His positive take on illegal immigrants is probably going to cost him more support than his blatant racism.
From this article -
This mirrors what conservatives, who, remarkably, are still defending Bundy, are saying on my FB feed. And it’s true, in a way, that he’s sympathizing with black people as opposed to condemning them. Somehow, this has clouded people’s vision of the actual racism in his statement, which is that he’s categorically stereotyped “the negro” as a welfare-dependent gang-banger.
He’s also completely whitewashed slavery, picturing some idyllic family life down on the plantation where god-fearing negros sing songs while doing an honest day’s work, which is it’s own special form of racism.
Historically, of course, family life was always problematic for slaves; you never knew when the man and the woman and the kids might be sold off separately.
I’ll say this for him, his beliefs aren’t exclusionary like many hardcore conservatives’ are, he seems to believe that all people are capable of practicing the cultural values he endorse (but doesn’t actually practice, as he himself subsists on subsidies), namely hard work and strong families, that they deserve the chance to do so, and thereby improve themselves and grow properous. That is to say, he’s not arguing that black people are fundamentally lazy or entitled by their nature, but that they’ve had harm inflicted upon them by outside forces. And in his second set of remarks, he’s openly calling for Hispanics (and presumably even the illegal immigrants) “to be with us”.
Does anyone else see him getting a reality show out of all this?
I’ve already labeled it Schmuck Dynasty in my head.
This is a particularly low bar, and considering that Bundy says “Where is our colored brother? Where is our Mexican brother? Where is our Chinese – where are they?” Bundy said. “They’re just as much American as we are, and they’re not with us. If they’re not with us, they’re going to be against us.”, I think they can accurately be described as exclusionary.
Well, yeah; I’m basically contrasting him against hardcore racists here.
I disagree; he wants them to be “with [Bundy et al]”, while lamenting that at the moment they are not.
She’s getting pimped now because Ann Coulter is getting rather long in the tooth. The older white males who make up 90% of the Fox News demo want to look at younger girls confirming their antiquated world-view. Her only drawback is she isn’t blonde.
Hasn’t hurt Michelle Malkin any.
So… he’s a racist, but not a ‘hardcore racist’?
Even if that’s what he means, he’s still being exclusionary, though perhaps in a different way.
That’s my take, yes. He’s not pining for a white-only America, or saying that non-whites are innately inferior. His racism is subtler: discounting the horror of slavery, insisting that other races share his values or be “against” him, and so on.
Now, one could argue that Bundy saying “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 these colored people to have to go back to that point. We sure don’t want these Mexican people to go back to that point”, when quite a lot of federal action was required to make those advances, while simultaneously proclaiming that he doesn’t recognize the federal government as even existing, is a stupid and dishonest view to have, and that argument would be correct. He seems to want non-whites to share his values and do well in life, while overlooking the federal government’s role in that.
He is, in that he’s advancing a fundamentally confrontational, with-us-or-against-us ideology of “taking the country back” and all that familiar garbage. But, he clearly welcomes non-whites on his side of the confrontation; he wants them there (presumably because he wants as many people as possible there), regardless of race. That’s what I mean by saying he’s not being exclusionary, or more precisely not racially exclusionary. He is exclusionary on non-racial lines.
That’s my take, anyway. I may well have given it more thought than Bundy has.
I personally see the stand-off as profoundly paradoxical. The vigilantes showed up to raise their guns in defense of liberty, and the man they are fighting for says that black people might have had it better under slavery. Wrench: meet works.
It’s all good folks- it’s all MLK’s fault!
Um, okay Cliven. You start.
If you’re a cute well spoken conservative woman, there is a job for you out there.
Whoosh?
If the only hispanics he saw were on TV too then he would feel the same way about hispanics.
I hate Michelle Malkin but she is reasonably smart when she isn’t engaging in polemics to grab attention.
If you are a dumb, better to be blonde.
Now Mr. Bumdy has a nice black boy, and a jar-head at that, saying Cliven is not racist (text included here so that you can avoid going to the site).
[QUOTE=“[‘Charlie Delta’]
(http://www.ijreview.com/2014/04/132699-black-marines-letter-refutes-left-wing-media-narrative-cliven-bundy-racist/)”]*The media distorts information to the point of social division. This is a photo of myself and the resilient, often charismatic, and maybe not so tactful Cliven Bundy. He’s a cowboy and a helluva family man, not an orator.
One thing he definitely isn’t – a racist. I found his comments to not only be NOT racist, but his own view of his experiences. Who the heck are we to determine another man’s perspective on the world around him?! Just because Picasso’s view of the world was abstract, does it negate the fact that his art was genuine?
Furthermore, if you take the time to do your own research, you’ll find that his statements about some black Americans actually hold weight. He posed a hypothetical question. He said, “I wonder IF” … Hell, I’m black and I often wonder about the same about the decline of the black family.
Bottom line is that we are all slaves in this waning republic, no matter our skin color. Mr. Bundy could have used any racial demographic as an example: Native Americans on reservations, whites in trailer parks, etc. He noticed the crippling effects of receiving government “assistance” and the long term result of accepting handouts.
It’s not progress at all. I challenge Sean Hannity, Rand Paul, and others to read my comment and reconsider their position in this matter. Individual liberties are at stake here, yours and mine. THAT is the issue.
Don’t let the liberal media and ignoramuses like Glenn Beck and that weasel Harry Reid make you lose sight of the real issue here: The federal government is a burgeoning behemoth and a bully on a once constitutional playground.I sincerely hope you real patriots out there who can see through the smoke.*
[/QUOTE]
I noticed since his slavery comments, all the video of him seems to include a black militia guy.
I think you can use “the” until it’s determined there’s more than one.