

      He’s not a martyr for anything except his own pocket book. He’s an ornery old man who is too dumb to know you don’t say the words like pick cotton, negro and slave in the same sentence and not get push back! The last place an old guy like him should be is in front of a microphone and the media. Sure, BLM could have handled this situation much, much better, so I’m not letting them off the hook, but this guy Bundy is a fool and he’s unworthy of my support. It’s a non-starter IMHO. -Jack

  20. Tina says:

    Thanks for telling it as you see it Jack…and in your own words too.

    I stand behind Bundy’s push back of federal government overreach.

    I am also willing to cut him some slack, as the left did with Joe and Byrd, because he’s old and comes from a different time. I don’t think he’s racist any more than old Joe is.

    There are too many instances of the government getting people off the land and taking their property by using the power of government to push them off and by over the top intimidation to let this go as just another kook. This has gone on for decades and gets more press under Democrats due to the Janet Reno tactics that are totally unnecessary. They could have slapped a lien on his cows and his property and let the courts work it out when he objected. That is how we usually do things in America. It isn’t against the law to be quirky and we do have the right to challenge our government when we believe they are wrong.

    You are right that Bundy should stay away from microphones and the press, though, and I don’t blame you for taking the position you have. Question though…how is Bundy’s case different from the Jefferson movement?

  21. Pie Guevara says:

    The issue is not about Bundy’s ridiculous remarks or any failings in his personality, which is precisely what the big-brother, statist progressives of the left will try and make this about.

    On a related note, Tina, you and Jack have nothing to prove when it comes to providing a platform for free speech, but that does not mean that you should allow yourselves to be continually pissed on by an obnoxious progressive @##hole like Chris. Chris makes Bundy look like Santa Claus.

    For years now you have given this mean-spirited, ungracious, ungrateful and vile pissant a platform by which to spew his hate, venom, and disdain for conservatives, Republicans, and the tea party.

    Why not take a break? Let this foul, arrogant, stuck on himself elitist snob piss into the wind for a few months at least.

    If Chris behaved towards people in person the way he behaves towards you in this forum, the foul little snot would be in a permanent state of hospitalization.

    Can you imagine his behavior towards his students and fellow educators, if indeed this dysfunctional and horrid little creep is actually a teacher (which I cannot believe.) There was a reason that Chris’ late and equally disturbed and vicious mentor, Quentin Colgan, had his teaching credentials revoked.

    I advise that you both take a break and show this very ugly individual the door. You owe him and his sick and depraved ilk nothing.

  22. Peggy says:

    Thanks Tina.

    I don’t think Bundy wanted all of this media attention nor do I believe he’s handling it well. But, he’s doing the best he can given the circumstances that have brought him in front of the reports that are looking for the “big” story to discredit him.

    Was he wrong in what he said or was it how he said it? He really didn’t say anything millions of others have in that the government is enabling those in poverty to stay in poverty. His using the word “negro” instead of black was a clue to me he’s from a different time with little knowledge of the changes that have taken place in the past decades. For that he’s called a racist and bigot. I’d rather judge a man by what’s in his heart and not a misspoken word.

    Has the media succeeded in shifting the discussion away from the government’s overreach and what the BLM is doing to our property rights? You bet they have.

    We need to remember what started this and the growing list of others who have and are losing their property to the feds. Just to name a few; there’s the couple in Colorado, the Indian tribe in north Nevada, the Texas/Oklahoma border, and of course the farmers in central Calif. lose of water rights.

    Here’s another black American who speaks out in support of Bundy.

    Black Marine’s Letter Refutes Left-Wing Media Narrative that Cliven Bundy is a ‘Racist’:

    http://www.ijreview.com/2014/04/132699-black-marines-letter-refutes-left-wing-media-narrative-cliven-bundy-racist/

  23. Peggy says:

    Well, well it turns out I was right about the New York Times after all. Yup, they “doctored” Bundy’s remarks to make him sound like a racist when he was saying the complete opposite.

    So, Chris how do you like them rotten apples?

    Unedited Tape of Bundy Emerges, Sheds Light on ‘Racist’ Remarks:
    A new, unedited version of comments by Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy has emerged, and it sheds some light on the context of his remarks, universally condemned on Thursday as horrifically racist.

    The 67-year-old Bundy, battling the U.S. government after federal agents stormed his ranch to confiscate his cattle in a dispute over grazing fees, said far more than what appeared in the New York Times and most other news accounts. While his grammar is pretty bad — and his use of “negro” and “colored” considered politically incorrect (although they were both once preferred terms chosen by blacks) — he actually was making a larger point, not simply deriding blacks.

    In a YouTube video, he is filmed already in mid-sentence.


    … 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.

    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.

    Those comments appear to change the context of the next section, which was quoted in the New York Times. One clear point the rancher made: America has progressed since the 1965 race riots and “we sure don’t want to go back.”

    Here are the heavily quoted comments from Bundy that followed the above section edited out by most news organizations.


    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.

    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.

    But Bundy went on after saying that — and again, his comments were edited out of most reports.


    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.

    So, Bundy thinks Hispanics are hard-working family people, and laments the current plight of American blacks under the federal welfare system while saying there has been much progress and that “we sure don’t want to go back.” As always, there’s more to the story than what the New York Times says.

    http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/unedited-tape-bundy-emerges-sheds-light-racist-remarks

    Video of Bundy above statement.
    http://www.infowars.com/unedited-video-shows-bundy-making-pro-black-pro-mexican-comments

  24. Chris says:

    It is not Bundy’s property.

  25. Peggy says:

    Hahaha!! It just doesn’t get any better than this. New York Times reporter admits liberal bias and even does it on Jeopardy.

    Great news source Chris. No wonder you keep coming across like a know it all second grader. Proving once again life experience really is worth more than sitting in a class taught by progressive agenda pushers.

    ——–

    I’ll Take ‘This NYT Reporter Just Flat-Out Admitted He Is Biased Against GOP’ for $2000, Alex:

    If you didn’t watch Wednesday’s episode of Jeopardy, you missed out on one of the most blatant admissions of mainstream media bias we’ve seen in a while. Fortunately, it was captured on video for all to see.

    The admission came as a question under the category “Man of the House” about House Representatives. In the video question, New York Times reporter Eric Lichtblau introduces himself and asks:

    *

    “This California Republican who chairs the House Oversight & Government Reform Committee has been called Obama’s Annoyer-In-Chief, & it seems I provide the same service for him.”

    *

    Get that? Lichtblau doesn’t provide the same services to both politicians. It’s a pretty frank admission from a journalist.

    The New York Times has long been suspected of having a liberal bias, and is routinely criticized for unfairly masking President Obama shortcomings while greatly publicizing George W. Bush’s.

    Now that one of the publication’s top reporters has come clean, it doesn’t have to even pretend to be impartial anymore.

    Must watch video.
    http://www.ijreview.com/2014/04/132627-ill-take-nyt-reporter-just-flat-admitted-biased-gop-2000-alex/

  26. Pete says:

    I’m not even going to address Mr. Bundy’s racist rants of late, but rather focus on the point; the BLM and grazing fees.

    Having grown up on a ranch, right here in Northern California, I’ve taken full advantage of the benefits of the BLM. I’ve hunted, fished, camped and hiked much of the BLM land here in California and in other states. I’m grateful for our government giving me this opportunity. Understand that if it weren’t for the BLM, much of our wonderful country would be privately owned and fenced off to the public.

    For years my family has paid grazing fees to the Federal Government. You see, almost half of our 5,000 acre ranch is bordered by BLM land and so we graze our cattle on much of your land. (Please note that when I say BLM land, I’m saying our land…yours and mine) My family understands that these fees, which are extremely reasonable and in fact a government subsidy, being that they are far less than leasing property owned by neighboring ranches, are necessary to keep our rights to graze our cattle. We follow the standards and guidelines set forth by you (our government) and overseen by the BLM. We work hard to comply with the rules so that our BLM property can be enjoyed by all. So, when I read about the flag draped Mr. Bundy and his dismissal of our United States and his utter contempt for the BLM I get mad. I get mad because the land that he has been using is ours! The land that he is now trespassing on is ours! The land he has been using to fatten his cattle is ours! In his mind this land is his and his alone. He is not a steward of the land as ranchers and farmers like to see themselves, but rather a thief that has for twenty years pocketed money and thumbed his nose at us. I have no respect for people like Mr. Bundy when they act as children do.

  27. Pie Guevara says:

    Dewey should back off the weed a bit.

  28. Pie Guevara says:

    I won’t pass any judgements about whether Bundy has paid or not paid proper fair use fees. I’ll wait for all that to be decided in court.

    I won’t comment on Bundy’s ridiculous personal remarks which only cloud the issue of the legitimacy and possible abuses surrounding federal land grabs and control. The state of Utah and others are legitimately concerned.

    This issue has been around long before Bundy momentarily grabbed focus and will be around after he is forgotten.

  29. Chris says:

    Peggy, the unedited comments are not that much better. His comments were completely ignorant, period. I don’t think the New York Times missed the spirit of what was said.

    I understand that these comments are not that much different from what Republicans have been saying about blacks for years. The terms “welfare plantation” and “slaves to the government” are bandied about without much thought to their hyperbolic and insensitive nature. This doesn’t prove that Bundy’s comments weren’t racist (nor does the fact that he has black friends). It proves that his racist sentiments have found a home among the GOP, and for some reason go hand in hand with anti-government sentiment, much of which is driven by resentment over what some older, conservative whites see as “special treatment” for blacks.

    It’s no secret that the New York Times is liberally biased, but that does not mean they are inaccurate. Peggy, the moment you stop linking to websites that claim George Bush personally ordered the attack on the Twin Towers is the moment you can critique my sources. Until that point, you are being a giant hypocrite.

  30. Pie Guevara says:

    So the NYT is biased, distorts, lies, and slurs and Chris is a fool. No surprises there. Business as usual.

    At least Peggy shut his yap for a bit, no matter how short lived that will be. Bundy doesn’t seem to be quite the racist he has been made out to be, but I still think his remarks were ridiculous.

    Nevertheless personal Bundy’s opinions are not the issue and will not be on the agenda for representatives from Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Wyoming, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, and Montana.

  31. Chris says:

    And keep in mind that the term “racist” does not mean that Bundy personally hates all black people or wishes them ill. I understand perfectly well that Bundy thinks he is being compassionate to “the Negro” in his words and probably wants the best for them. That doesn’t make his comments any less patronizing. Condescension is a much more common form of racism than outright hate. So is callousness. To entertain the idea that blacks were better off under slavery than under welfare is ludicrous. Even putting aside the debate over whether welfare keeps people in poverty or helps lift them out, it’s an argument that could only be made by someone who’s never seriously considered the reality of slavery.

    I’m so sick of the notion that unless you’re riding horseback in a white hood and refuse all contact with black people, then you can’t possibly say or do anything racist. It’s a very ignorant view of what racism is and how it works.

    That said, as Pete and Jack have demonstrated, the root of this issue is simply that this is NOT Bundy’s land. This is a guy who has said he doesn’t even recognize the U.S. government as being legitimate. He’s criticizing people on welfare while living off the government himself! It is absurd that so many conservatives hitched their wagon to this guy just because they share his distrust of the federal government. I’ve argued for years that conservatives have to be more careful and stop grabbing onto anything they think might further their narrative. I’d hoped the Bundy incident might be the point where conservatives realized their mistake and did some honest soul-searching. But given that there are still people justifiying Bundy’s behavior, I’m honestly not sure if that will ever happen.

  32. Peggy says:

    Hum, the BLM is a PROFIT MAKING BUSINESS within our government with a profit margin that would be the envy of any major private US business. Coal and helium are just two of their money makers.

    The Hugely Profitable Bureau of Land Management:

    “BLM’s current helium inventory is valued at approximately $1 billion. For each percentage point increase in value, BLM would collect approximately $10 million in additional revenues. To capitalize on the opportunity to collect additional revenues, BLM needs to identify and charge market value for all helium sales to nongovernmental purchasers.”

    Let’s move on from helium and into mineral sales, shall we?

    In this Department of Interior Inspector General’s report from March, 2014, we learn about the BLM’s $17 million dollar a year mineral business. A business the department feels is mismanaged because contract adjustments overlooked by the BLM cost the government $846,117. Interestingly, $118,600 of that loss is in Nevada alone.

    “A department report from June 2013 details just how profitable the coal business is for the department and BLM:

    “The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in the U.S. Department of the Interior (Department) oversees coal mining activities on Federal (public) and Indian lands.

    The Department collects more than $1 billion in bonus and royalty revenues from coal mining companies each year, a figure that has been steadily rising. In fiscal year 2012, bonuses and royalties exceeded $2.4 billion, the highest amount recorded in the last decade.”

    That’s $2.4 billion dollars in coal revenue for the federal government. The Obama administration’s hypocrisy here is mind blowing.”

    http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/the-hugely-profitable-bureau-of-land-management-3/

  33. Peggy says:

    Chris for an educated kid you sure can be ignorant.

    The argument is not about Bundy owing the grazing fees, he does. The argument IS about the BLM showing up with a SWAT teem, snipers, and cattle rustlers instead of just putting a lean on his property.

    Al Sharpton owes more in unpaid taxes than Bundy does. So should Al be expecting the IRS SWAT teem next?

    People/supports would have not shown up to protect Bundy and his cattle, and protest the actions of the BLM if they’d just gone the lean route instead of rounding up his cattle killing so many in the process.

    Also, attacking a man for HOW he said something instead of what he said shows how little tolerance you progressives really have. He used the word “negro” not the “N-word.” He was being respectful, because years ago “negro” was politically correct. Black or Afro-American are today, but not back when Bundy was growing up or a young man. It was when I was growing up too.

    The man also appears to not have a college education or great speaking skills. So what? Give the poor guy a break and stop expecting him and everyone else to live by your self-righteous standards.

    He owes the fees!!! Put a lean on his ranch and don’t try killing his cows again unless a SWAT teem is sent to Al Sharpton’s place at the same time.

  34. Tina says:

    There’s one problem with Chris’s assessment of what Republicans have been saying for years. The Welfare problem is sometimes associated with blacks as were the remarks made by Daniel Patrick Moynahan when Johnson’s Great Society was being debated. They are often deliberately associated with racism as a means of discrediting the right. I say deliberately because the number of whites on welfare and being harmed by it is equally deplorable. It is the condition that Republicans wish to change. Democrats only discuss the issue as a means to labeling their opponents (racist). The people on the left that always go there are ignorant scum that will do anything to forward the socialist dependency agenda…the jackasses..and that keeps poor blacks and poor whites voting democrat.

    Yes it’s a terrible fact of life that politics has been reduced to this ugly fight between those who slap on the racist label at the drop of a hat and those who are sick of it. The accusers set the agenda on that one…only the voters, the American people have the power to change it. How to cut through the constant noise? Ignoring racism labels to avoid the discomfort of fighting back hasn’t changed it in over fifty years. As long as the radicals on the left keep pushing the race card it will continue.

    Do the people notice that playing the race card means that we can never change the policies of the left even if they are not working? these bullies further their dependency agenda through intimidation practices…hypocrites!

    Thankfully there are people in both the white and the black communities that are catching on. Peggy has done a great job giving them voice, at comments #18 and #25, on these pages with links.

  35. Tina says:

    The issue isn’t (clarification: Bundy’s) ownership of the land.

    The issues are government overreach, unnecessary Janet Reno style tactics, government intimidation to remove ranchers from their own lands…and now for a lot of others, the excessive federal “ownership” of so much of the land in the West.

    To that last point the days of BLM land being open to the public is changing rapidly across the West.

    Also there are many ranchers and landowners in Montana that allow people to come on to their lands for fishing access and hunting. People are as likely to give access as is the greedy green control machine now active in the federal government agencies and our congress.

  36. Tina says:

    Pie you are exactly right. The grass roots will work from the bottom up to clear the rats nest of vipers out that are bent on denying Americans property rights, access, and speech!

  37. Tina says:

    Peggy, this just in:

    Cliven Bundy’s black bodyguard claims rancher is not racist and he would ‘happily’ take a bullet for him…

    It just gets better and better.

  38. RHT447 says:

    Link is down, Youtube account associated with video has been terminated.

  39. Tina says:

    The Daily Mail, link at #40, quotes body guard Jason Bullock:

    Bullock was recently interviewed by CNN and asked, ‘You’re protecting this man and he’s wondering whether African-Americans would be better off as slaves. How does that strike you?’

    ‘It doesn’t strike me any kind of way,’ Bullock answered. ‘This is still the same old Mr. Bundy I met from the first day of all this happening.’

    Bullock says the things Bundy has been saying – ‘wondering’ if ‘negros’ were better off under slavery, and comparing himself to civil rights hero Rosa Parks, for example – don’t offend him.

    ‘Mr. Bundy is not a racist. Ever since I’ve been here he’s treated me with nothing but hospitality,’ Bullock told the reporter. ‘He’s pretty much treated me like his own family.’

    He goes on to say that ‘I would take a bullet for that man, if need be,’ and that he ‘look(s) up to him just like I do my grandfather.’

    ‘I believe in his cause and after having met Mr. Bundy a few times, I have a really good feel about him and I’m a pretty good judge of character,’ Bullock said.

    Mr. Bullock is apparently relying on the full content of Mr. Bundy’s character…he is truly a free man, capable of thinking for himself rather than being instructed and intimidated into the politically correct box that stifles speech and makes it impossible to evaluate the affects of our policies to correct mistakes. Bravo Mr. Bullock…Bravo!

    It is easy to avoid using certain words, to always smile and do the white shuck and jive dance of inclusion and acceptance; it is much harder to take a risk, to make an important point, especially if you know that what you say is true but in today’s hostile environment some might misunderstand and set out to crucify you for it.

  40. Peggy says:

    The link to CNN’s interview with Jason Bullock on my #41 post works.

    We were on the same page Tina.

  41. Chris says:

    Tina, Peggy; see comment #34. I did not call Bundy “a racist,” I said his comments were racist. There is a difference.

    I owe no apology.

  42. Pie Guevara says:

    Re #43 Tina : Clearly this black man is a brain-washed Uncle Tom on the payroll of his evil racist white master overlord.

    Oops, sorry, I just had a Dewey and Chris moment. I suddenly and momentarily became a vicious, bigoted progressive ass from hell. Once I vomit up their poison I’ll get over it. BBL after a good, solid, prayer at the porcelain.

  43. Pie Guevara says:

    Re #41 Peggy : “Can’t wait to hear your apology Chris after watching this video.”

    ARE YOU SERIOUS??? CHRIS APOLOGIZE?

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

    That sick and arrogant pissant creep is now trying to redefine racism in a desperate attempt to try and word weasel his sorry, bigoted, stupid, knuckle-dragging butt out of the corner that he and his pin-headed pal Dewey have painted themselves into.

  44. Pie Guevara says:

    By the way, when it comes to condescension and callousness, who is more practiced in the perfection of that pursuit than Chris The Coward? Certainly not Bundy who, at worst, uses some quaint and uncomfortable language now considered politically incorrect. Chris is a master of condescension and callousness. All progressive jerks like him are.

    Alexander Pope wasn’t kidding when he said “The proper study of Mankind is Man.” Making a study of Chris shows just how depraved men can be. He is enough to turn a saint into a cynic.

  45. Chris says:

    Pie Guevara: “Clearly this black man is a brain-washed Uncle Tom on the payroll of his evil racist white master overlord.”

    Nope. But nice strawman you’ve constructed there.

  46. Chris says:

    Pie: “Chris is a master of condescension”

    Perhaps, but there’s a moral difference between being condescending to an entire race of people, and being condescending to douchebags such as yourself.

  47. Chris says:

    This article, written from a conservative perspective, does a good job of explaining the different definitions that liberals and conservatives have of racism:

    Why Left and Right Talk Past Each Other on Race

    “Although this has been largely unspoken in the decades since the civil rights laws passed, liberals and conservatives have developed very different ideas of what constitutes racism and racial discrimination.

    Conservatives largely see racism as racial hatred, treating people as groups rather than individuals and then displaying animus toward members of those groups. Discrimination is deliberately treating individuals differently on the basis of race.

    Liberals tend to see racism as a desire to preserve a socioeconomic structure that grew out of slavery and segregation, maintaining a privileged status for some and a disadvantaged status for others. Discrimination is anything that has a negative disparate impact on protected minorities.”

    http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/why-left-right-talk-past-each-other-race-10342

    • Post Scripts says:

      Chris, you wrote about “Why Left and Right Talk Past Each Other on Race.” I found it interesting, but I don’t see how it applies in this case? I am talking about people with an agenda to cater to one segment of CA population at the expense of the others.

  48. Peggy says:

    Chris I knew you wouldn’t apologies. It’s not in you to admit you’re wrong on anything.

    You constantly attack Tina for making statements you don’t agree with or telling her her comprehension and grasp of a topic is moronic. You even flat out accuse her of lying when you don’t approve of what she says.

    You ARE a pathetic hypocrite Chris. Trying to justify your attacking an old man by trying to explain the differences between the progressive and conservative meaning of racist is just the cowards way out.

    It’s getting late little guy and it must be close to your bed time. When you start acting like a man, let me know. Otherwise I’m not wasting my time on a child who believe attacking an old man is acceptable behavior. Night, night. Sleep tight.

  49. Pie Guevara says:

    Re #52 Peggy : Chris act like a man? Sorry Peggy, that is NEVER going to happen. Here is one of the reasons why …

    “At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child — miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats.”

    — Humorist P.J. O’Rourke

    That fits Chris to a T, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless.

  50. Tina says:

    Chris you didn’t say what you think about his opinion.

    Mr. Antels conclusion wrapped it up nicely for me:

    Where Hubert Humphrey (Democrat) once promised to eat the paper the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was printed on if it ever resulted in quotas, many contemporary liberals would consider the landmark legislation racist if it did anything but.

    I liked Humphry. He, like Moynahan, often made sense.

    The key point about the liberal viewpoint: … a desire to preserve a socioeconomic structure…”

    It seems to me that by creating welfare programs and quotas the left has preserved the lesser status for blacks and the privileged status for Democrats as their “saviors”. It doesn’t surprise me at all that liberals are always pointing fingers at others. They are blind to their own insensitivity, their own failure to treat poor black people (the poor generally) as equals.

    America promises its citizens equal opportunity and yet liberals stick behind the solidity of the union and deny black kids vouchers to attend better schools. They protect bad teachers and tolerate bad schools.

    In sixty years we have not honestly and openly acknowledged the failure of welfare to lift sufficient numbers of the poor from poverty or looked for better ways to approach the problem. Every effort to do so by conservatives is met with reasons to protect the status quo…a “cared for’ disadvantaged class protected and managed by political elites. It is also met with cries of racism, bigotry, or insensitivity.

    We can’t discuss how to approach what has become a crisis without risking being labeled, demonized, and dismissed.

    Conservatives are inspired the most by ML Kings most famous words about the content of character and we do tend to evaluate people, all people, based on character rather than thinking of them as part of a group or class.

    I’ve met wonderful people from different races and classes; I have also met scum from the same groups. My observation is that we are not all alike and cannot be classified by things like class and race. Character and merit are much better measures of a person.

  51. Pie Guevara says:

    Re #50 Chris :

    Pie: “Chris is a master of condescension”

    Perhaps, but there’s a moral difference between being condescending to an entire race of people, and being condescending to douchebags such as yourself.

    Thank you for that excellent set-up Chris! It is perfect! Bless you for being the contemptible, self-aggrandizing, snot-nosed creep that you are!

    Well then, I must not be the only douchebag in Post Scripts. You treat Jack and Tina the same way. You treat everyone with whom you disagree the same way.

    There you have it, folks, Chris the bully, Chris the coward, Chris the strutting jerk thinks we are all “douchebags.”

    Have you had enough of this sniveling, juvenile @$$hole yet? Does this immature, mentally arrested, dysfunctional scum of a human being deserve a soap box in Post Scripts? Eh, fellow douchebags? What do you rest of you douchebags think? C’mon ALL YOU douchebags, it is time to chime in.

  52. Peggy says:

    #37 Tina. I emailed Jack a perfect response to your post. Hopefully he’ll post it since it’s a picture I can’t. If not, hopefully, he’ll forward it to you.

  53. Pie Guevara says:

    Re #49 Chris : “…nice strawman you’ve constructed there.”

    You have the unmitigated gall to instruct me on the strawman fallacy? A fallacy you commit ceaselessly and which I have called you on and satirized you on so many occasions?

    Well, OF COURSE you have the gall, you and oblivious ridiculous fool.

  54. Peggy says:

    #45 Chris : Tina, Peggy; see comment #34. I did not call Bundy “a racist,” I said his comments were racist. There is a difference. I owe no apology.”

    More proof of just what a hypocrite you are.

    Bundy’s words can be used against him, but yours can’t be used against you, because there’s a self appointed difference in what progressive say versus what they mean.

    What you’re saying is, his words reflect who and what he is, but your’s don’t. Different standard for different individuals depends on if you agree with them or not.

    Following the minds of progressives is like trying to follow shape-shifters. Always changing.

    It’s like Clinton’s meaning of, “I didn’t have sex with that woman.” When the evidence was all over a blue dress.

    And the award winning Liar in Chief Obama with all of his ObamaCare lies who did say we could keep our plans, doctors and it was going to save us $2,500.

    So, Chris claims he didn’t say Bundy was a racist, he’s saying Bundy’s words were racist and somehow one man’s words don’t reflect what he is while another man’s words does.

    But, Chris you also said, “But given that there are still people justifiying Bundy’s behavior, I’m honestly not sure if that will ever happen.”

    Post Scripts is your “Blue Dress.” Words have meaning. Behavior has meaning. Pointing out that a man’s words and behavior are racist is evidence you were calling him a racist and trying to say otherwise is proof of your hypocrisy and cowardly childish ways.

    I really wish you were not a teacher to a bunch of 7th graders. I can not imagine a worse nightmare for a parent then to realize you had filled their child’s mind with your progressive garbage that will destroy their freedoms and take away any chance of fulfilling the American dream. They’ll be working to pay off the Tax Man so everyone else, all races and creeds, can live on the government’s plantation.

    You won’t allow them to develop their critical thinking skills to come to their own conclusions if they don’t align with yours. Instead of learning from the past of what a country did to their youth you will doom them to repeat it. Very sad and very scary.

    I wish you were digging ditches instead of molding the minds of our country’s future generation.

  55. Chris says:

    Peggy: “attacking an old man”

    You’ve GOT to be kidding me. Now you’re going to act like he’s some poor defenseless victim? This “old man” has managed to raise an armed militia against the federal government because he refuses to pay his grazing fees!

    Also, I did not “attack” him. I posted his own words, verbatim, and called those words ignorant, which they are. That is not a personal attack. But it’s cute that you think accurately quoting a conservative now constitutes an attack against them.

  56. Chris says:

    Peggy:

    “What you’re saying is, his words reflect who and what he is,”

    Yes, they do, but they also reflect what the modern conservative movement has become. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that Bundy’s brand of anti-government sentiment corresponds with ignorant and condescending views on race. I did not cite Bundy’s comments in order to paint him as a terrible person. I don’t think having ignorant views on race makes someone a terrible person. My point was to demonstrate that conservatives have hopped on the “Support Bundy” train without much thought to what exactly it was they were supporting. I am only sorry that I did not make that clearer to begin with. I can understand how my comments could have been construed as a character assassination. And certainly many liberals have used them that way. But you are right that the focus of the Bundy case should be on the issue of who owns the property. In this case, I think it is clear that Bundy does not own the property.

    “but your’s don’t.”

    I’m not sure where you’re getting the idea that I think my words shouldn’t reflect on my character. Of course they do. And while I could have been clearer about my intentions, I stand by what I said.

    “It’s like Clinton’s meaning of, “I didn’t have sex with that woman.” When the evidence was all over a blue dress.”

    Clinton’s behavior throughout the Lewinski case was idiotic. You’ll get no argument from me there.

    “And the award winning Liar in Chief Obama with all of his ObamaCare lies who did say we could keep our plans, doctors and it was going to save us $2,500.”

    Yes, I agree with you. Those were lies, and Obama was absolutely wrong to tell them. I still believe the ACA is a net benefit to our country, and since so much of the case against the law is *also* based on lies, I have yet to be convinced otherwise.

    “Post Scripts is your “Blue Dress.” Words have meaning. Behavior has meaning. Pointing out that a man’s words and behavior are racist is evidence you were calling him a racist and trying to say otherwise is proof of your hypocrisy and cowardly childish ways.”

    No, I’m sorry, that’s ridiculous.

    Everyone knows there is a difference between criticizing a behavior and putting a label on a person. Everyone has at one point said that a friend or family member is “acting like a jerk,” even though they wouldn’t label that loved one a “jerk” as a general descriptor. That’s because everyone, even the nicest people, is capable of sometimes exhibiting bad behavior.

    For some reason people in our society–and this seems to be more common among conservatives, though many liberals have the same problem–don’t seem to apply this same logic to the issue of racism. If someone is accused of acting in a racist manner or making racist statements, that’s seen as equivalent to calling someone “a racist,” as if that is a fixed identity, and the world is neatly divided into “good non-racist people” and “evil hateful racist bigots.”

    Thus if the accused can be shown to not have a white-hot hatred directed at a certain race, and if they have–gasp!–black friends, then they can’t possibly have ever done or said anything racist. All behavior that might be considered offensive is immediately absolved.

    I have explained numerous times that that is not how I see this issue, Peggy. Now, you can disagree with my view of racism, but please don’t pretend that by accusing Bundy of making racist comments–which I don’t think can be denied at this point–I am automatically calling him “a racist.” I have made the distinction clear. In fact I have already said that I’m sure Bundy thought he was being compassionate to blacks in his comments. If you don’t agree with the distinction I’ve made, that’s one thing, but don’t pretend I haven’t made it.

    Your comments about my teaching ability are unfair. Politics rarely comes up at the seventh grade level, and when it does I never give students my own opinion. I refused to give my own political opinions to my high schoolers last semester as well, even when asked. It is very presumptuous to assume that I would talk to my students the same way I talk to fellow adults. A classroom is not like a political blog. I may get very passionate and even angry here, but I do not run my classroom that way. I wish there was a way you could see that.

  57. Chris says:

    Peggy: “government’s plantation”

    This type of rhetoric is exactly the problem with the GOP. It is an offensive comparison, and you should stop making it if you are in any way concerned about the future of your party.

  58. Peggy says:

    Rancher sets Glenn Beck and others straight on what happened the day of the stand off.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suqzL7L9lJk

  59. Tina says:

    Chris please explain to me why democrat rhetoric that asserts republicans want poor people to die and put blacks back in chains doesn’t offend? Why don’t such words negatively impact your party?

    More examples:

    NPR’s Nina Totenberg: [I]f there is retributive justice [Sen. Jesse Helms] will get AIDS from a transfusion, or one of his grandchildren will get it.

    I hope his wife feeds him lots of eggs and butter and he dies early like many black men do, of heart disease. – Julianne Malveaux, USA Today

    Jessie Jackson refers to Jews as Hymies and New York as Hymietown

    O Lord, give Dick Cheney’s Heart, Our Sacred Secret Weapon, the strength to try one more time! For greater love hath no heart than that it lay down its life to rid the planet of its Number One Human Tumor. – Tony Hendra, Huffington Post

    Is your opinion flawed?

  60. Chris says:

    “Chris please explain to me why democrat rhetoric that asserts republicans want poor people to die and put blacks back in chains doesn’t offend? Why don’t such words negatively impact your party?”

    It does, and it should. All of the quotes you posted are not only immoral and hateful, they just give more ammo to conservatives to paint liberals as intolerant. In these cases, that label is deserved. I apologize for these members of the party; they do not represent me.

  61. Peggy says:

    While you’re at it Chris would you try and justify what this Democrat said and what the NAACP is about to award him with?

    NAACP Scheduled To Give ‘Racist’ Democrat-Backing LA Clippers Owner Lifetime Achievement Award:

    “The NAACP is scheduled to award L.A. Clippers owner and Democrat supporter Donald T. Sterling a lifetime achievement award next month, adding to the controversy about racist comments he allegedly made to his girlfriend.

    Charges of racism against Sterling are not new, having been sued by his 22-year employee and basketball star Elgin Baylor in 2009 (which was thrown out of court) and also settling a housing discrimination lawsuit.”

    http://www.ijreview.com/2014/04/133170-latest-clipper-owner-race-wrinkle-naacp-scheduled-award-donald-sterling-lifetime-achievement-award/

  62. Tina says:

    Chris I have to disagree. When democrats say things like that their voters cheer. They have defeated legislation and candidates with such rhetoric without losing membership.

    Liberals are intolerant. They pretend not to be but they are. How can they not be when they divide people into categories and always run on class or race division? Democrats rarely talk about whats good for America as a whole; they are always fighting against something.

    All human beings have the same capacity to be intolerant or abusive. The left has been about convincing the naive and malleable that only republicans have this capacity…they act as if they are mean, evil and vicious inherently. It’s absurd.

    Liberals have the same act, the same dog and pony show, going on about corporations being the seat of all evil. It’s bologna but they get away with it.

    As I’ve said before, for a long time Democrats were able to run this game because republicans didn’t have a platform for fighting back. Now we do. We have talk radio, internet media, and blogs. So now it looks like a cage fight but at least its a fight that’s been equalized.

    I don’t care for over the top demonizing and labels but I won’t run from it either. I will fight back and meet them measure for measure.

    Have you noticed no one in the main stream media ever wonders if the left needs to be more civil or tone down the rhetoric? It’s incredible. The president isn’t even called on it. In fact his leadership is responsible for ramping-up some of it. Calling his opponents enemies in public is pretty bad as was, “they bring a knife we bring a gun”.

  63. Chris says:

    Peggy, the NAACP has already decided not to give Sterling the award, which is the right decision.

  64. Chris says:

    “Liberals are intolerant.”

    Isn’t this phrase self-defeating? You’re using an overgeneralization. I would never say “Conservatives are intolerant.” (Certainly many liberals would, but I think they’re wrong to do so.) To label a whole group like this is itself intolerant.

    You’re right that liberals are not magically immune to lacking tolerance, and I even agree with you that they need to be called out more. I have seen liberals mock Chris Christi and Rush Limbaugh’s weight, and make sexist and transgender jokes about Ann Coulter, and I have tried to call them out on this. You’ll get no argument from me that both sides need to be more careful about their language and try and be more civil. Those statements by Obama you mention were idiotic and extremely unpresidential. I don’t pretend to be above it all, I have failed at times too, but I try to promote tolerance in general.

  65. Tina says:

    Chris you say we are _____ (fill in blank) almost on a daily basis. People get frustrated and the words come out. We don’t like to admit it but when we do that our intolerance is showing. It’s human nature.

    This is one of the infuriating things about the whole leftist politically correct construct. It sets up a false sense of acceptableness. It’s phony and paints with a broad brush. I think it has also become the basis for avoiding the hard work of understanding one another. As long as we stand in the right box and say the correct things we’re fine; let anyone wander off track and he will be terminated post haste! What a silly way to associate. What a barrier to effective communication.

    Politically speaking, shouldn’t the goal for everyone be to come up with solutions to problems that actually work for everyone involved? When we see that something is doing damage or is not working shouldn’t we be free to point it out? Shouldn’t the input be welcome even if it means we have to throw out the current model and start from scratch?

    I don’t talk about it much but that doesn’t mean I don’t see qualities that liberals have that are wonderful. Liberals are dedicated, energetic, creative and socially conscious. But they have blind spots. They are very poor at economics and job creation and refuse to learn, even when the evidence of the failure of their policies is obvious and hurting people very badly.

    I often wish there was a way to convince ordinary out in the community liberals to trust the nuts and bolts to conservatives while they do the service work…cause they are good at it. We find liberals in nursing, education, and our local animal shelters…they are kind-hearted but also not very informed about the beauty of our republican form of government or our capitalist system…and sadly unaware of the value of freedom. Radicals are another matter. The agenda is the fundamental transformation of America…changing our very way of life. I can’t stand by and allow that to happen even if I have to be intolerable in the process!

    Trying to force free people into a box will always be met with resistance. The golden rule, however, is pretty universal.

  66. Tina says:

    As a point of interest the cowboys who came to the aid of Mr. Bundy were very respectful and continue to express themselves with civility to this day.

    They also didn’t leave a big mess of litter when they left.

  67. Chris says:

    Tina, thank you for the kind words about liberals. I will say the conservatives I know in my daily life are kind, professional and respectful people who know how to work hard to get what they want.

    “They also didn’t leave a big mess of litter when they left.”

    Well then I guess the armed resistance to the government’s legitimate land claims is all cool as long as they didn’t litter. 😉

  68. Chris says:

    Speaking of calling out one’s own, I quite appreciated Rod Dreher’s take on Sarah Palin’s “waterboarding is how we’d baptize terrorists” comments:

    “OK, stop. Not only is this woman, putatively a Christian, praising torture, but she is comparing it to a holy sacrament of the Christian faith. It’s disgusting — but even more disgusting, those NRA members, many of whom are no doubt Christians, cheered wildly for her…

    Palin and all those who cheered her sacrilegious jibe ought to be ashamed of themselves. For us Christians, baptism is the entry into new life. Palin invoked it to celebrate torture. Even if you don’t believe that waterboarding is torture, surely you agree that it should not be compared to baptism, and that such a comparison should be laughed at. What does it say about the character of a person that they could make that joking comparison, and that so many people would cheer for it. Nothing good — and nothing that does honor to the cause of Jesus Christ.

    If I thought that kind of hateful declaration and abuse of the Christian religion was what conservatism stood for, I wouldn’t be able to call myself a conservative. Some conservatives do stand for that. They’re wrong, and they should be called out on it — not because some liberal somewhere is going to be offended, but first and foremost because we Christians who identify as conservatives are appalled by it.”

    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/the-sacrilegious-sarah-palin/comment-page-2/#comments

    I have many disagreements with Dreher, but he is a man who absolutely lives by his principles, partisan loyalty be damned.

  69. Tina says:

    Oh well, it’s back in the box.

    I rather liked one comment that appeared under the linked article:

    After linking to and blasting Palin’s comments on my personal FB page, come to find out it is common parlance in the military to speak of “baptizing terrorists” through waterboarding. Furthermore, we should all just lighten up because “it’s just words.”

    Lord, have mercy.

    Doctors and nurses in burn wards have been known to refer to their patients (fondly) as crispy critters…amongst themselves of course. Cops have their own brand of humor to take the edge off regarding their work. Sarah was speaking to NRA members many of whom were likely veterans. I’m not one to believe God would be offended by this admittedly sick humor. I think Sarah Palin has been treated very badly by our citizenry and even worse by the press and comedians. She has earned her right to speak however she sees fit.

    I’m sure you were hoping I would condemn her, Chris, but I have always been very fond of, “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.” I can find no reason to set that good admonishment aside in this case.

  70. Tina says:

    The term “armed resistance” conjures up all kinds of images of everything from machine guns to tanks…Janet Reno once held such a party near a small town in Texas a few years back. Now that was out of control since the man they wanted could have been picked up on the street quite peacefully without the conflagration and death.

    The “arms” that the cowboys brought were, according to the cowboy attendee in Peggy’s link, two rifles that were saddle holstered, and two guns holstered at the hip of a couple of the cowboys. None were ever drawn. These men stopped to pray for a peaceful resolution. I wonder what the attitude of the government was as they rounded up and mistreated the cattle?

    Jack is right in his latest article. This isn’t about grass; it isn’t about any species being managed well…not the turtles or the cows. It is about A deal made by a politician and a few cowboys who were in the way. It is about government that’s gotten too big for its britches!

    It’s also admirable, and very conservative, to leave the area cleaner than you found it! the cowboys do know how to manage the land and the animals quite well…and leave the land better than they found it.

    Can’t always say the same for the BLM…at least not since the WWII era began to retire and the activists took over.

  71. Chris says:

    Tina: “Oh well, it’s back in the box.”

    If that box is big enough to include both Rod Dreher and myself, than there’s room enough for all of us.

    “I’m not one to believe God would be offended by this admittedly sick humor.”

    But what exactly is the joke? What is the connection between torturing our enemies and baptism? It doesn’t make any sense. It reminds me of a small child who doesn’t yet know how to craft a joke. Palin simply didn’t give what she said any kind of real thought, which isn’t surprising, since she doesn’t give any real thought to anything she says.

    I agree with you that God has bigger fish to fry. What do you think his stance on torture is?

    “I think Sarah Palin has been treated very badly by our citizenry and even worse by the press and comedians.”

    Possibly, but that has little to do with this conversation. And given that she’s an incurious, petty liar who is willing to use her disabled son to scare the public for political gain, I don’t have a whole lot of sympathy for her.

    “She has earned her right to speak however she sees fit.”

    Of course she has the right to do so, and it’s not a right she needs to earn. But by the same token, the rest of us have the right to call her an idiot for her thoughtless, stupid words.

    “I’m sure you were hoping I would condemn her, Chris, but I have always been very fond of, “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.” I can find no reason to set that good admonishment aside in this case.”

    And yet I’m sure you will find every reason to do so the next time a Democrat does or says something you don’t like.

  72. Tina says:

    Every box has its anomalies.

    Ever heard of baptism by fire? It’s not like the term has never been used before.

    First of all I don’t agree that what we did can be categorized as torture. I’ve read about people being tortured. I’ve seen pictures of the bent bodies, the broken bones, the starvation and deprivation that constitutes torture. It’s a joke to put the carefully monitored and controlled procedure that we conducted in pursuit of information to save lives in the same category. Doing so is ignorant, naive, and grossly unreasonable…my opinion.

    Given that, I believe Sarah Palin has the same opinion so her joke about baptism has nothing to do with torture.

    It has everything to do with disrespect for an enemy that would do all kinds of unspeakable things not only to us, his enemy, but to others of his own race and religion, to women and to children. If you are someone who believes it is our duty to stop the madness of flying planes into buildings, and blowing people up, waterboarding is righteous tool used to stop the madness…a tool similar to baptism procedurally. Therefore the reference is amusing.

    This is obviously an area you are not willing to consider fully. those who are charged with the difficult decisions, the hard choices, don’t have that luxury.

    Honestly I wouldn’t ever want to try to speak for God. My own sense of right and wrong, the world we live in and the situation we were contending with I think the procedure we used was justified. If I had to pretend to be God, like in a play, and I were asked to judge what was done to the men who withstood the Bataan Death March and what we did to three murderous monsters without physically harming them to get information I’d call the Death March torture…the men who oversaw that were giddy at times and the men were treated like the lowliest of animals…there was no respect at all…they were given not one ounce of sympathy nor left with an ounce of humanity. I would forgive those who made the hard decisions for America and not judge them harshly…can’t say I’d do the same for those in charge of the death march.

    As for the rest of your predictable trash talk about Sarah Palin that ends this discussion. You couldn’t wait to bring it up so you could rant on like a loon.

  73. Tina says:

    Just in case anyone is still gathering information on Reid: The New America is informative.

  74. Chris says:

    Tina: “Every box has its anomalies.”

    There’s no box! Dreher doesn’t care one whit about being politically correct, he cares about morality. Now I have my disagreements with some of his moral stances, especially on issues like gay rights, but I admire his consistent and principled nature. Neither of us are taking issue with Palin’s words because they’re not PC. We take issue with them because we think they’re immoral.

    The constant cries of “political correctness” is a silencing technique meant to shut down rational criticism.

    “Ever heard of baptism by fire? It’s not like the term has never been used before.”

    What that phrase typically means is earning some type of redemption (religious or non-religious) through a tough ordeal. How exactly does waterboarding do that? The purpose is to extract information through making the enemy suffer, not to “redeem” the enemy. Palin’s joke doesn’t make sense, and it also conjures up ugly notions of forcible conversion. Has Palin given any thought to how her words could be used as a recruiting tool? Forced baptisms are a real thing that actually happened in early American history, and I can easily see Muslim extremists using Palin’s comments to persuade gullible potentials into thinking that American Christians want to forcibly convert them. Taken along with Ann Coulter’s “we should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity” comments, it basically gives our enemies more ammo in molding new terrorists.

    Now I’m 100% positive that Sarah Palin didn’t even think about her joke this way, but that’s the problem: she doesn’t think about the stupid things she says. The joke was designed to simply take a sadistic glee in the prospect of waterboarding a terrorist. The fact that her audience laughed and cheered shows that the terrorists have succeeded at using fear to further the moral decay of our nation. Even if one thinks that waterboarding is acceptable as a last resort, that’s all it should be; the idea of lowering ourselves to such a thing, of degrading our enemies and making them suffer, shouldn’t be the subject of a light-hearted joke meant to rally the base. Palin is acting like waterboarding is just some casual game. That’s morally repulsive.

    And yes, I’m aware that soldiers in the field use this kind of humor in order to survive and keep their sanity. But Palin is not a soldier. She has never been in a position to make this kind of decision, and because of her total incompetence, she thankfully never will be. So there is no excuse for this type of dehumanizing rhetoric to escape from her lips.

    “First of all I don’t agree that what we did can be categorized as torture…It’s a joke to put the carefully monitored and controlled procedure that we conducted in pursuit of information to save lives in the same category. Doing so is ignorant, naive, and grossly unreasonable…my opinion.”

    Well, your opinion is just wrong. The idea that it can’t be torture as long as it is “carefully monitored and controlled” is silly. And as even John McCain noted, the U.S. government has long considered waterboarding a form of torture and has convicted members of enemy nations for using it on our soldiers:

    “There should be little doubt from American history that we consider that as torture otherwise we wouldn’t have tried and convicted Japanese for doing that same thing to Americans,” McCain said during a news conference.

    He said he forgot to mention that piece of history during Wednesday night’s Republican debate, during which he criticized former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney after Romney declined to publicly say what interrogation techniques he would rule out.

    “I would also hope that he would not want to be associated with a technique which was invented in the Spanish Inquisition, was used by Pol Pot in one of the great eras of genocide in history and is being used on Burmese monks as we speak,” the Arizona senator said. “America is a better nation than that.”

    Waterboarding generally makes breathing difficult and can cause the subject to think he’s drowning. It’s banned by domestic law and international treaties, but those policies don’t cover CIA personnel and President Bush’s administration won’t say whether it has been allowed against terrorism detainees.

    McCain was a prisoner of war for more than five years during the Vietnam War. He was tortured during that time, but said he wasn’t subjected to waterboarding.

    “If the United States was in another conflict, which could easily happen, with another country, and we have allowed that kind of torture to be inflicted on people we hold captive, then there’s nothing to prevent that enemy from also torturing American prisoners,” McCain said.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/mccain-japanese-hanged-for-waterboarding/

    Most nations including our own prior to the Bush administration acknowledged that waterboarding was a form of torture, and that’s just basic common sense. It’s designed to extract information by inflicting extreme fear and suffering in an individual–what the hell else would you call that but torture?

    To say that waterboarding isn’t torture is to severely mangle the English language out of convenience. You need to justify the use of this technique so you are changing the definition of torture in order to excuse it. It’s mindless.

    I’d also be remiss not to point out the chilling irony that the same people who say they can’t trust the government to run the post office think that they can still trust the government to identify and detain terrorists and subject them to extreme interrogation methods all without any sort of due process. It’s amazing, the faith you’re willing to put in the government when they tell you what they’re doing is a matter of national security. Even though you know there are documented cases of the government waterboarding innocent people mistaken for being terrorists, you still don’t question the idea that they should be able to violate the Constitution by using indefinite detention without trial if they accuse someone of being a terrorist.

    “If you are someone who believes it is our duty to stop the madness of flying planes into buildings, and blowing people up, waterboarding is righteous tool used to stop the madness…”

    Well, except for the fact that it’s totally unreliable according to military experts, intelligence agents and scientists who’ve studied the effects:

    http://www.wired.com/2009/09/badintelligence/

    http://www.nbcnews.com/id/30721458/ns/us_news-security/t/ex-fbi-agent-critical-cia-interrogations/#.U1–sOu7HLw

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/11/AR2007121102110.html

    “This is obviously an area you are not willing to consider fully.”

    I have considered the issue fully; you are simply trying to shut down my critiques.

  75. Pie Guevara says:

    Re #80 Chris’ outrageous and idiotic claim: “I have considered the issue fully; you are simply trying to shut down my critiques.”

    Oh really? Where and when have you EVER been denied a voice you ridiculous, sniveling buffoon? This $%&* for brains jerk is absolutely unbelievable.

Comments are closed.