Health & Fitness
Waiting For Cliven Bundy To Get Off Our Lawn...
When a 67-year-old white Republican begins a sentence with "I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro," you know the sentence is not ending well. But deadbeat rancher and domestic terrorist Cliven Bundy wasn't content to stop with mere racism, however undisguised. No, he went ahead and added a dose of flagrant hypocrisy to the mix:
“I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro ... because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do?” he asked. Oh! Basically on government subsidy. Well, a man who's been grazing his cattle on federal land for 20 years without even paying the ridiculously low (effectively: subsidized) rates he legally owed should know a thing or two about government subsidy. This is a man who sparked an armed standoff with the federal government in an effort to avoid paying the more than $1 million he owes. And he's talking about how the effects of government subsidy on black people are that:
“They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton. And I’ve 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 didn’t get no more freedom. They got less freedom.”
Does government subsidy somehow work differently for white ranchers with 14 children? Sorry! Stupid question, I realize. Cliven Bundy is a special snowflake to whom no rules apply, ever. He gets to illegally graze cattle on public land for decades and take up arms against the federal government, and then when the New York Times comes calling to write about them, he gets to hold forth about how the Negroes were better off under slavery and it not only doesn't make the headline, you have to read down 11 paragraphs to get to what would seem to be significant information about who this guy is. But apparently the Times thought the more significant piece of information in the article was that Bundy "savors the audience that rallied to his side." What a piece of hard-hitting news that is—deadbeat on ego trip savors ego trip.
Just the latest Republican hero...
H/T: Laura Clawson
“They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton. And I’ve 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 didn’t get no more freedom. They got less freedom.”
Does government subsidy somehow work differently for white ranchers with 14 children? Sorry! Stupid question, I realize. Cliven Bundy is a special snowflake to whom no rules apply, ever. He gets to illegally graze cattle on public land for decades and take up arms against the federal government, and then when the New York Times comes calling to write about them, he gets to hold forth about how the Negroes were better off under slavery and it not only doesn't make the headline, you have to read down 11 paragraphs to get to what would seem to be significant information about who this guy is. But apparently the Times thought the more significant piece of information in the article was that Bundy "savors the audience that rallied to his side." What a piece of hard-hitting news that is—deadbeat on ego trip savors ego trip.
Just the latest Republican hero...
H/T: Laura Clawson
We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here
