Cliven Bundy

GOP House Candidate Jody Hice Touts Bundy Ranch Standoff As Symbol Of Anti-Gay Fight

In a radio program posted online Monday, Georgia pastor Jody Hice, the GOP nominee to replace Paul Broun in the U.S. House, linked the anti-government Bundy ranch standoff to anti-gay politics, saying that the militia groups that faced off against the Bureau of Land Management in Nevada were a symbol of Americans standing up against Big Government incursions on their liberties…like the legalization of same-sex marriage.

“There is unquestionably an undercurrent that is taking place across America where people are getting fed up,” he said. “They are saying to themselves and now beginning to say to themselves, ‘Enough is enough. We are not going to sit back while our government tramples over our liberties.’”

I will never forget these ranchers on horseback continuing to walk slowly toward the BLM. They were prepared to die. They were ready for confrontation. They were saying, ‘Enough is enough. You’re not going to trample on our rights any more. You have gone far enough and no further will you go.’

I mean, that was the statement being made by the ranchers and they continued marching toward the BLM. You will remember what happened, eventually the BLM never fired a shot, instead they got in their vehicles and left. Again, one of the other reasons they did not fire a shot is because all these ranchers, the cowboys and many, many others around them were themselves armed and ready for action if it came to that point, thank God it did not, but they were prepared just in case.

Now, that’s the image that comes to my mind. There is unquestionably an undercurrent that is taking place across America where people are getting fed up. They are saying to themselves and now beginning to say to themselves, ‘Enough is enough. We are not going to sit back while our government tramples over our liberties.’

And the examples are numerous. We could deal with different scenarios I don’t know how many times, they are abundant in the various ways in which this is taking place.

Now, I want to give you just what is the latest example: the whole battle over gay marriage, and in particular gay marriage as it relates to businesses, that businesses cannot remain committed to their personal religious convictions if there is ever a confrontation between those religious beliefs and same-sex marriage.

Cliven Bundy Defends Border Militias, Tells Feds to Point Guns At 'Enemy' Immigrants

If the anti-immigrant protests in Murietta, California, and the gathering of militia groups at the border remind you of the anti-government standoff at Cliven Bundy’s ranch, that might be because the events are attracting some of the very same people.

Far-right radio host Pete Santilli, who we last saw harassing a Mexican-American reporter at Bundy’s ranch, has been broadcasting from Murietta for the past week or so and has mentioned that he has also driven down to join some groups along the Southern border, who he has been working with in an effort to shut down the Tijuana border crossing.

In fact, yesterday, Santilli interviewed Bundy himself about the similarities between the Bundy ranch standoff and the events in Murietta and at the border.

Calling the Bureau of Land Management “dirty rotten buggers,” Bundy told Santilli that the groups who faced off with the BLM at his ranch were “successful in bringing back freedom to America, at least in this area.”

Speaking of the militia groups gathering at the Southern border — including groups like the Oath Keepers and the Three Percenters, who were strongly represented at his ranch — Bundy said that like at his ranch, federal agents are “pointing their guns at we the people” and not at the “enemy,” who he said is the “encroacher that’s illegally coming in here.”

Right Wing Round-Up - 7/3/14

GOP State Rep: Bundy Standoff Pitted 'Freedom-Loving Americans' Against 'Government-Dependent Socialists'

Matt Shea, a Republican state representative from Washington who thinks the government is moving to establish concentration camps after forcibly disarming citizens and wants Tea Party members to stockpile ammo for the country's “inevitable collapse,”  led a delegation of state lawmakers to Nevada last month to support anti-government rancher Cliven Bundy.

In an April 26 interview with Gun Owners for America director Larry Pratt, Shea compared the fringe element supporting Bundy to the American colonists who revolted against Britain. He added that when it comes to the Bundy situation, Americans are divided between “patriots and loyalists”: “Are you a loyalist or are you a patriot? Are you a god-fearing, self-reliant, freedom-loving American, or are you a government-dependent, Constitution-ignoring socialist?”

“I don’t think it’s hyperbole or exaggeration to compare this to colonial America,” he said.

Pratt: I’m not sure it’s all that much different from what it was in colonial America, when our forefathers drew their line in the sand and fought off the world’s most powerful empire. The estimates that I’ve read of historians that have really done some digging is that maybe three percent were actively involved in the war for independence. Maybe another 10 percent, if I remember their guesstimates correctly, at least supported materially in some way –‘Use my pasture over there, you can take those crops over there,’ whatever they might have done to help. Then there was a body of opinion that was kind of undecided and there was another body, a small body probably, that was pro-Tory, pro-king. Maybe we’re not that much different than that estimated line of public opinion in colonial America.

Shea: I really don’t think we are. And I agree with the statement, you know, between three to five percent of the population is what gets actively involved to stand on that line, and then there’s just another huge swath of the population that will, you know, offer material support.

And I’ve been talking to folks recently about what really happened in Nevada, and I’ve really framed the question this way, which I think is the second thing that really relates to colonial America, and that is very simply: Are you a loyalist or are you a patriot? Are you a god-fearing, self-reliant, freedom-loving American, or are you a government-dependent, Constitution-ignoring socialist? And we really have to make that decision as individuals throughout the country.

And that’s really, I think, where we’re at and why I don’t think it’s hyperbole or exaggeration to compare this to colonial America.

Mike Vanderboegh Doubles Down on Civil War Warning, Compares Cliven Bundy To Dred Scott

Mike Vanderboegh, the militia group leader who warned in a speech at the Bundy Ranch last month that the United States is on the verge of “civil war on a vast scale” that will involve Sen. Harry Reid having his “balls ripped off,” joined Alan Colmes on Wednesday to defend his now-infamous comments.

“It’s funny, I’ve been warning about the possibility of civil war caused by government bad conduct for the past 20 years, but it wasn’t until I started mentioning the collectivist senators who were putting their own testicles at risk that people started paying attention,” Vanderboegh told Colmes. “I think I must have accidentally put my finger on where you fellows worship.”

He added that the “balls ripped off” expression was just a rhetorical flourish, and that he could just as easily have said “put a bullet in your head”: “I’m saying that if you push ordinary people enough, they will react. And whether they rip your testicles off or put a bullet in your head is sort of immaterial, assuming that you initiate the violence.”

When Colmes asked Vanderboegh if he really thinks Reid wants to “initiate violence,” Vanderboegh responded, “I don’t think there’s any doubt that he would like to do it.”

Completing the civil war picture,  Vanderboegh told Colmes that there’s not “much of a difference” between Cliven Bundy’s stand against federal law and Dred Scott’s.

Later in the interview, Colmes asked Vanderboegh about his call for his followers to throw bricks into windows of Democratic offices in protest of the passage of the health care reform law in 2010.

Vanderboegh doubled down on the comment, saying “you bet your ass” he called for window-breaking and claiming that the move was modeled on the “carefully calibrated violence” of the American Revolution (Vanderboegh’s organization, the Three Percenters, is named after the number of colonists he believes participated in the revolt against the Crown).

“Sons of Liberty tactics, fellow,” he said. “Read your history. Do you think that this republic of ours was born in anything other than very carefully calibrated violence that was counter to government violence at the time? How do you think we got here? Sons of Liberty tactics. We have not tarred and feathered yet, have we? Sons of Liberty did.”

“All I have been arguing is that people should understand that government violence will be responded to by counter-violence on the part of the people,” he continued. “That’s been exactly what I’ve been saying for the past 20 years. I’ve been warning that a civil war is coming. And you know why? It’s because idiots do not understand it’s possible.”

When Colmes asked how the health care bill represented “government violence,” Vanderboegh responded that “The violence was in the threat of the bill” because “you will do what this bill says or things will happen to you,” which he speculated would include an IRS “raid party.”

Here's Vanderboegh's original Bundy Ranch speech:

Right Wing Round-Up - 5/8/14

Larry Klayman: Racist Outbursts From Don Sterling & Cliven Bundy Are Obama's Fault For Putting Whites In 'The Back Of The Bus'

Larry Klayman insists Americans had “stopped thinking in racial terms” until Barack Obama was elected president, which is why Klayman says that Obama is to blame for recent racist statements made by Cliven Bundy and Donald Sterling.

Klayman, who is working with Bundy on his foundering legal dispute with the federal government, warned in his Friday WorldNetDaily colum that Obama is trying to extract “reparations” from “whitey.” “[W]hites, and particularly rich ones, are now at the back of the bus,” as “Obama has set back the civil rights movement to the days preceding King and the advancement in race relations that followed his death.”

“While I cannot with certainty explain the recent outbursts of what the mainstream media perceived as racism by Cliven Bundy, owner of the Bundy ranch in Nevada, and Donald Sterling, owner of the Los Angeles Clippers, this feeling and latent resentment by whites that they do not have a president who represents their interests, but instead is prejudiced against them, may be a large part of the underlying cause,” Klayman said.

“Much as blacks experienced in the years leading up to Obama’s election, and even to today, whites now feel disenfranchised by our chief executive, and they may be striking back subconsciously with this resentment.”

Maybe Klayman will blame his slew of racially charged columns on Obama too.

We Americans had thought we had come a long way since the days of the civil rights movement lead by the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. Over the decades since his tragic death, freedom for African-Americans had been increasing, and their upper movement among all strata of society has been clear for all to see and experience. In effect, the American people by and large stopped thinking in racial terms; the words of Martin Luther King increasingly had taken hold in deeds.

While I for one did not vote for President Barack Obama in 2008 (nor in 2012), I felt good as an American that We the People had elected an African-American, something even our “enlightened” European white ancestors had never done. Indeed, while Obama obviously had received a large percentage of the African-American vote, it was white people who put him over the top and in effect elected him in both 2008 and 2012. As a result, both the African-American and Caucasian races had much to be proud of. They also had a right to expect that the new president would seek to represent all of us, not just his own people, in his new job.

But things did not turn out as hoped for. Obama and his cronies spent the next five years favoring African-Americans and people of color over all other groups of society, and it became painfully obvious that this socialist saw himself as the one person who could extract a pound of flesh for all the years of insidious discrimination against blacks, dating back to even the years before the founding of the republic. In effect, Obama and his friends – ranging from black Muslims, to anti-Semites, to anti-Christians, atheists and other ultra-leftists – saw his presidency as an opportunity to “settle the score” with not just conservatives but rich whites. If this meant bankrupting the country with higher taxes on rich whites and other means to extract what in effect were reparations, then this was the price that needed to be paid for past discrimination. It was time for “whitey” to pay up, and to hell with the economic and social health of the nation.



In this context, and as I have written before, the irony is that under the Obama presidency there has been a role reversal; whites, and particularly rich ones, are now at the back of the bus. While it is not politically correct in today’s world for whites to raise this feeling in public, there has developed regrettably and tragically an undercurrent of deep resentment among whites, which is now starting to manifest itself in major ways.

While I cannot with certainty explain the recent outbursts of what the mainstream media perceived as racism by Cliven Bundy, owner of the Bundy ranch in Nevada, and Donald Sterling, owner of the Los Angeles Clippers, this feeling and latent resentment by whites that they do not have a president who represents their interests, but instead is prejudiced against them, may be a large part of the underlying cause. Much as blacks experienced in the years leading up to Obama’s election, and even to today, whites now feel disenfranchised by our chief executive, and they may be striking back subconsciously with this resentment.



These remarks are wrong and offensive and certainly not politically correct, but regrettably they may be understandable given the highly resentful mood among whites created by Obama and his friends.

The atmosphere of racial divide President Obama and his comrades have fomented is extremely unhealthy if not cancerous for the body politic of this nation. It runs counter to the words and deeds of the person he attributes for his rise to the presidency, Martin Luther King Jr. Obama has set back the civil rights movement to the days preceding King and the advancement in race relations that followed his death.

If Obama does not start to show that he represents all Americans, expect more Cliven Bundys and Donald Sterlings to reactively bring race into the national dialogue.

This Edition Of Paranoia-Rama Is Just A Distraction From Benghazi

RWW’s Paranoia-Rama takes a look at five of the week’s most absurd conspiracy theories from the Right.

In a desperate attempt to distract from the GOP’s sad and dishonest effort to turn the 2012 Benghazi attack into a political sideshow, we have decided to post Paranoia-Rama today, as we always do on Fridays.

5. Obamacare Death Lists

It’s no wonder that Glenn Beck wants to recruit Rep. Louie Gohmert to run for the U.S. Senate, as the Texas GOP congressman recently warned that health care reform will lead to death lists.

While appearing on The Blaze, Beck’s TV network, Gohmert said that in order to preserve Obamacare, the Obama administration will have to “put people on lists” where they will “die waiting to get the treatment and care.” 

“This is where socialized medicine always goes,” he lamented.

Back in March, Gohmert similarly claimed that as a result of Obamacare, “we [will] see the morality rate start coming down, you die earlier, not because it’s an actual death panel but because you don’t get the treatment.”

4. Sharia Law In The Military

Yesterday, more than a year after he absurdly claimed that the Obama administration has issued a “litmus test for leadership in the military” based on whether prospective leaders “will fire on U.S. citizens or not,” activist Garrow “revealed” another dubious Obama military litmus test: whether service members “support” the “islamic [sic] ideology.”

The "new" Litmus Test of all senior officials of the Federal Government and their agencies.

 

As many will remember (except those who support Obama) I broke the news on January 20th of 2013 that senior members of the military were being asked a "litmus test" question to determine if they would be allowed to continue in their positions. That question determined if their loyalties lay with Obama.
Well it is now almost a year and a half later and I am now assured by many that the new criteria for senior leadership is their attitude towards and support of muslims [sic] and the islamic [sic] ideology.

Your Christian nation is now fully at the service of islam [sic] and its hateful ideology. The treason is complete and utter in its depth and breadth. Mark this date, May 1, 2014, the day that America was warned that the muslim-marxist [sic] in the White House Barack Hussein Obama is remaking the public service and government agencies into Sharia compliant entities as the next step in the subjugation of America to islam [sic].

- Dr. Jim Garrow -

please share this everywhere - the warning must be given - we are betrayed

3. Donald Sterling Scandal Meant To Distract From Benghazi

Since GOP activists failed in their truly bizarre campaign to link LA Clippers owner Donald Sterling to the Democratic Party (it turns out he is a registered Republican), they have now moved on to attempting to link the controversy over Sterling’s racist remarks to Benghazi.

Fox News contributor and former GOP congressman Allen West denounced the media’s coverage of the Sterling scandal as an attempt to cover up President Obama’s “incessant lies, deceit and abject failures,” particularly about the Benghazi attack.

Media Matters reports that West cited Sterling’s racist remarks in a Fox News Radio interview to call for greater public uproar over Benghazi: “The outrage of the public seems to be totally focused on Mr. Sterling but, you know, you've got this thing with Benghazi and we have an even bigger lie, an even bigger deceit, which is even more impactful on the country that no one is really caring about.”

2. Mass Grave For Cliven Bundy Militia

After suggesting that the military rise up against Obama in response to the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Gordon Klingenschmitt is now warning that the government may begin digging a mass grave as it purportedly prepares to murder Cliven Bundy and his allied militiamen.

“Mass graves dug by the government, this time for the cattle, but next time, maybe for the cowboys, right?” he asked. “I suspect that in some months to come, there's going to be some secret mission by the feds to go in there and punish the people who are standing for freedom.”

1. Bundy Psy-ops

The Oath Keepers, an extremist right-wing group, is attempting to distance itself from a rumor it started that the Obama administration was imminently launching a drone strike against Bundy’s ranch.

The founder of Oath Keepers, Stewart Rhodes, reportedly claimed that “Eric Holder approved a hot drone strike on the Bundy ranch within 48 hours.”

But a new Oath Keepers memo blames President Obama for the Oath Keepers’ own baseless claim, insisting that the drone rumor was actually an Obama “psy-ops” mission to discredit and undermine the Oath Keepers’ presence at Bundy’s ranch. The group says they were merely “indicating that a drone attack was at least ‘possible.’”

“Oath Keepers is tremendously happy that nothing happened and that this was a bad tip, a piece of ‘dis-info’, a ‘psy-op,’” a group spokesman said. “A typical FBI psy-op would plant ‘leaders’ in every militia they could infiltrate. What those sorts of FBI agents or surrogates do is always ‘handled.’”

Thanks for clarifying!

Of course the Bunkerland was filled with plenty of other crazy rants, including one by militia leader Mike Vanderboegh who warned of a “civil war” to protect the Bundy ranch (and also threatened to have Harry Reid’s “balls ripped off”).

Extremist Radio Host At Bundy Ranch Harasses Local Reporter, Accuses Glenn Beck Of Starting A 'Race War'

It should come as no surprise to learn that Pete Santilli, an Internet radio host best known for wishing he could shoot Hillary Clinton “right in the vagina” and helping to organize last year’s “Truckers For the Constitution” rally, has spent the last couple of weeks broadcasting live from Cliven Bundy’s ranch in Nevada.

Last Friday, Santilli filmed the press conference at which Bundy attempted to explain that his view that black people were better off under slavery isn’t racist. After Bundy spoke, Santilli announced that “somehow” the Bureau of Land Management had used the media to “hijack” the press conference by “injecting race and dividing us.”

So, naturally, Santilli decided to confront a local TV reporter who had apparently questioned Bundy on his views about race, drawing the attention of Bundy supporters standing nearby.

“Who do you work for?” Santilli demanded of the reporter, who appears to be Antonio Castelan of Channel 3 New. “Do you believe that the media is state-run?” When Castelan responded that “as a Mexican-American” he didn’t think his questioning on race was biased, Santilli hounded him: “Why do you believe you need to inject Mexican-Americanism into your line of questioning?”

“As a Mexican-American you should know that we’re defending your rights, and you’re working for the state-run media, and you should know that, especially by the bias in the line of your questioning,” he yelled as Castelan walked away, hounded by Bundy supporters. “You’re not serving the American public and you do not deserve even First Amendment constitutional rights, sir!”

Later, talking to another reporter, Santilli accused Glenn Beck, who has criticized the Bundy ranch protester, of promoting a “race war” on behalf of the United Nations’ Agenda 21. That is surprising, given that Beck has written an entire book warning about the very same Agenda 21 conspiracy theory that he is being accused of promoting. 

Bundy Ranch Speaker Warns Of 'Civil War On A Vast Scale,' Promises Harry Reid Will Have His 'Balls Ripped Off'

In a speech to the militia members still gathered at Cliven Bundy’s ranch in Nevada this week, Mike Vanderboegh, leader of the militia group Three Percenters, warned that the country is “staring a civil war in its bloody face.”

Vanderboegh’s Three Percenters group, named after the number of American colonists they believe fought back against the British in the revolutionary war, was listed in a recent Oath Keepers press release as a stalwart of the standoff at the Bundy ranch. Vandeboegh, who wrote a novel that allegedly inspired a domestic terrorist plot in 2011, is also known for his role in pushing the “Fast and Furious” scandal.

“All over this country, we are still staring civil war in its bloody face,” Vanderboegh warned the crowd, in a video posted by Tom Lacovara, the host of an anti-government radio show.

He claimed that Sen. Harry Reid, who has criticized the Bundy ranch militias, “is promising us all civil war on a vast scale, because state-sponsored violence is they only way they can win an argument with free people, especially free people who are armed and who are willing to use those arms in defense of liberty.”

Vanderboegh then told the legend of an Alabama woman named Jenny Brooks whose husband and son, in Vanderboegh's telling, were killed by state law enforcement collecting taxes for the Confederate government. According to the tale, Brooks went after the men who had killed her family, killed two of them in return, and turned one of their skulls into a soap dish.

Vanderboegh then pulled out a skull and declared that he would present it to Reid as the “2014 Award for Incitement to Civil War.”

He added: “Don’t poke the wolverine with a sharp stick, Harry, unless you want your balls ripped off.”

Oath Keepers Claim Government 'Psy-ops' Behind Bundy Ranch Drone Rumor, Militia Infighting

The Oath Keepers, one of the groups organizing the armed standoff at Cliven Bundy’s ranch in Nevada, issued a bizarre, meandering “advisory” today claiming that a rumor that the group promoted that Attorney General Eric Holder had authorized a drone strike on the ranch was in fact a “psy-op” meant to discredit the protesters.

An Oath Keepers "editor" who calls himself "Elias Alias" writes:

Yes, it is true: Oath Keepers received a bizarre bit of leaked info which could not be verified but which also could not be ignored. Our contact is connected with the Department of Defense – or “was”. The info we received stated that Eric Holder of the Department of Justice had okayed a drone strike on the Bundy ranch near Bunkerville, Nevada, within a 48 hour period over the weekend of April 26/27, 2014.

This mis-info came from a trusted source, a former Special Forces soldier with significant connections inside DOD. Though the info was unbelievable, in the present climate generated by the BLM and Senator Harry Reid (who called the ranchers and their friends “domestic terrorists”), Oath Keepers decided that the info must be regarded as indicating that a drone attack was at least “possible”.

Knowing that this sort of info is at least bizarre, Stewart and our Board members who were there at the ranch finally, after painstakingly going over all possible angles, decided that this should be handled just as the authorities would handle a bomb threat at a school – evacuate the kids from the school immediately and then sift for the bomb, if indeed one turned out to exist there. Stewart knew this was a potential trap for Oath Keepers, but felt that he could not remain quiet about the info which had come to us. Better safe than sorry, in a nutshell, defines his thinking on this. Oath Keepers is tremendously happy that nothing happened and that this was a bad tip, a piece of “dis-info”, a “psy-op”.

"Elias Alias" then claims that conflicts among militia groups at the ranch can only be the result of FBI infiltration of militias in another “psy-op” on behalf of the “UN’s Agenda 21 domestic usurpations.” The group repeats the debunked rumor that Sen. Harry Reid is working on behalf of a Chinese energy firm. “This is United Nations covert activity inside the United States and it involves the planet’s largest Communist nation, China,” the advisory states. “The Bundy connection connects also the relationship of the BLM to the Reid family. It is deep stuff.”

Oath Keepers is happily hosted at the Bundy Ranch by the Bundy family. A film/video is en route to Montana right now, riding by car with Stewart, for editing and subsequent posting to our YouTube channel. That video will feature Stewart himself in powerful expressions of the principles on which Cliven Bundy stands, and the direness of the hour in our Republic’s history, and the need to overcome the UN’s Agenda 21 domestic usurpations carried via now-stolen “federal agencies and departments” such as the Forest Service and the BLM. The BLM’s policy is mirrored in Agenda 21, and the entire Bundy Ranch affair traces back to corruption in internationalist-federal deal-making in the name of the People’s government. Chinese management of Nevada land is at the bottom of this, as Alex Jones exposed Senator Reid’s connections with a Chinese firm wanting to operate a solar energy farm on land related to the eco-plans for developing that site, which included moving a population of desert tortoise from that site to the area where Bundy’s cows graze – and that was a problem for EPA as well as the Endangered Species Act, which caused seriously-armed federal force to move in to make sure that the Bundy cattle were removed from the new home of the tortoise – correct me if I’m wrong. This is United Nations covert activity inside the United States and it involves the planet’s largest Communist nation, China. The Bundy connection connects also the relationship of the BLM to the Reid family. It is deep stuff.

And that is why suddenly, as Oath Keepers is getting into gear to ramp up and build upon this defense of the people against the BLM’s tyrannical forces, and as we are making awesome strides, all hell suddenly breaks loose with the militias, who in a surprising twist of fate, have decided to destroy Oath Keepers at the same time we’re hit with a rumored leak about a drone attack being possible. Sheesh. The militias are being unruly about it, and somewhat rude, assuming that the word “rude” includes threatening to shoot Stewart or his officers in the back “for desertion” – if you can believe that. Some of the alleged militia leaders are threatening to accost Oath Keepers’ leadership if leadership step foot on the Bundy Ranch. That is fairly rude, but that has actually been said.

A typical FBI psy-op would plant “leaders” in every militia they could infiltrate. What those sorts of FBI agents or surrogates do is always “handled” . Some of the purported “leaders” of the militia at the ranch are doing exactly what any agent provocateur would do after having infiltrated the militia and claimed a role in leadership. Did you notice the massive ego about who is going to command who? Did you notice the drama in the tendency to speak of Oath Keepers as if we were a militia, which we are not. These militia “leaders” would judge us by battlefield standards even though there has not been a “battlefield” since April 12, 2014? They would shoot us for desertion? Really? That is amazing, and is the kind of bumbling consciousness which a conditioned and programmed special warfare officer or a federal agent would offer if he had to think on his feet of a sudden.

He adds that the Oath Keepers are in fact the upstanding citizens in this “classic” situation by backing Bundy, who “is a patriarch of our American heritage” with a “vision.. in harmony with that of the founders”

We understand that the Bundy affair is classic and that Mr. Bundy himself is a patriarch of our American heritage and as such he is to be protected by the people at all costs. His vision is in harmony with that of the founders, and we all know it. When Oath Keepers brings in to the Bundy Ranch out-of-State legislators, and when CSPOA and Oath Keepers bring in men and women from our Peace Officer community to stand by Mr. Bundy, the power in the unique outreach style of Oath Keepers becomes clear.

Keyes Says Bundy Is Not Racist Because Blacks Are Worse Off Now Than During Slavery

From the very beginning of the standoff, Alan Keyes has been a vocal supporter of Cliven Bundy and his anti-government allies and he has not backed away one bit even after revelations that Bundy is an unmitigated racist. 

In fact, Keyes is actually defending Bundy, saying that he is not at all racist because it is an undisputed fact that black people are worse off now than they ever were during slavery.

While speaking with radio host Peter Boyles, Keyes said that Bundy's remarks were not racist because Bundy "simply spoke about what he observed" happening to black families in America and that "in statistical terms ... black folks are worse off than they have been in this history of the United States."

"Hear that?" Keyes thundered. "Worse off than they have ever been! And since that includes slavery, it's not racist to point it out":

Larry Klayman Says Cliven Bundy Is Not A Racist But An American Hero

Larry Klayman, who fears that the “black-Muslim” President Obama is triggering a race war, said in a column yesterday that anti-government rancher Cliven Bundy can’t possibly be a racist because Bundy didn’t come across as a racist during a conversation he had with Klayman last week.

“From my interaction with Cliven, it became clear to me that he is a person who speaks what is in his mind and is not a racist, and that, being a rancher in a remote area of Nevada, never was exposed to the political correctness of the city slickers in Las Vegas for instance,” Klayman recalled in a RenewAmerica column.

Klayman also repeated his call to overthrow Obama over the Bundy standoff, which he described as “a turning point in modern U.S. history” and “the first major physical manifestation of the peaceful second American revolution.”

I was on my way to the Bundy ranch last Thursday to meet with the family to see if I could be of some help in their epic land battle with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). After a government confrontation a week or so ago where the Bundy's exercised their constitutional and God-given rights of self-defense under the Second Amendment, they stood down President Obama's and Senator Harry Reid's armed BLM thugs, who tased, assaulted, and battered members of the Bundy family over their cattle in an obvious effort to force them off the land.



When I arrived at the ranch, I spoke with Cliven about the comments and suggested that he clarify his remarks immediately since, after talking with him, it seemed that what he was trying to say was that black people had been so poorly treated by the government, as he had been, that ironically they may have been better off under slavery. He was trying to equate welfare and going on the government dole, which takes away a person's self esteem and puts then out to pasture like cattle, with his own plight. From my interaction with Cliven, it became clear to me that he is a person who speaks what is in his mind and is not a racist, and that, being a rancher in a remote area of Nevada, never was exposed to the political correctness of the city slickers in Las Vegas for instance. For him, the term "negro" was what he had learned as a boy, when that term was widely used by even such civil rights icons as Rev. Martin Luther King. He was obviously unaware that the likes of other reverends – albeit phony members of the cloth – Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, had coined the term "African-American," many years after Rev. King's death.



Cliven Bundy's remarks, whether anyone agrees with the way he expressed his thoughts or not, do not negate the importance of the successful patriotic showdown at Nevada's equivalent of the OK Corral. The hard and irrefutable fact is that for the first time in many decades the American people stood down an ever growing oppressive government, which thinks and acts as if it can do as it pleases, undoubtedly for ulterior corrupt purposes.

The successful stand-off at the Bundy ranch is a turning point in modern U.S. history, and I left the ranch that day vowing do what I could to further the first major physical manifestation of the peaceful second American revolution.

Stay tuned. In the words of Kris Kristofferson and Janis Joplin of another rebellious era in America history, freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose. We the People have had it with our present government and indeed have nothing left to lose to restore liberty to our nation.

Klingenschmitt Speculates The Government Will Kill Bundy Ranch Protesters And Bury Them In A Mass Grave

Responding to right-wing reports that the Bureau of Land Management had killed several cattle and buried them in a mass grave during the standoff with Cliven Bundy, "Dr. Chaps" Gordon Klingenschmitt suggested on his "Pray In Jesus Name" show that the government was going to return to the Bundy ranch in the coming months, kill all the protesters, and dump their bodies in a similar mass grave.

"Mass graves dug by the government, this time for the cattle,"  Klingenschmitt said, "but next time, maybe for the cowboys, right?"

Klingenschmitt praised the armed, anti-government protesters and urged his viewers to go out to Nevada and join "the freedom movement" because "I suspect that in some months to come, there's going to be some secret mission by the feds to go in there and punish the people who are standing for freedom."

WorldNetDaily Pundit Claims 'Mac-Daddy Sissy' Obama's Criticism Of Donald Sterling Is Just A Distraction From Benghazi

WorldNetDaily is out with yet another column defending Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling over his alleged racist remarks.

In a WND column published today, pundit Mychal Massie insists that “Sterling has done more for blacks than Obama.”

Massie writes that “as quick as you can say ‘Mac-Daddy sissy,’ Obama” found “time to feign insult over Sterling’s comments.” He speculates that Obama is trying to use Sterling’s comments as a distraction from Benghazi and “reports that Michelle plans to divorce him (supposedly over his countless affairs).”

The past two weeks have been a race-monger’s dream. Cliven Bundy responded to an interview question that has allowed the press to portray both him and those of us who support him as racist.



And as quick as you can say “Mac-Daddy sissy,” Obama, with the blood of the Benghazi Four (Ambassador Christopher Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods and Glenn Doherty) on his hands; the IRS scandal; Fast and Furious (and the blood of Brian Terry and Jaime Zapata also on his hands); unemployment at unparalleled highs; America becoming a food-stamp nation; Japanese reports that Michelle plans to divorce him (supposedly over his countless affairs); and “If you like your insurance you can keep it,” he finds time to feign insult over Sterling’s comments.



Obama’s comments were morally opprobrious and boorish but obviously not out of character for him. Obama has done less to further the racial unity of America and more to exasperate and, indeed, to exacerbate racial and religious tensions in America and around the world than any American leader before him.



I know many blacks live for the opportunity to be portrayed as victims of rich white men who are racist and say or do something that validates what blacks desire to believe. But Sterling has done more for blacks than Obama.

Right Wing Round-Up - 4/28/14

Sandy Rios Attacks New York Times For Quoting Cliven Bundy's Racist Remarks

Taking a cue from other Cliven Bundy apologists, Sandy Rios of the American Family Association on Friday accused the New York Times of tricking the lawless rancher into making racist remarks about African Americans.

Even though Bundy’s remarks were public and completely unprompted, Rios blamed New York Times reporter Adam Nagourney for the outrage anyway.

“I’m sure that this reporter, Adam Nagourney, who I think was the only reporter there, I’m sure he asked Mr. Bundy a question about race for this very purpose, for this very purpose, hoping to get something on tape, something to make him look like a fool and a racist so that to bring the prophecy about Harry Reid that something’s going to happen to stop Cliven Bundy.”

She later claimed that Nagourney tricked Bundy just as people “trap” her by asking her questions in media interviews.

“I really do find it curious that suddenly he is talking about race to a New York Times reporter,” she said, reflecting on her own experience “having been on the news trapped by reporters many, many, times, attempted trappings, being set up, being asked pointed questions so that they hope that they can get some kind of response from you…sort of give a quote so they can destroy me, that’s what they do. That’s kind of what they did [to Bundy] and it’s working.”

Tom DeLay Salutes Cliven Bundy For 'Standing Up For The Rule Of Law,' Fears Government Will Incite Violence Against Bundy Family

On his Washington Times Radio show last Wednesday, former House GOP leader Tom DeLay reiterated his defense of Cliven Bundy, arguing that the Nevada rancher — who has repeatedly lost in the courts and refuses to recognize the existence of the United States government — doesn’t have to obey the law on land use.

“He doesn’t owe the federal government anything because he doesn’t recognize that the federal government can come take his livelihood away from him and he’s standing up for the rule of law, the real law, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, and fighting against what is happening to him,” DeLay said.

“The oppression and the tyranny that is coming from our government is just outrageous…. The federal government is building its weapons of oppression and tyranny as we speak.”

DeLay also warned that the government may incite “violence” against “law-abiding American citizens to affect their tyranny.”

“This could get really out of hand, and I’m just really worried with the kind of attitude that this government has that they’re going to come back and do some real harm to the Bundy family and the others that are standing up for their rights,” he said.

Flashback: Ben Carson Hailed Cliven Bundy And Militia Members As 'Outstanding People'

Like his fellow potential GOP presidential candidates Ted Cruz and Rand Paul, Ben Carson lauded Cliven Bundy and his militia movement supporters last week during their armed standoff with law enforcement in Nevada.

Speaking with Washington Times Radio on April 23 — shortly before the New York Times published Bundy’s notorious remarks about “the Negro” and slavery — Carson, who now writes for the Washington Times, said that Bundy and his supporters are “pretty outstanding people.”

Carson said he was “encouraged” by Bundy’s armed standoff, adding that military and CIA officials personally assured him that “they are not going to cooperate if there is ever any type of government takeover of the people’s rights, that to me is very encouraging and I saw that with those people there.”

“But the fact of the matter is if you look back through history, what our government is doing is not unprecedented by any stretch of the imagination, it always starts like this and freedom is not free and there may come a time when people have to actually stand up against the government,” Carson said. “I hope that doesn’t happen.”

Later, Carson was more explicit in suggesting that martial law is on the horizon in America.

When people see selective enforcement and they see favored groups, it breaks down their respect for the government and whatever the government says. This is something that we have to change soon because if we don’t, we’re going to see all kinds of anarchy.

All we have to do is go back and read about various nations who have been in this situation before and what’s happened. I think one of the key take-home points that must be emphasized, you look at some of the real tyrants in world history and how they have always wanted to restrict the rights of citizens to have weapons to defend themselves.

Look at what happens every time we have a mass murder in this country and the calls for all of these draconian ways of getting rid of weapons or what happens in New York where they expose the names of all the people that have weapons, these are draconian tactics that are against the Second Amendment right of people. Citizens should be able to own weapons, they should not have to report what weapons they own so that somebody can come and collect those weapons before they start their martial law. These things are common sense.

WorldNetDaily Defends Donald Sterling From Racism Accusations

After jumping to the defense of Cliven Bundy, WorldNetDaily is now troubled by the negative reaction to racist statements allegedly made by LA Clippers owner Donald Sterling.

In a column today titled “Thought Police On The Loose,” WND pundit Barbara Simpson complains that allegations of racism against Sterling and Bundy, along with criticism of then-Mozilla CEO Brandon Eich over his donation to the Proposition 8 campaign, are “frightening” signs that America is embracing Nazism.

She laments: “Sad, isn’t it, when truth is considered ‘offensive’?”

Say the “N” word, and you’re finished – unless, of course you’re a person of color who claims dibs on the use of that word, anytime, anywhere.

Say something that even smacks of criticism of people of any other color than white, or any other nationality than American, or any status other than legal American citizen – and you’re finished professionally and otherwise.

Say something that indicates you do not go along with the party line about total acceptance of anything gay, and you will find you do not have the right to participate in our current culture.

It’s not hard to find examples, which in itself, is frightening.



But as of Saturday night, the identities of the voices were not verified. Who are they?

Hmmm.

Let’s see.

We don’t know where the recording came from. An illegal taping of a phone call? If so, who recorded it and who gave it to TMZ? More importantly, why?

Was it to jeopardize the outcome of the playoffs – in essence, throw the series? No doubt there’s a lot of money riding on the games.



Then there’s Cliven Bundy, the Nevada rancher who was the target of government overkill, in more ways than one, to get him off his land.

In an interview with the New York Times, he was selectively quoted in a way that portrayed him as – guess – racist!

Why?

Because he recollected what government housing for blacks was years ago and what has happened to them since, and related that to slavery.



Funny, I said that on my KSFO talk show years ago – just looking at the dependence of so many blacks on Uncle’s largesse is comparable to being a slave to the government. You do what you’re told, or you get nothing.

He spoke of the breakdown of black families, the number of single parent families, the high incidence of black abortions, the number of blacks in prison, unemployment and dropout levels.

All illustrate a breakdown of black culture because of government dependence.

No, it’s not “slavery,” but it really is, just with a different face.



Sad, isn’t it, when truth is considered “offensive”?



If people don’t go along with the “accepted” view on anything controversial, you’re fair game to be denounced, insulted and deprived of your property and your career.

We’re not on a slippery slope; we’ve slid nearly to the bottom.

When the government gets full control of all the information in our medical, school, IRS and all other records, we will have no privacy or secrets, we’ll not be permitted to think anything the government doesn’t first approve and we’ll have turned into a regime Hitler could only have dreamed about.
Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious