Posted on 04/26/2014 6:03:33 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Like everyone else, Gavin McInnes has weighed in on Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy's observations on "the Negro". Mr McInnes concludes:
This isn't about some old guy's views on slavery. It's about government control. We're not saying Bundy is the messiah and we accept him as our personal savior. We're saying the government is wrong.
Let's stipulate that Cliven Bundy is a racist. Let's also assume, if only to save time, that he's Islamophobic, homophobic and transphobic. So what? Does that make criticizing the Bureau of Land Management "racist" or "homophobic"?
During my battles with Canada's "human rights" commissions, defenders of the racket liked to point out that the people it targeted were generally pretty unsavory. And I'd respond that the reason the standard representation of justice in statuary is a blindfolded lady is because justice is supposed to be blind: If you run a red light and hit a pedestrian, it makes no difference whether the pedestrian you hit is Nelson Mandela or Cliven Bundy. Or at least it shouldn't: one of the basic building blocks of civilized society is equality before the law.
Likewise, if what the Bureau of Land Management is doing is wrong, the fact that Cliven Bundy is a racist sexist homophobe whateverphobe doesn't make it right - any more than at Ruby Ridge FBI sniper Lon Horiuchi shooting Vicki Weaver in the back of the head as she was cradling her ten-month-old baby and running away from him is made right by the fact that she allegedly had "white supremacist" sympathies. As I wrote last week, I've little doubt that, in the era before cellphone video, the bureaucratic enforcers would have been happy to off Bundy and then come up with a reason why it doesn't matter....
(Excerpt) Read more at steynonline.com ...
ping
BUNDY IS NOT RACIST. NO NEED TO STIPULATE TO IT.
So true. This BS about racism is nothing but a diversion.
You've missed Steyn's point.
Which is: Let's not waste time defending Bundy, he isn't the point; let's address the larger issue of government over-reach.
The media has made so much of Bundy's alleged racism simply because it is a distraction from the central issue.
Steyn's stipulation isn't an accusation or a confirmation, it simply dismisses the relevance of the accusation.
EXACTLY!The Left ALWAYS Pulls The”RACIST BULLSH*T”!It’s Their Way of”Changing The Subject”!!The Left Will ALWAYS Be At Odds With The US Constitution Because They Believe That You Are”GUILTY UNLESS PROVEN INNOCENT”!!!!!!!!!!!
RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)
Harry Reid said that Obama was “clean” and “articulate” Or was that Biden? I guarantee you , you sit that little communist sh&t down and slap a lie detector on his as$ and he is a total RAYSESS!!
The rest of the "conservative" pundits can pound sand.
Last paragraph has some very excellent observations on the tyranny of tolerance.
It was a rhetorical hypothetical. Exactly like the rhetorical hypothetical that Cliven Bundy used when he asked “I wonder if they would be better off...” You’re criticizing Steyn for the same thing Bundy is being condemned for.
That wasn’t even close to his point.... one stipulates as a manner of getting people back on track to the original point
BUMP!
Exactly right. I honestly don’t know if he’s racist or not - and I don’t care. What I care about is the feds taking his property by force, and his case and cause against them.
See post #5
This is the perfect place for Andrew Breitbart’s favorite comeback. When someone wants to delegitimize Cliven Bundy’s argument with the BLM, by claiming he’s a racist, just answer, “So?” While they’re sputtering, you can go on with the REAL issue, and that’s the BLM’s going after Mr. Bundy, because he’s not playing ball with the Crony Capitalists the BLM is representing.
It would have been clearer to say that he did not agree that Bundy was racist, then say to stipulate to it. When you stipulate to something it means you do not want to argue about it implying agreement.
Exactly my point. He is not racist and therefore no need to stipulate to anything. It seems like Steyn wants it both ways. By throwing in a feel good word like stipulate he is implying Bundy’s racism which makes Steyn look good. Bundy is not racist.
Of course “Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada described in private then-Sen. Barack Obama as “light skinned” and “with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.”
No big deal there. No accusations of racism. This Bundy accusation is ridiculous when viewed in context.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2425904/posts
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.