Posted on 04/25/2014 12:49:24 PM PDT by logi_cal869
The Left adores its "racism" narrative. It is practically the only narrative they have left, and they have used it repeatedly like a cheap prostitute at a party for sex addicts. One of the cheapest political whores on the national scene is Dirty Harry "Cleanface" Reid, the ignoble, utterly corrupt U.S. Senate Majority "Leader." Harry has now added his wormy voice to the cacaphony of leftist sluts calling Cliven Bundy "racist." Let's get our facts straight.
The Left is able to promote this narrative for two main reasons: 1. they lie. 2. the media repeats the lie. So let's dissect their lie about Bundy. How did they lie? As usual, they edited remarks to create the perception they want, using only that portion of Bundy's remarks where he intimated that blacks were better off under slavery. They carefully left out the portion that put the statement in context.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
FWIW
Correction, three main reasons, the third reason is that too many Republicans are so afraid of being called a racist that they are willing to restart the Republican circular firing squad with Clive Bundy in the middle.
Although it may be the obvious truth the people the writer is trying to convince do not care.
Bundy is no racist, just clumsy, and not eloquent in what he said about Blacks. He should have said Black families were better able to survive as a family under the harshness of slavery, better than they can under the help of welfare; that results in broken homes, out of wedlock children, and young men who end up shooting each other.
Slavery bound and threatened their bodies, but welfare has bound and threatened their souls.
The left never passes up an opportunity to try to destroy any conservative who dares to speak out against the government plantation.
The “reporter” on CNN last night went on an hour-long rant against FOX for “supporting” Bundy. No mention of facts, and actually little mention of Bundy, just an hour of hate for FOX.
I don’t think he’s a racist. No more than most of us here are, but he has described racial issues in terms that the PC establishment doesn’t approve of nowadays. That means you catch a lot of crap. If it were me, and I felt like it was worth taking the crap, I’d stand by what I said. I think Mr. Bundy isn’t very articulate and tends to shoot from the hip, albeit in a sincere way to make a point, not because he’s a racist. But that said, if I were him I’d just shut up, because I think he’s got more to lose by offering his opinions in this way than he could possibly gain. I’d advise him to keep opinions private and focus on the abuses of the BLM if I were offering him advice.
Shameful.
Yep. Bundy had to be destroyed by the regime and Hannity, Beck, O’Really, Krauthammer and the rest of the faux Conservatives went right along and did King Zero’s bidding.Shameful.
DO NOT overlook the FACT that MANY on this site DID THE SAME!!!
No kidding...
How did they lie? As usual, they edited remarks to create the perception they want, using only that portion of Bundy's remarks where he intimated that blacks were better off under slavery. They carefully left out the portion that put the statement in context.
No different in principle from NBC playing a question to George Zimmerman . . . followed by Zimmerman’s answer to a different question.
It is painfully obvious that so-called “objective” journalism is an ideologically unified propaganda organism. The reason should have always been obvious - journalism is ideologically unified by the wire services.People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. - Adam Smith, Wealth of NationsThe reason journalists, brought together (by the wire services in general and the AP in particular), coalesce around socialist ideology is also plain - journalists are not doers but critics. As such, they naturally reject Theodore Roosevelt’s formulation that"It is not the critic who counts . . . the credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena . . . who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds . . .The opposite formulation, perfectly congenial to journalists, is”If you have a business, you didn’t build that,"It is limiting case of criticism - cynicism.The solution I advocate is to sue for libel. But not merely to sue the offending publication, but to sue journalism itself. By the simple expedient of suing “the Associated Press and its members.” Unless you sue the whole institution, the AP will diffuse the responsibility into oblivion.
Didn’t Mr. Bundy say pretty much the same thing as Phil Robertson said about the black community?
I am quite sure neither thinks slavery was a good idea. They were merely observing how the family structure was intact back then. Nothing to do with slavery.
Enter the Democrats and their systematic destruction of the family unit (both black and white) and two older generation men merely point out the consequences.
Liberalism ultimately leads to a different form of slavery.
Yes, sad to say. I did see that. Some names I did not recognize. Sleeper agents perhaps? The others, they’ll have to live with themselves.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.