Self-purported “Negro” expert and conservative hero and “Patriot” Cliven Bundy is in hot water for the racist comments he made while defending his feelings of entitlement to government welfare he shouldn’t have to pay back, so he explained himself again just to make sure you get it.
He’s not a racist, y’all, but weren’t things better when blacks had something to do? So, follow Cliven down the logic path where this fellow who doesn’t want to pay the government fees he owes for land he’s used thinks it would be super freelike for “negroes” to be slaves, because at least then they had something to do.
Plus the media totally “took him out of context”, so let’s let Mr. Bundy explain exactly to the The Peter Schiff Show via Mediaite what he meant by his “idea” that negroes might have been better off under slavery.
Transcript from Talking Points Memo:
I’m wondering if they’re better off under a government subsidy and their young women are having the abortions and their young men are in jail and their older women and children are sitting out on the cement porch without nothing to do.
I’m wondering: Are they happier now under this government subsidy system than they were when they were when they were slaves and they was able to their family structure together and the chickens and the garden and the people have something to do?
So in my mind, are they better off being slaves in that sense or better off being slaves to the United States government in the sense of the subsidy? I’m wondering. The statement was right. I am wondering.
Like Mr. Bundy, I am wondering. I wonder why Cliven Bundy feels so entitled to government resources that he’s sucking the government dry by stealing government subsidies, and I’m also wondering why when the Right wing saw the militia standing strong with Cliven, they didn’t know it was time to back away quietly.
I am also wondering if the Right would be celebrating “freedom” so much if Cliven Bundy were black, and his militia were armed black men who were standing up to the feds because they didn’t think the laws applied to them and refused to pay back government resources they allocated to themselves.
I’m wondering if Cliven Bundy weren’t on his cement porch with nothing to do, surrounded by white women getting abortions at record speed in red states, if he would have time for this big show and all of these media appearances. Someone might want to educate Cliven Bundy, because the slaves weren’t all happy together families. Seriously. History matters.
But since he, like Sarah Palin, thinks it’s no biggie, maybe Cliven would be better off if he had a Master to tell him what to do, to organize his home life as Master saw fit, to divide his family as Master saw fit, and to steal all of Cliven’s rights away as Master saw fit, because I’m wondering if Cliven Bundy can really function as a responsible grown up without someone telling him what to do. Obviously, he feels entitled to government land that his fellow ranchers have to pay fees for, so he clearly can’t be responsible for his own property and actions. I’m wondering if he needs a nice, well-intentioned Master to take over for him.
I was also wondering just who would defend this, as even a smattering of true fools in the Republican party figured out that they had better backpedal quickly after embracing Bundy as they have other law breakers like George Zimmerman, and who would try to claim that Mr. Bundy, welfare taker extraordinaire, really had a point about just wondering if negroes were better off under slavery. Some hollow and desperate Republicans are trying to pretend this is a real issue worthy of discussing (keeping it real, NRO and Dana Loesch), because nothing says freedom like “discussing” whether or not a minority group might have been better off when they were stolen from their families and shipped over to the US to serve and enrich white people, and were not even considered full people.
Oh, sorry, that’s not what he meant by slavery. He just meant yeah, they’re enslaved, but think of the freedom. So much better than taking stuff from the government like Mr. Bundy has been doing for years.
Mr. Bundy knows real slavery, y’all. He’s just wondering if “negroes” are really happier being free. I’m wondering why he is a wondering this, and why if he’s so curious he doesn’t give it a shot and see how he likes it.
Apparently this is a serious policy matter for some on the right, who are still pretending that the militia wasn’t a clue as to the racist agenda of Bundy, and that “state’s rights” isn’t another way of relitigating the resentments of the Civil War. Welcome to the 2014 war of northern aggression: This is the part in our program where conservatives jump off a cliff with anti-government juveniles who are cheating the taxpayers with their entitlement, in the name of white man’s “freedom”, because BIG TENT. They want to win.
Here’s a big clue for conservatives who are still defending Mr. Bundy: If you are explaining that you are not a racist, you’ve already lost. But if you really want to make this about how pro-slavery viewpoints/policies are not racist, please proceed loudly.
Ms. Jones is the editor-in-chief of PoliticusUSA and a member of the White House press pool.
Sarah hosts Politicus News and co-hosts Politicus Radio. Her analysis has been featured on several national radio, television news programs and talk shows, and print outlets including Stateside with David Shuster, as well as The Washington Post, The Atlantic Wire, CNN, MSNBC, The Week, The Hollywood Reporter, and more.
Sarah is a member of the Society of Professional Journalists.