Just this week, a short article came across my desk from email sources about racism. The article was about a white racist named Nancy Pelosi. Like Cliven Bundy, she too is not a Harvard graduate. She got her degree from Trinity College in Washington D.C. The headline on the article that I received is "Nancy Pelosi Says She Doesn't Care About 'White' People."  

Nobody in the corrupt media called her a racist for this racist remark. If Clive Bundy uttered this headline and substituted black, brown, yellow, or red, for white, would it be a racist comment? My answer to that question is a question: “Do flys have wings?”  

Like you, I am trying to figure out what is racist and what is not racist. I am sick of race baiters and racists calling the rest of the world racists just for talking about race as best they can. Isn’t this racist crap wearing thin? Is anybody awake out there?

Unlike Sean Hannity and Rand Paul and other conservatives who have abandoned Clive Bundy in his time of need, I am not willing to cede control over the notion of racism to the Democratic Party. Nor should any of us! Democrats do not own the race card, though they play it every day as it helps their little lies become factoids—lies said so often they appear to be truth. 

It seems that the corrupt left-leaning national media sincerely believe they own the only race card that God ever created. Moreover, they believe they have a right to play the card whenever they wish, even if played improperly, and even if the victim of the race card attack is innocent and is nonetheless destroyed for life.  Well, neither you nor I buy that as being legitimate use, and so we see their attempts to use the card for political purposes as completely illegitimate.

The race card rules according to liberal progressives are as follows: “Whenever a Republican or conservative says anything, it is racist, and whenever a Democrat or a liberal progressive Marxist says anything, it is automatically acceptable and definitely not racist.” And, you thought the rules would be complicated!  They may not be fair, but it is how the corrupt national media play their only card.  Like you, I do not buy in!

Harry Reid, US Senate Majority Leader called Cliven Bundy and a thousand others domestic terrorists. Reid did not quote an authoritative source for his labeling so like a lot of lies, this was just Dingy Harry’s opinion. These Nevadans have been demanding for some time now that the Federal Government, which has assumed unlawful ownership /possession of almost 85% of the land in Nevada; give the land back to the people of Nevada, the rightful owners. The US Constitution was not written so Harry Reid can control all the land in any one state so that he and his family can further prosper.

Under the Constitution, the Federal Government actually has no right to own any land that is not for an enumerated purpose such as supporting a navy, an army, interstate highways etc.   The Tenth Amendment Center has provided Conservative Action Alerts readers with an expose on the truth about the Bundy / Nevada land grab by the Feds. Click here (http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2014/04/25/ownership-of-federal-land-answers-suggested-by-the-bundy-standoff/?doing_wp_cron=1398519649.5484580993652343750000#.U1vCJFVdUYk ) 

This group has done a full and independent analysis of the Bundy situation and it has concluded some things Harry Reid does not want to reid read about:

“Land not needed for such purposes must be disposed of within a reasonable time. The federal government should have disposed of BLM grazing land long ago… In fact, for the federal government to own a large share of American real estate (currently about 28 percent) is directly contrary to certain values the Constitution was designed to further.”

So now, Cliven Bundy is under attack by an unfair press for being a racist, and Harry Reid, a prolific liar is now vindicated by the same corrupt press for calling it right. Reid has been credited now with the wisdom to know that Cliven Bundy is a terrorist since he has been declared a “proven racist.” Really! And all of Harry Reid’s sins, including being a liar are now forgiven by the same corrupt press. After all, they have declared Cliven Bundy as a “proven racist.” The corrupt press should have no standing in the court of public opinion but they think they still control the public with their lies. 

Unfortunately for Reid, the corrupt national media does not control speech yet in the US. RNC Press secretary Kirsten Kukowski in a rare display of Republican guts, says that Harry Reid is “not to be trusted. He is a ‘repetitive bold-faced liar’… Nothing’s Too Unethical for Harry Reid… He was caught funneling campaign money to his relatives. His Senate Majority PAC was caught lying to voters. And he was caught hypocritically accepting money tied to people he calls 'un-American.”

It is probable that Cliven Bundy made improper racist remarks about President Obama,  when he described the President as a "light skinned" African-American "with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one."

Well, not exactly. Sorry for the temporary deception. You see, Harry Reid is already on record apologizing for saying that the race of Barack Obama and his clever way of being a Negro when he needs to be would help his election chances. Is Harry Reid a racist? Harry did it! Is Harry Reid a racist? Why not?

Well, Cliven Bundy made big time racist remarks. The Grey Lady must not have captured all the racism in Bundy’s heart. They missed when he lectured black communities about improving their lives with these racially insensitive words:

They have “…names like Shaniqua, Taliqua and Mohammed and all of that crap, and all of them are in jail… Brown or black versus the Board of Education is no longer the white person's problem. Bundy said that blacks have to “take their own neighborhoods back.” Then Bundy really got out of control with these remarks:

“People used to be ashamed. Today, a woman has eight children with eight different 'husbands' -- or men or whatever you call them now. We have millionaire football players who cannot read.  We have million-dollar basketball players who can't write two paragraphs.”   Then to add insult to injury intentionally, Bundy said: “…black folks have to do a better job. Someone working at Wal- Mart with seven kids... you are hurting [black people]…

Bundy then challenged blacks to “…start holding each other to a higher standard.” And, he fired off this caustic remark: “[Blacks]… cannot blame the white people any longer. It's NOT about color...It's about behavior !!! “

And, for these words, Bundy has been rightfully ruled by Harry Reid and the corrupt national media as a “proven racist,” and therefore a domestic terrorist without a doubt.

But, wait! It wasn’t Bundy who said that. It was Dr. William Henry 'Bill' Cosby, Jr., Ed.D. Is Cosby a racist also?

Wait a minute here. How did all this happen? Bundy is no Bill Cosby and cannot express himself as well as the patriarch of the Cosby Family. The corrupt press gave Bundy celebrity status, put him on a soapbox, and, hoping they could get him to come out with a “great gotcha moment,” goaded him into offering his “professional” commentary as an expert on various world affairs, including race. What a bunch of slime bags!  

So, you have waited long enough. Here is what Bundy actually said. This time I am not kidding:

“I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro,” he said. Mr. Bundy recalled driving past a public-housing project in North Las Vegas, “and in front of that government house the door was usually open and the older people and the kids — and there is always at least a half a dozen people sitting on the porch — they didn’t have nothing to do. They didn’t have nothing for their kids to do. They didn’t have nothing for their young girls to do.

“And because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do?” he asked. “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.

By the way, this quote that has rippled across the media is from the New York Times. It has been edited to intentionally make Bundy look like a racist. Yes, the Times lied by deceit in this article. They knew better but chose to lie. The Ole Grey Lady ain’t what she used to be…

With 112 Pulitzer prizes to its credit, neither Adam Nagourney, the author of the hit piece  on Bubdy, nor the The Grey Lady herself checked out the real meaning of Cliven Bundy’s remarks. Instead the NYT slanted the facts to fit their editorial style.

Consequently, the Times will not be winning another prize for the corrupt and downright dishonest reporting of their hit piece of April 23, regarding Clive Bundy. By the way, a hit piece is defined as “an attempt to turn public opinion against someone/something through the appearance of objective reporting or editorializing.” Yeah, hit piece is the right term for this rabble for sure.

To the NYT, I say, pick on somebody your own size or change the game to make it fair. Instead of grading off the cuff speeches as racist or not, how about competing in a ranch specialty such as tie down roping or perhaps a clay pigeon shoot. How good would Adam Nagourney or any of the slime at the New York Times do if it were a Bundy home game, and if it were honestly graded.

Seeing Bundy as a pigeon easy to take down with a little language and muck reporting license, Nagourney stacked the deck on Bundy with his attack. Bundy’s comments may have proven that Bundy is not the best public speaker but it proved nothing about racism. The Grey Lady with Adam Nagourney as the stooley, turned in a trick for Harry Reid and the Democrats to substantiate the government’s illegal claim to 85% of the land in Nevada. The NYT may now be able to claim they have a monopoly on low lifes.

Thomas Sowell is a great man and that separates him from slime like Adam Nagourney. He is an American economist, social theorist, political philosopher, and distinguished author. He is currently a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. When Thomas Sowell speaks, America listens. Mr. Sowell has little regard for The Grey Lady’s penchant for making up news from their own liberal progressive opinions:

“Front-page editorials, disguised as news stories, have become such familiar features of the New York Times that it should have been no surprise… What is really corrupting is camouflaging an editorial as a "news" story.

Thomas Sowell, just like Bill Cosby, Allen West, Alan Keyes and other prominent black statesmen have often spoken out on the validity of a comparison of slavery and the liberal welfare state. Conservative columnist Sowell writes that:  “The black family, which had survived centuries of slavery and discrimination, began rapidly disintegrating in the liberal welfare state that subsidized unwed pregnancy and changed welfare from an emergency rescue to a way of life.” Isn’t this what Bundy said, more or less?

Ambassador and Presidential Candidate Alan Keyes specifically addressed the Bundy issue and unlike Sean Hannity and Rand Paul, who apparently lost their nerve, Keyes came right to Bundy’s defense:  “He wasn’t talking so much about black folks, but about the harm and damage that the leftist socialism has done to blacks.”  Keyes continued:  “I find it appalling that we basically have a history of the leftist liberalism that wants to extinguish black people by abortion [and] destroying the family structure…All of these things if you just look at the effects, you would say this was planned by some racist madman to destroy the black community.” Isn’t this what Bundy said, more or less?

What do these four distinguished black men know that Sean Hannity and Rand Paul do not know?  Bundy’s biggest sins are that he is both inexpert in racial matters, and he is inarticulate. That’s it. Get over it!

If Nagourney were a real journalist and not just a racist hit man looking for another big and quick raise in an unfair capitalist society, he would have done a little more work on the story. Nagourney doesn’t get paid for hearing half facts and divining the other half. Well, at least that is what I thought!

If the Times is such a high quality news organization, why did they not check their facts? Why did they not qualify Bundy’s comments rather than take them out of context? To be sure they got it right, why did they not ask some follow-on questions?  Why can I, an IT-Expert know what these professional journalists should have done, and yet they still prefer us to think this bogus story is legitimate.

They are not apologizing because they think they have Republicans on the run, and they have America 100% duped. They said Bundy is a racist, and thus it is final.  So let it be written! So let it be law!

The answer is because Bundy had delivered more than enough for them to achieve their labeling goal. This was a well constructed sting operation and once Nagourney got enough to fabricate racism as a charge from his innocent little sting operation, the game was over. Nobody who knew The Grey lady wanted to learn that Bundy doesn’t really feel that way.

The Grey Lady wanted to make Bundy look like a jerk so Harry Reid would be vindicated, and the Bundy name would be demonized for all time, just like the name Richard Mourdock in 2012. Democrats are ruthless, and the lie is their favorite weapon.

They also hooked noted conservatives and Republicans, though none were black, to look like wimps and jerks. Democrats protect their own while wimpy Republicans, unfortunately, are always hoping to protect their own hides while looking for the closest bus.

Look at the full remarks here (http://politicaloutcast.com/2014/04/infowars-publishes-full-context-clive-bundys-remarks/). You will see that Bundy never suggested going back to slavery days. In fact, he specifically said he did not want to go back to those days. It is clear that the Times wanted to slam Bundy even if they had to “lie a little” to intentionally get his message wrong…and they did. And they did it with malice and forethought. No Pulitzer Prize will be coming from this attack piece!

Who thinks minorities on the federal dole have more freedom than slaves? Are we permitted to talk about it? Who among us are qualified to give facts for either side of this argument? Did Bundy use racist terms such as “slavery” or perhaps he mentioned “welfare” or “government subsidies?” Can we use those words nowadays without offending anybody?  Is the mere mention of these words, according to the owners of the race card, pure racism?  

It seems to me that Bundy was using his own life experience to extrapolate a hypothesis about something he was goaded into discussing by a corrupt and seedy, biased press. The press hoped he would trip up so they could call him a racist. Meanwhile Harry Reid has also been called a racist, and he surely is a liar, but since he is an adjunct liberal progressive member of the corrupt media team, when he stumbles, he gets a pass. Clive Bundy is a Republican and he is fair game. Bundy does not get a press pass.

I think that none of the above—Reid, Cosby, or Bundy are racists. However, there is an awful lot of deserved shame that belongs on the corrupt national media for creating this controversy to help Harry Reid recover, and to help him extrapolate the word racist to mean domestic terrorist.

It is too bad that there are always a handful of gutless Republicans and conservatives such as Sean Hannity and Rand Paul who play right into the hands of the anti-conservatives . Once the controversy began, they immediately threw Bundy under the bus. Like Pilate, they washed Bundy off their weak little hands.

They chose to distance themselves from the real victim here, Cliven Bundy. Rather than look at what Bundy said and use it as a basis for dialogue, even those who should be fighting the Bureau of Land Management and the Federal Government have fallen for the race card once again. When will they ever learn? “Cowards die a thousand times before their death. The valiant never taste of death but once.”

Unlike Bill Cosby, with a Doctor of Education degree, Cliven Bundy did not graduate from the University of Massachusetts Amherst. Unlike Harry Reid, with a law degree, Cliven Bundy did not graduate from George Washington University. Unlike many of the politicians and the press on the national stage, Cliven Bundy does not hold a degree from Harvard, nor did he attend Harvard.

However, like many in the US who do not hold college degrees, Cliven Bundy is not stupid. Yes, he was tricked by a corrupt national press, but many a trusting human being could have fallen for the media love fest being provided Mr. Bundy. Bundy was starting to feel good about all the PR—like as if the dirty press really liked him.

As a free citizen, Bundy offered his "dialogue" about the problems in black communities and it was admittedly not very articulate. He was slammed immediately by the US liberal progressive corrupt press as being racist. Not a single second lapsed from Bundy beginning his "dialogue," until he was declared a racist and the verdict by the press was final. None of this could be that it is the Press’s job to defame all Republicans. If so, being Republican may have Bundy’s most unforgivable crime. 

Looking at what Bundy said in the words he used, there was no animus, just as there was no animus in Bill Cosby’s exhortation to the black community.  Cosby and the rest of us, including Cliven Bundy know that there is a big problem in the black community with over 70% of the births out of wedlock. This is an inconvenient fact for the left.

Regardless, Cliven Bundy is not the appropriate spokesman on nuclear physics, nor on race relations. There was no anger. Bundy was not demeaning blacks or whites or reds or browns or yellows or anything at all. He was beginning a dialogue now that he had gotten all this free air time. But, the liberal progressive corrupt press had set the trap, and they hoped Bundy would fall for their sting. He did.  They are now clobbering him for trusting them.  

Ironically, the left has often said we need to discuss race in America. Before he was elected, Candidate Obama felt the same. He gave a big speech about race in his campaign in 2008. You may recall that the President got to touch on many of the taboo racial subjects, but nobody got to deliver a rebuttal; and there was no discussion.

Obama addressed the subjects of racial tensions, white privilege, and race and inequality in the United States. He discussed black "anger," white "resentment," and other issues as he sought to explain and contextualize Reverend Wright's controversial comments and sermons. At the time, Candidate Obama was trying to free himself from the yoke of his buddy, Wright, a true racist. The Press were instructed to lay off the Obama / Wright relationship after the perfect race speech, and like good soldiers they followed orders. It is too bad, because a little truth from the corrupt media back then could have helped Hillary be our President today. It is too bad Obama does not call off the bad press on Clive Bundy.

So, what is the problem with Bundy offering his unedited thoughts on the matter of race? We all do it all the time, don’t we? We live in America. Bundy took the bait from the press and he discussed his opinion on some notions that many scholars agree are problems in the black community.

Of course Bundy was not the guy anyone would have picked to articulate any of the sensitive notions he felt in his heart, to the rest of the country. We all would have picked Bill Cosby, a great American to deliver Bundy’s speech, and from where I stand, Cosby has delivered similar speeches to Bundy’s, though much more fluently and many more times than Cliven Bundy. So, why did the press pick Bundy to give that speech instead of Cosby? Because they wanted to whack Republicans, that’s why! BTW, I am a Democrat. Sorry! I just happen to like the truth.

We know the problem is that liberals would kill conservatives if they would not have to stand trial and go to jail for their crimes.  If somebody shot a nice little poison dart into Bundy’s neck while he was defending his property, it would not have even made the evening news. But, if they could get Bundy to say some stuff that would kill him politically, along with all “those nasty” Republicans; that would be even better.

Political hacks want to nail and demean anybody who mentions the word black or brown or red or yellow if they can control the context. I did not mean just anybody. The anybody speaker must be a conservative.

The left uses everything from the sun in the sky to a breakfast cereal to an insect on the ground to help them gain politically. They do not want to solve the real problems among blacks and whites and browns and yellows and reds!  That is why race relations have gotten worse, not better—even with a black President in office.  These race baiters are not really interested in all people getting along if they can gain from the divisions. 

Cosby's exhortations to all of us have surely influenced our thinking and Bundy's thinking. We have some big problems in the USA, and Bill Cosby speaks to the black communities about them unabashedly, and we all hear the repercussions in our own communities. Cosby identifies problems in white, yellow, brown, and red communities also. Cosby knows we can all do better.  He roots for us. He does not sit by like a sniper waiting for the least articulate of us all, to give up a big “gotcha!”

Bundy basically said that the blacks that he knows by where he lives in Nevada, as a family, get so much from the government that all members of their families from young to old are often on the front porch with nothing to do.  He said they seem to have no purpose. He thinks this is not a good situation as they become slaves to the government handout.  What did Bundy say that many in the US, black, white or other, are not thinking?

If it cannot be said or discussed, what discussion is it that the leftists want to have about race? Or is their invitation just a ruse to trap a few more Bundy’s? 

Aren't you sick of the fact that the race card is always the last line of offense for the liberal progressives? Whenever they are hurting, they bring out the race card. They are always calling somebody a racist in order to destroy them and any cause they represent. Bundy is simply their latest victim. He is a straw man representing all Republicans. But, he is not! Americans need to be smart enough to see lies as lies.

The left thinks they won the race card. They store it in Al Gore’s lock box and they pull it out whenever they need it for their own political gain. What about the truth? Where do they store the truth? What happened to the notion that it was a good idea to discuss race?

When a white person begins a discussion about race; he is immediately a racist yet the universal opinion is that there should be more discussion about race? How can you have a discussion about race when every time a white person mentions a black person, he is automatically declared a racist if he is not a Democrat?

Bundy's big mistake was suggesting that if a person is going to sit around all day with nothing to do until the mailbox bells go off and the monthly checks arrive, this cannot be a good way to raise a family.   Is there anybody within eyeshot of this paragraph that thinks this is a good idea?

Bundy suggested as many have, who would like to end the welfare state, that the people chained to their mailboxes, waiting for government checks, are slaves as much as those chained to the plow in the 1860's. So, in his thinking, when the slaves had their full families intact, and they were a family unit, and there were no out-of-wedlock babies; other than the wickedness of involuntary servitude, which was 100% wrong, those families may have been better off keeping their family units in God's hands, rather than having government hold the keys to their chains.

It was the beginning of a discussion. Who in the liberal progressive media, at The Grey Lady or otherwise, has taken the time to tell Bundy where he went wrong?  Once the The Grey Lady trapped ole Clive Bundy, there were no attempts at the truth. There was no attempt o make Clive Bundy a better man. They wanted to destroy him simply because the hate conservatives and Republicans. Nobody would go “ooh and ah”  if the left said he was bad simply because he was Republican. So they had to brand Bundy guilty of the capital offense of racism. I don’t think so.    

That's how I read it. But, if you are a liberal progressive--a person wanting to hurt any conservative who becomes famous, the best way to defame that person, no matter what his or her name, today, is to label them a racist. Then, the corrupt press will spread the corrupt word, and it will be the gospel, according to the liberal progressives. Americans, who think for themselves and ignore the pleadings and the outright lies from the corrupt media, see things much differently and much more clearly.

Liberal Progressive Marxists and their cohorts in the rest of America keep forgetting that Abraham Lincoln, the President, who indisputably freed the slaves, was a Republican. SO, REPUBLICANS ARE AND HAVE BEEN ANTI-SLAVERY FROM DAY ONE! Democrats were the big plantation owners but they are better purveyors of spin and lies than Republicans could ever hope to be. They do not want blacks especially, to know they have consistently voted against their rights.

Will we one day soon see a defamatory program from Democrats against Lincoln? Lies are most important when your message is anti-people. After all, the notion of the new left would prefer to defame all Republicans, including Abraham Lincoln. I predict that eventually they will find that Lincoln was a racist.  

We also keep forgetting that Democrats, not Republicans were the leaders of the KKK, and they hated Republicans as much as blacks. But, were they ever called racists? Democrats have somehow shifted the KKK stain to Republicans, yet Republicans and blacks were both KKK victims. Democrats cannot afford for blacks to know the truth that even before they were born, the Republicans were fighting for their freedom, while Democrat plantation owners were hoping to keep them as slaves. Is that a racist comment?

But, aren't Republicans the worst people that God has ever created? Liberal progressives would like you to think so. Until people begin to use their full brains and speak up, the liberal progressives will use you and people like poor Cliven Bundy, a victim himself, as the poster child for Republican racism. Just because it is a lie will not stop them. Will it stop you?

Irish Mike in 2009, writing to the free republic notes that the original targets of the Ku Klux Klan were Republicans, both black and white. He cites a 2009 television program and a book, which describes how the Democrats started the KKK and for decades harassed the GOP with lynchings and threats. Mike says that an estimated 3,446 blacks and 1,297 whites died at the end of KKK ropes from 1882 to 1964.

But, if the Democrats told stories like this, they would never get elected since the truth would kill their chances. Moreover, they would not be able to as quickly use the race card to damn anybody who looked like they may have conservative leanings.  Cliven Bundy is a victim and it had nothing at all to do with what he said. He is a Republican and Democrats believe they hold the one and only race card.

Shame on the New York Times and the corrupt national press for giving this ugly story, created by The Grey Lady’s lies, any attention at all! It is a contrived and bogus attempt to get Americans to forget about Obamacare, no jobs, the progressive socialist Marxist agenda and the lawlessness in Washington DC, by getting us all to think that the Republicans did it.

Yes, Cliven Bundy, who is obviously the new leader of the Republican Party is a bad guy since he is a Republican and of course all bad people are Republicans and all Republicans are racists.


Even an American with just a half brain can see this for what it is!