More Scarey Bundy Hype

Another example of media distortion from the New York Times.  Regarding the revealing of supposed "racism" from rancher/philosopher Cliven Bundy.  As it turns out, the Times own revision of the "evidence" was presented through carefully edited video comments from Bundy.  The original uncut video shows how it was modified for the NY Times to use.

Difficult to unravel the lies and false premise from layers of revisionism. Although I find no general justification for trading in human lives, I had the impression that black slavery has been a common practice between warring tribes in Africa as a convenient way to dispose of enemy prisoners. Apparently economic demand from other countries just made it more profitable.

There are existing records which seem to indicate that American slaves, at least some of them, were far better off than their African counterparts. I have met and worked with black families whose ancestors were American colonial slaves. They had chosen to be adopted into the slave owners family, took the same last name, and were treated like every other family member. This family group owned and operated a ranching cooperative, shared the work, and the profits. They did not depend on the welfare state.

While I have no reason to insist that happy coexistence may have been representative, it provides some evidence that black slavery in America was probably not the unrelenting hellish nightmare some would have us believe.  Bundy's real crime - he was naive enough to believe that he could speak the truth without apologizing.

Defending these ideas is not popular these days. Everyone is more anxious to establish their own victim's posture. But it seems problematic to counteract supposed lies with lies of your own.

Apparently colonial slavery was not limited to Africans. Slavery at that time was equal-opportunity indenture.


One of many interesting comments about this issue.

Bundy's idea was hardly original.  Stated by others...

Welfare has been worse than slavery. (E.W. Jackson)

The welfare state has done to black Americans what slavery could not have done, the harshest Jim Crow laws and racism could not have done, namely break up the black family.  (Walter Williams)

Bill Cosby has long been an outspoken critic of the nanny state.

Ben Carson has stated:

• Charities better at providing for needy than the government. (Mar 2013)
• Those who don't want to work? They are on their own. (Jan 2012)
• Government entitlements compete with private-sector charity. (Jan 2012)
• Eradicate poverty by providing education and requiring work. (Jan 2012)

Don't people ever grow weary of hearing everyone identified as "racist"?  These men cannot be considered "racists" for making such observations.

"Gay" in the News: NYTimes Sort of Helps Out

Wondering what to feel about Arizona storms raging in the media?  Once again, a NYTimes column dispels any confusion.  We are left with no doubt about the most popular politically-correct doctrine of the time.  Continuing the trend of popular media misrepresentation, the NYTimes sorta helps out.

Though perhaps it remains to be seen who these "morans" might be.

We understand by the blessing of such NYTimes wisdom that those miserable Arizona Congress critters, abandoning the sinking ship of desecrating sacred "gay rights", have pivoted,  now busy aiming their impotent guns of discrimination against another sacred sacrament, compromising the freedom of abortion clinics. 

And here you were thinking that Arizona is just a political backwater of no consequence to Real Important People of the NYTimes.  Arizona's obvious purpose for existence is to provide fodder for NYTimes readers to fashionably deplore.

Now we really KNOW how to engage in public ridicule of the unenlightened and intolerant.   With all the authority and sensitivity of the NYTimes.

We of the benighted regions should perhaps just shuffle back into our caves, drink the haute Kool-aid, and shut up.  For those who need permission, you know now what to think.  Be glad that the NYTimes, true source of all benevolence and virtue, has deigned to take notice.

"Gay" in the News: Resistance is Futile

Resistance is futile.  So the Borg has spoken.

Nothing new here, but an interesting perspective on the Arizona "anti-gay" bill, now that it has been properly vetoed and laid to rest with a stake in its heart, along with all other such bigoted discrimination.  We know it was only calculated to promote the posting of still more of those pernicious "NO GAYS ALLOWED" signs that we see in Arizona businesses all over the state.  Because most of the media coverage told us so.

The article makes a good case for characterizing public perception, especially as it is so strongly steered by the media today.  A headline in the NY Times is worth far more toward coloring public sentiment than all the apologetic posts that were ever written.

In fact, the Arizona bill was similar to legislation that is proposed or already enacted in several other states.

It basically repackaged the ideas embodied in the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act and made them applicable to the State of Arizona.  Remarkably, the original RFRA was sponsored by Chuck Schumer, was nearly unanimously approved in the Congress, and was signed by President Clinton in 1993.

So, is the federal legislation also "anti-gay"?  Could it be an example of federally-based "Jim Crow"?

In her speech justifying the veto, Governor Brewer asserted that not one example of religious discrimination has been found.  But most ironically, it also seems telling that not one "NO GAYS ALLOWED" sign has been found in any Arizona businesses either.