Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
nice try. No dice.
Context always matters. And you already know that.
Why don't you just go ahead and defend the guy, if you feel that way? It's your right. If you want to support racism, go right ahead, but notice how his RW fan club is shrinking really, really fast.
Gee, maybe they know something you don't know.
If context matters why are you ignoring the full unedited context of his remarks? Or does context only matter if it supports your desired version of events?
Because what you just said is bullshit.
Here is the NYT article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/24/u...eaks-the-law-becoming-a-hero-in-the-west.html
Here is the quote:
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 didnt have nothing to do. They didnt have nothing for their kids to do. They didnt 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 Ive 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 didnt get no more freedom. They got less freedom.
Now, go watch the video. here it is:
The same words. The only line that is not a direct quote is the line I bolded, which is called an indicator line, totally common in journalism. And it says exactly the same thing he said.
Nothing about what he said was altered. Nothing.
Care to try again, or is the butthurt just too much for you.
It is great that conservatives are condemning racism! That is what conservatives should always do. What is the problem?
Perhaps liberals should spend more time denouncing racism and less time making race an issue about everything.
Well, folks, it was fun playing on this thread, I need to do some other things now. Have fun screaming at each other!
Lol oh now dis guy's mad
Is that the same TK who just advocated for slavery on another thread?
Why yes, I think it's the same TK!!!!
Can you link to that, please.
The word "Negro" still appears on significant chunk of government forms...
No. It does not. Idiot.
"Negro" was used on the 2010 census.
Huh? You are gonna have to think of another way to explain your point to me, because I don't follow.It is great that conservatives are condemning racism! That is what conservatives should always do. What is the problem?
Perhaps liberals should spend more time denouncing racism and less time making race an issue about everything.
Hmmmm. Do you really think that liberals don't spend enough time denouncing racism? Or was that just a throw away line that you used to try and make the dopey point that followed?
Let's take this case for example. Was anyone calling Bundy a racist the day before yesterday? Were liberals making the grazing rights legal battle about race?
I appreciate the attempt to ride the fence and raise the level of discourse. But if you sit on a fence long enough.....it is going to lean one way or the other. Hope it works out for you.
Why don't you just go ahead and defend the guy, if you feel that way? It's your right. If you want to support racism, go right ahead, but notice how his RW fan club is shrinking really, really fast.
Gee, maybe they know something you don't know.
I've never conformed to political correctness, that's the turf of Progressives, a turf that they navigate well.
Fact: The man lives in the middle of desert, ranching cattle and picking some crops --- and has his entire life; he has no direct experience or education about the horrors of true slavery.
Fact: He does however have experience and education about modern slavery (welfare state), since he frequently drives through Las Vegas.
Fact: He has observed and realized (correctly) that the most dangerous place for a black person is in the WOMB of their mother. Most blacks die before they are ever born. Even blacks admit this. Aborition is not SAFE (Gosnell) and it is not RARE (20+million now, aye?) in black America, but it certainly is LEGAL and often subsidized.
Fact: He has observed and realized (correctly) that the second most dangerous and unhappy place to live (in America) is in a black city or suburban ghetto, such as Chicago or Rochester or many of the suburban ghettos on Long Island not far from where I live. I've had cops let me go when "improperly" storing my shotgun in the front seat of my car nearly loaded when driving through these areas --- black cops btw.
Fact: Black crime rate was lower than the white crime rate in the 30's and 40's and arguably less int he 50's. Family units were very strong then in the black community and their culture thrived --- they invented jazz --- as a fellow musician, I'm sure you know that. Today, their music ---- omfg. And they degrade themselves and their women in particular.
Fact: You do NOT want to be born black in America today, nor more than you wanted to be born black in America pre-1860's. The 1920's-1950's was the Black Golden Age. It was during this Golden Age of Enlightenment that outstanding men like Martin Luther King rose to power to restore their birthrights of freedom. Then MLK got shot and his movement was hijacked by race merchants and KKK Democrats like Byrd and LBJ who realized that black empowerment couldn't be stopped, so they diverted it's course to their own political ends. Funny enough, Gun Control laws were started by the KKK to disarm blacks (whilst the NRA armed them hahaha) and Democrat run cities like Chicago are still enforcing Black Codes to keep them disarmed.
Fact: Blacks (statistically by percentage) are the most dependent upon Government subsidy.
Fact: LBJ said "I'll have these ******* voting Democrat for the next 200 years." In other words --- I'll steal from whites, with he support of black voters, and distribute that money to the blacks very sparingly and just enough to keep them "content" and voting Democrat.
Fact: The Welfare state has only impoverished whites and blacks together, and has resulted in the loss of individual freedoms.
It's just a repository of the Righties who have distanced themselves from Bundy for him being a racist fuck.
Those Righties are Neoconservatives and always have been. They're just as bad --- arguably far more dangerous to be honest, than Progressives. At the very least, the Progressive base doesn't vote for foreign wars.
They called the Bundy ranch "ranch Davidian" last week and snickered about it. Doesn't giggling about using tanks and poison gas and burning 80 men women and children to death sound a little creepy? Doesn't it trump a racist comment by an old man? The gotcha mentality on the left is starting to sound a little desperate and a tad psychotic.
Huh? You are gonna have to think of another way to explain your point to me, because I don't follow.It is great that conservatives are condemning racism! That is what conservatives should always do. What is the problem?
Perhaps liberals should spend more time denouncing racism and less time making race an issue about everything.
Hmmmm. Do you really think that liberals don't spend enough time denouncing racism? Or was that just a throw away line that you used to try and make the dopey point that followed?
Let's take this case for example. Was anyone calling Bundy a racist the day before yesterday? Were liberals making the grazing rights legal battle about race?
I appreciate the attempt to ride the fence and raise the level of discourse. But if you sit on a fence long enough.....it is going to lean one way or the other. Hope it works out for you.
Disagreeing with something Bundy said does not mean agreement with the government's outrageous actions.
The way I see it, you claim racism whenever someone disagrees with you (not you but liberals, i don't know about you yet).Huh? You are gonna have to think of another way to explain your point to me, because I don't follow.Hmmmm. Do you really think that liberals don't spend enough time denouncing racism? Or was that just a throw away line that you used to try and make the dopey point that followed?
Let's take this case for example. Was anyone calling Bundy a racist the day before yesterday? Were liberals making the grazing rights legal battle about race?
I appreciate the attempt to ride the fence and raise the level of discourse. But if you sit on a fence long enough.....it is going to lean one way or the other. Hope it works out for you.
Really? I thought it was pretty clear. I was trying to be fair.
You néed to take your bullshit meme about liberals making everything about race and shove it far up your ass. We don't. But we do denounce racism when we see it.
Yes, they did. Liberals asked, "What if Bundy were black."Since we did not make the Bundy episode about race until HE DID, you have used a piss-poor example in trying to make your bullshit point.
I have no issue talking about race, with rational people. But when the arguments are bullshit arguments, there is no point.You seem like a decent, intelligent and well-meaning person. And you do a great job of putting some assholes in their place. But I think you want to pretend that race does not motivate much of what is going on in this nation....politically. You are, essentially, on the fence. You dislike racism.....but you also dislike having the discussion about racism. If you accuse liberals of overplaying the "race card", you can sit up on that fence and point fingers in both directions. Safe. Smooth sailing.
The way I see is that you claim racism whenever someone disagrees with you.Huh? You are gonna have to think of another way to explain your point to me, because I don't follow.
Really? I thought it was pretty clear. I was trying to be fair.
You néed to take your bullshit meme about liberals making everything about race and shove it far up your ass. We don't. But we do denounce racism when we see it.
Yes, they did. Liberals asked, "What if Bundy were black."Since we did not make the Bundy episode about race until HE DID, you have used a piss-poor example in trying to make your bullshit point.
I have no issue talking about race, with rational people. But when the arguments are bullshit arguments, there is no point.You seem like a decent, intelligent and well-meaning person. And you do a great job of putting some assholes in their place. But I think you want to pretend that race does not motivate much of what is going on in this nation....politically. You are, essentially, on the fence. You dislike racism.....but you also dislike having the discussion about racism. If you accuse liberals of overplaying the "race card", you can sit up on that fence and point fingers in both directions. Safe. Smooth sailing.
I refuse to accept that racism plays as much of a role in the political arena as you and the left claim. My belief, when it comes to politics, racism is a fine invention. That's not sitting on the fence, that is standing steadfast with my principles.
Don't get me wrong, racism does exist...we see examples of racists everyday when the Pussy Brigade posts their nonsense. But to use the race card whenever someone disagrees with a policy is nonsense and an abuse of intellectual discourse.
As long as you don't make generalizations about Conservatives being racist...that includes attacking black conservatives because they are black.The way I see is that you claim racism whenever someone disagrees with you.Really? I thought it was pretty clear. I was trying to be fair.
You néed to take your bullshit meme about liberals making everything about race and shove it far up your ass. We don't. But we do denounce racism when we see it.
Yes, they did. Liberals asked, "What if Bundy were black."
I have no issue talking about race, with rational people. But when the arguments are bullshit arguments, there is no point.You seem like a decent, intelligent and well-meaning person. And you do a great job of putting some assholes in their place. But I think you want to pretend that race does not motivate much of what is going on in this nation....politically. You are, essentially, on the fence. You dislike racism.....but you also dislike having the discussion about racism. If you accuse liberals of overplaying the "race card", you can sit up on that fence and point fingers in both directions. Safe. Smooth sailing.
I refuse to accept that racism plays as much of a role in the political arena as you and the left claim. My belief, when it comes to politics, racism is a fine invention. That's not sitting on the fence, that is standing steadfast with my principles.
Don't get me wrong, racism does exist...we see examples of racists everyday when the Pussy Brigade posts their nonsense. But to use the race card whenever someone disagrees with a policy is nonsense and an abuse of intellectual discourse.
Let's you and I agree on something. When you see ME PERSONALLY use the race card in response to a simple policy disagreement.....you can make those generalizations about liberals.
Deal?
No, they don't, because you'll notice that each time they say that what Cliven Bundy said was wrong, they also include something along the lines of "but Democrats do that, too."Now they're all scurrying around trying to throw Bundy under the bus by claiming they didn't "know?"
Here's a little clue for these guys. You can't rescue your credibility when you don't have any to begin with.
Wow, you really think they don't get a little credibility for denouncing racism?
They were not apologizing for standing with Cliven Bundy until it was undeniably obvious that he was wrong, even when it was undeniably obvious that he was wrong from the start, as the multiple court orders stated.
This was never about Cliven Bundy, land use rights, a Chinese solar plant, the 2nd Amendment, the police state, or desert tortoises. This was about uninformed rednecks thinking that they have had enough of a black President. These people are dangerous. They belong on a terrorist watchlist.
Disagreeing with something Bundy said does not mean agreement with the government's outrageous actions.
Disclosure: Didn't read past the above quoted post on p 3. I agree with that statement, and anyone attempting to make a correlation btwn people who disagree with the way the feds have been handling such situations, and a racist old jerk, are pretty fucking transparent. If it was a Venn diagram showing Bundy and the majority of conservatives/libertarians, the "racist" segment would not be overlapping...but if any libs want to pretend that's the case, or actually believe it, then I just chalk it up to their delusional hatred towards the right, and their pathetic need to stoop to such levels to discredit their opposition/enemies. Continue to overreach though, because it's so old and obvious, that normal people on the left who aren't rabid dogs looking for a bone to chew on even roll their eyes anymore at the ease with which race baiting and throwing out the race card are constantly played...so continue to lose credibility with with the tired game of The Boy Who Called Racist.
This was never about Cliven Bundy, land use rights, a Chinese solar plant, the 2nd Amendment, the police state, or desert tortoises. This was about uninformed rednecks thinking that they have had enough of a black President. These people are dangerous. They belong on a terrorist watchlist.
What you see as accolade, I see as abuse of power. Just because you condemn one party does not mean you support the other. Everyone on fox said Bundy's legal position was untenable; he lost! Fox has promulgated his case to focus on the abuse of the federal government - not to champion Bundy. The embolden is the crux - not a point of contention. 24-7 is hyperboleHere's a little clue for you. From what I've heard and read, Bundy is an extremist in ALL his views. He's on the edge of the nth degree of a statistical distribution range in terms of his views. The thing is that it's not like it was a secret. Bundy is not the shy and retiring type who has spent years hiding himself and his views behind a wall of privacy. He's quite willing to spout off and has done so for years. So, I don't buy that people in the media who latched on to him as their new anti Obama anti federal gov't media-manufactured hero couldn't or wouldn't do a little due diligence in order to discover some facts about him instead of just hoisting his banner and waving it for him.
I saw this as an obstinate man who chose not to pay his taxes, because he did not recognize the federal authority, and the deplorable way they responded - his racial bias is not relevant! You seem to think that those beliefs should suppress it.
I did not see one person champion his tax dodge on fox. They told both sides of this significant case. I don't see why you believe they flew his banner?
The bolded: an interesting point. Were it a case to not receive national attention and 24/7 accolades from FOX News, I could almost agree with you on it, but as soon as a national party pretty much attached itself to him as a cause celebre for their ideology, as soon as he started to to do this shit, then is DOES matter, imo.
The word "Negro" still appears on significant chunk of government forms...
No. It does not. Idiot.
"Negro" was used on the 2010 census.
