Tuesday, May 6, 2014

Cliven Bundy truthers

A lot of Free Republic these days comes down to a conflict between their id and - way in the background these days - their political instincts.

So they are totally on Cliven Bundy's side, through thick and thin, but they also know this is making them look pretty bad to normal people.

So they eagerly alight on the fact that the NY times excerpted that Bundy slavery quote, assume it's all a frame-up, and then...screw it up by being all racist.

ZULU didn't even bother to read the article.
Puts it all in different light.
ThunderSleeps also rests assured in assuming media bias:
Selective editing on the part of the NYT? Say it ain’t so, Joe.

I'm shocked, shocked I say! . . . Actually, not so much. MSM thinks they can do anything.
Graewoulf does not understand why the blacks only pay attention to the past 60 years, and not the time before that!
It has always been of great curiosity to me why the Democrat Party has turned out to be the 95 % Block Vote Choice of those previously freed from Slavery.

The Democrat Party supported the Southern Plantation System, and the KKK, but now have generations of the descendants of these same slaves on the Federal Welfare Plantation System, with headquarters at 1600 Plantation Avenue, District of Corruption, with a Black Man currently running it!

Have the decisions made by Republican Presidents Lincoln and Eisenhower had such a short historical imprint on our current policy towards each other in the body politic?
Graewoulf also suggests a return to segregated schools:
This is a subject that the PC Police do NOT want to be discussed, but IMHO, it is time - - - time for a change.

Krauthammer had a great observation on FOX this week: “Why do the Liberals send inner city Black kids to Berkley where the Black kids have a 54 % flunk out rate and the White kids have only a 14 % flunk out rate?

Why not send inner city kids to good Black schools, like Morehouse, so can they have a much better chance of a good education AND becoming more successful in our Society?” [Note: as best as I can remember what Charles said].

IMHO, we should learn from the past, hope for the best, and do the best we can with what is left of America. (Pun not intended).
re_nortex preaches the gospel of GOP Presidents.
both President Calvin Coolidge and President Ronald Reagan expanded opportunities for all Americans. The policies of both of these fine men led to years of unprecedented opportunities, with income growth in the every community and demographic. Why a large number of blacks have so little regard for Coolidge, or more notably, Reagan is utterly incomprehensible.
hosepipe sets out a right to be racist.
I reserve the RIGHT to despise some whites, blacks, asians, and hispanics...
and do....
Uncle Lonny details all the racism he has managed to make up:
Compare the media uproar over Bundy’s “racist” comments to the silence of the Corrupt Liberal Media over Jamie Foxx gloating on Saturday Night Live about killing “ALL the white people. How great is that? How black is that?”

Or Eric Holder’s open statement made before the Senate Judiciary Committee in June, 2009, that federal hate crime laws do NOT cover racially motivated violence against white Americans because whites are not an Holder approved “protected group”.

And Holders exempting black on white racist violence from federal law and Jamie Foxx’s glorifying and inciting it is especially egregious considering that thousands of whites are victims of racially motivated attacks by blacks every year in the USA.

Bundy is an elderly white blue collar rancher who is held to a much higher standard than a racist black Attorney General who is corrupting the law.

There is plenty of racism evident in this story and it is the same old racist DOUBLE STANDARD that is SOP of “liberals” and their toadies in the Corrupt Liberal Media.
left that other site laments how liberal Free Republic has gotten these days.
OF COURSE this was a cleverly edited “Hit Job” by the NYT.

However, what Hannity, Beck, and many others fail to recognize is that Our Constitutional Rights DO NOT depend upon our personal prejudices, clumsy speech patterns, or even our IQ.

The unedited interview says things that we say here on FR all the time, about how the Welfare State has destroyed the Black Family in America.

Mr. Bundy is just not quite as eloquent as the average FReeper in expressing these truths.

I was really stunned at the knee-jerk reaction of many FReepers when this first came out. Epithets such as “Idiot”, “Troll” and “Racist” streamed onto the threads about Mr. Bundy from people I usually respect. Mostly these were from people who felt that Bundy had “Hurt Our Cause”.

So, does that mean when a person is unlovely, maybe a little ignorant, or even railroaded by the liberal press, that we should no longer defend his Constitutional Rights?

FR has a Proud tradition of uncovering Lamestream Media Hoaxes that are meant to discredit us. Rathergate, Green-Helmet-Guy, Flat Fatima, The GI Joe Hostage Doll, and the Edited Zimmerman Tapes are all examples of how the bright and discerning minds of FR have been at the forefront of speaking the Truth and uncovering the lies and hoaxes.
grania synthesizes the desire to side with Bundy and to be politically relevant by making this yet another purity test to smoke out all the insufficiently crazy politicians:
This whole Bundy situation is fascinating. The DC politicians, even those who pretend to be constitutional conservatives, did not have the instincts to side with Bundy and states rights and individual rights to use what were once called public grazing lands. Then after the standoff, the light comes on and they realize that a majority of people don't like federal over-reach and the sneaky profitiable for politicians deals to use rhe land for their schemes. But you know what? They're all in the DC smog, so they're probably looking for how to get on that gravy train.

So those pols appealing to conservatives sent out a message "send us some cover" so they could drop support of Bundy and the issue. In comes the NYT editing Bundy and changing a message of "today people are enslaved by the federal government" to "Bundy's a crazed racist". Immediately, the fake conservatives had an excuse to drop the cause, and they thought still keep their supporters.

It didn't work. We now know who the worst of the fakes are. People like Rand Paul, Shawn Hannity and Glenn Beck were so quick to condemn that they had to know this was coming. We can't trust them ever again. And as far as the rest of the crowd? Did ANY of the pols we support as conservatives have the instincts to support Bundy's questioning of the over-reach of the federal government?

It's all so rigged. The only silver lining is politicians and talkers who supposedly support constitutional conservative have been exposed.

47 comments:

  1. This is what modern day feminism and liberalism has brought forth..a young girl rejoicing over her abortion and saying "yay"at the end.. sick..

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2621461/Abortion-counselor-proves-procedure-isnt-scary-posting-YouTube-video-OWN-termination-three-weeks.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, distasteful things should all be illegal, and in this case punished as murder would be.

      Off with her head!

      Delete
    2. You seriously do not see any thing wrong with this video..cheapening of life? Speaks volumes about your character..

      ..and I believe you are women is that correct?

      Delete
    3. @anon1 - I concur. It is a revolting thing. The ending of a life is never to be celebrated. And yes - I believe that life begins at conception and there are damned few circumstances that warrant it being ended before it really begins.

      Delete
    4. Oh, I think it's disgusting, but so is piss Christ, or Drudge's endless stream of noting every black-on-white crime story.

      But they're all legal.

      As to abortion generally, I find it deeply troubling, and would hope no one would abort one of my children.
      But its a humility thing with me - the question of when life begins is a decision I don't want to project on someone else; that's up to them.

      Delete
    5. You think.

      You don't just do the talking points.

      I can accept abortion in 3 cases. Rape. Incest. Real and clear danger to the mothers life.

      Anyone else - if you are too damned stupid to take the pill ($9 from Walmart) or use a condom (About a buck for 3, and if you need more than 3 in a night you are bullshitting me) I have very little sympathy with you.

      Delete
    6. Yep - I completely understand your position - society makes moral decisions on behalf of its members all the time and overrides their personal convictions. And this is about as moral as they come.

      But it is not quite as simple as 'it's killing an innocent person.' It's not murder - look at the exceptions. And look at who they want to punish - the doctor, not the mother.
      So it's not quite human life as we treat it outside of the womb.

      And at that point, I just don't want to make the decision of what it is.
      But I respect those who do, and I understand the disgust, and I hope they keep fighting, because if I believed as they did you'd better believe I would.

      Delete
    7. Oddly enough - the best description of abortion was from a Democrat, "Safe, legal and rare."

      I can live with that

      Delete
    8. Heh. Almost typed that myself.

      Delete
    9. I think abortion is great! Every pregnancy should end with one!

      Delete
    10. I'm sorry, what does any of this have to do with Cliven Bundy truthers? I am so sick of guys and their slutty-women-who-love-abortions hobbyhorse. Stop obsessing already.

      Delete
    11. @anonymousB, anon1 is just on some sort of jihad to show us liberals how wrong we are, not realizing how ridiculous he looks doing it.

      And despite anon1's link above, I am still completely pro-choice. Not only because women should be allowed to choose what happens with their own body, but because I don't want to see a return of back alley abortions. It's already starting to happen in Texas where women go to Mexico to buy abortion drugs and then wind up in the hospital because of a lack of safe abortion clinics there. And my right-wing Republican Obama-hating mother-in-law feels the same way.

      Delete
    12. Euph - one small favor? Never even joke about jihad. It is one thing that is taken deadly serious by over a billion people. You are safe enough saying that where you are right now - but it's a bad habit to get into if you ever want to travel. One slip and bang. Your head is gone.

      I too find I am pro choice - either use contraception or don't fuck. I like binary solutions. As someone who considers that life begins shortly after conception (a single cell is not really life, once they start to differentiate you got a person on your hands, like it or not) I have to think that being pro-choice has to include the rights of the child too.

      No one speaks for them. At least not eloquently. In these days of 98% reliable contraception and 100% reliable post sex contraceptives - abortion shouldn't even exist.

      Delete
    13. No promises about my word choices. But if it makes you feel better, I had to think about what word I wanted to use for a while, so it's not likely to come up in spoken conversation.

      I can certainly see where you're coming from as far as the life of the unborn. But I don't agree with you as to when it becomes a separate life. Otherwise, why would we celebrate birthdays and not conception days? Yes, I know that can be hard to pin down exactly, but it's not hard to estimate.

      As for rights of the child, I don't consider anything that can't survive outside of the womb to be a child. I think we focus too much on the baby and don't consider the woman's feelings. Most anti-abortionists in this country are also against any form of welfare assistance for mother and child once it's born, and if a woman is not ready to be a mother, they are most likely going to need it if forced to bring a child to full term. Plus, as I mentioned above, many women are going to go to desperate measures to avoid having a child in that situation. Better to have it "safe, legal and rare" as you said above. And I would add one more to that, "without fear of harassment". It can be a hard enough decision to make that choice. A woman doesn't need several protesters at the clinic waving signs with pictures of dismembered fetuses at her.

      Delete
    14. Fair enough. This is one of those places we are going to disagree.

      Though I will point out that - legally speaking - even a fetus incapable of surviving outside it's mothers womb is considered a person. It's why someone who kills a pregnant woman is charged with double homicide. Still - the law is not exactly renowned for it's consistency!

      Delete
    15. " Most anti-abortionists in this country are also against any form of welfare assistance for mother and child once it's born, and if a woman is not ready to be a mother, they are most likely going to need it if forced to bring a child to full term."
      -------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total flat out lie..Most conservatives are not against welfare for people who deserve it and need it..what we are against is the generational welfare and waste..women who have 6 bastard kids with 6 different baby daddas.

      Get it? No I know you won't

      Delete
    16. @EC, I would argue that killing a pregnant woman is considered a double homicide because it happens against the woman's will. Same thing if a woman was forced to have an abortion. I would be completely for the assailant being charged with murder in both cases.

      @anon1, So let me ask you, would you rather a woman get welfare for her "6 bastard kids with 6 different baby daddas" or would you rather she abort them? It's not the children's fault they were born, after all, and if the mother is unable to support them without welfare, what do you propose we do? And who are you to determine who "deserves" welfare?

      Delete
    17. "and if the mother is unable to support them without welfare, what do you propose we do? "
      -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Why do you liberals make this so hard? Cut them off of any beenies for any subsequent bastard child after the first one...They will make sure they won't get pregnant..and give em lot's of BC.

      And who am I to say who deserves welfare? I am a fickin tax payer who is raped via taxes..that's who..

      Delete
    18. Oh, so cutting them off is your big plan to make them more responsible? How naive can you get? What happens when your plan doesn't work and they have more children anyway? Let those children starve in the street? Or maybe state mandated abortions like China?

      And yes, you can always vote against your tax dollars going to them. But until your ideas prevail, you can't choose who does and doesn't get welfare.

      Delete
    19. Oh, so cutting them off is your big plan to make them more responsible?
      -----------------------------------------------------------------------
      My coworker went on the group 52 week disability plan and everyone knew after a few months he was milking the system..funny..3 days after the disability ended his condition miracously got better and he was back to work.

      Too many welfare bums milking the system..you seriously have no problem with women having 4-6 kids out of wedlock and out taxes paying for her bad choices..SRS answer this question.. what do you think about this women and what would you do to get her to stop having bastard kids?

      Delete
    20. Oh, so cutting them off is your big plan to make them more responsible?---------------------
      ------------------------------------------------------------------

      If they know they won't get bennies they won't have bastard kids..they won;t have the kids to begin with.

      Delete
    21. "If they know they won't get bennies they won't have bastard kids..they won;t have the kids to begin with."

      ...Do you have any idea what people do that makes them have kids?
      It's actually a lot of fun, and might explain quite a few pregnancies as least as much as some sort of welfare scam.

      Delete
    22. I'm not a liberal, I'm libertarian but I'm 100% pro-choice.

      A unborn fetus has no rights because it is not a human being yet.

      Until the baby comes out of the vagina, the woman should be allowed to do whatever she pleases with it, its just an extension of her body.

      Delete
    23. "...Do you have any idea what people do that makes them have kids?
      It's actually a lot of fun, and might explain quite a few pregnancies as least as much as some sort of welfare scam."
      --------------------------------------------------------------------------
      So..responsible people are not having fun in the bedroom? Your comment is another fail.

      Delete
    24. @Anon1:

      "Total flat out lie..Most conservatives are not against welfare for people who deserve it and need it..what we are against is the generational welfare and waste..women who have 6 bastard kids with 6 different baby daddas. "

      I might not have phrased it as harshly, but - pretty much. If you are too damned stupid to take responsibility for your own actions - including the use of contraception - you really shouldn't breed. The Darwin Awards have enough contenders each year as it is.

      Delete
    25. @anon1, Going on disability is obviously different. You can't suddenly decide that you no longer have another child. No plan is foolproof for getting people to stop having children they can't support, but I would like to see more education and more availability of birth control, including abortion.

      Delete
    26. So..responsible people are not having fun in the bedroom? Your comment is another fail.

      So responsible people are the only ones having fun in the bedroom? Your naivete is showing again.

      Delete
    27. So responsible people are the only ones having fun in the bedroom? Your naivete is showing again.
      -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Why are responsible people having fun in the bedroom and not having bastard kids and welfare mom'as are having fun in the bedroom also but popping out 6 bastard kids in the process and expect others to pay for it.

      Maybe one has enough pride and respect not to expect others to pay for their mistakes while the others have no problem with being moochers?

      Delete
    28. Anon1, sounds like you think of children like a punishment...

      Delete
    29. No plan is foolproof for getting people to stop having children they can't support, but I would like to see more education and more availability of birth control, including abortion.
      ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
      One child they can't afford... ok accidents happen and not all BC is foolproof but 6 kids?

      Delete
    30. Ozzie - trust me on this?

      Children are a joy. Grand children are better, because you can hand the sods back! But sometimes - coming off an 18 hour stint to a howling kid - yes, they feel like a punishment.

      Delete
    31. Anon1, sounds like you think of children like a punishment...
      -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      Not at all....but 6 bastard kids the baby momma cannot afford is wrong and is a punishment for the taxpayers who have to pay for her nonsense...and having more than one bastard child she cannot afford dis irresponsible and nonsense..but some people don;t give a shit because they know Sugar daddy Uncle Sam will pay for it.

      Delete
    32. OzymandiasMay 7, 2014 at 2:10 PM

      Anon1, sounds like you think of children like a punishment...
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      LOL funny comment coming from a women who is pro choice and supports abortion..

      Delete
    33. Come on, anon1, let's hear your solution to stop irresponsible people from having sex while also outlawing abortion. If the children are born, society will pay for them one way or another, even if you cut off their welfare.

      Delete
    34. Come on, anon1, let's hear your solution to stop irresponsible people from having sex while also outlawing abortion. If the children are born, society will pay for them one way or another, even if you cut off their welfare
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Young women today are told it's ok and cool to have children out of wedlock...quite a few young men tell me it's sometimes near impossible to find young girls without least one kids before age 21.

      Women also know Uncle Sam will pay for their kid from cradle to age 18 so getting pregnant is no big deal.

      I would change attitudes and make it clear to women after the first kid the bennies are cut off for any new kids..the women will make sure their BC is working or will be more selective on the future sex partners..or will astain form random hookups.

      And we could use some more morality in this country.

      Not hard euphgeek.

      Delete
    35. Oh, yeah. Not hard at all. *eyeroll*

      So your answer is to trust that once irresponsible people run out of money, they'll magically become responsible? Oh, and of course tell them to be moral. Do you not see the myriad of ways your naïveté would fail? One of the ways being that those children you want to protect from abortion would end up starving to death. Good going! You're trading a quick death for a long, drawn out one! But then we knew you RWNJs loved torture.

      Delete
    36. So your answer is to trust that once irresponsible people run out of money, they'll magically become responsible?

      ----------------------------------------------------------------------
      They sure will....you are the one that is naieve. It's easy to go out and spend some other person's money.
      ------------------------------------------------------------------------Oh, and of course tell them to be moral. Do you not see the myriad of ways your naïveté would fail?-------------------------------------------------------------------TeMoral people worked great for this country for much of our history.
      -------------------------------------------------------------------------
      One of the ways being that those children you want to protect from abortion would end up starving to death.
      -----------------------------------------------------------------------Thre you go again putting words in my mouth..if they don't have the kids out of wedlock and wait until they are in a stable relationship or marriage there is less chance of being poor or starving. Nearly every study shows single, never ,married moms as being destined to be poor and on gov't assistance


      Good going! You're trading a quick death for a long, drawn out one! But then we knew you RWNJs loved torture.
      ----------------------------------------------------------------------
      I explained this to you in a message above..conservatives are not against welfare or benefits to people who deserve them or need them..

      You and your fellow liberals have destroyed the morality of this country..trillions spent on the poor and we are poorer than ever.

      Delete
    37. Euph you liberals truly are as dumb as a box of rocks. If you think if the bennies are cut off people won't change their ways you are naieve. It worked under welfare reform with Clinton..

      Delete
    38. They sure will....you are the one that is naieve. It's easy to go out and spend some other person's money.

      It's also easy to go out and have indiscriminate sex with a stranger.

      Moral people worked great for this country for much of our history.

      Which part of our history were we perfectly moral? Was it when we were keeping slaves? When we drove Native Americans off their land? When segregation was legal? When women weren't allowed to vote?

      ...wait until they are in a stable relationship or marriage...

      Irresponsible people doing that? Yeah, good luck.

      conservatives are not against welfare or benefits to people who deserve them or need them..

      And you alone are allowed to determine who "deserves" or "needs" welfare. Everyone else can just starve in the streets.

      You and your fellow liberals have destroyed the morality of this country

      It's all the fault of the liberals! If they would only stop trying to feed the poor, nobody would be poor and everyone would be responsible!

      If you think if the bennies are cut off people won't change their ways you are naieve. It worked under welfare reform with Clinton..

      Yes, I forgot how under Clinton there were no more poor people. What happened since then? Oh yeah, we had a Republican president. Won't be making that mistake again.

      Delete
    39. Oh, and by the way, if you could convince irresponsible people to stop having children by threatening to take away their "bennies" then they wouldn't be irresponsible people.

      Delete
    40. I have an easy fiscal solution, but not one that anon1 will agree with because he is a woman-hater: All men have to have their DNA in a database before they turn 18. If they fuck somebody and produce a child, they have to either marry the woman for life, or do hard labor to pay off the child until it is of age at 18. No more welfare for children at all. How's that sound? Oh, too harsh? Well, I guess we should put all the punishment back upon the children and the women, where it belongs, then. Because that's working out so well. I mean, as long as we are proposing ridiculous and impractical solutions, why not mine.

      Delete
  2. Need cripplecreek for a spotlight!!!! Pleeease!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Well, at least one creeper doesn't understand Facebook powered comments can expose your creep alias:http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3152151/posts andhttp://www.dallasvoice.com/transgender-woman-files-discrimination-complaint-dallas-salvation-army-10172167.html
    Wvkayaker is W. Page Noe.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Green Helmet Guy? Flat Fatima?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I balked at those same two names. Funny that you did, too. Who/what?

      Delete
  5. Nice idea. If people are having children they can't afford, the best solution is to punish them.... by having the innocent child starve. That'll teach those 2 year old welfare leeches not to get themselves born like that ever again!

    People really think this way - and think they are the moral ones.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They say that they are thinking of the lives of the children but they don't seem to care about the children's lives after they are born. No food stamps, no housing allowances, no heathcare, no headstart education programs because chlidren need to learn that there will be no free handouts. The parents, who wanted the abortion in the first place because they couldn't afford the chlid, should have to support the child even though they are unable to do so. If a few children die in the process it's their own fault right?

      Delete