The Framing and Betrayal of Cliven Bundy
If you caught more than 5 minutes of Sean Hannity on either TV or radio late last week, you probably heard him denouncing Cliven Bundy as “repugnant,” “beyond despicable,” “beyond ignorant,” et cetera, astounding those who have seen Hannity devote both of his shows over the past few weeks to hyping Bundy into a folk hero.
The catalyst for this abrupt reversal was a sandbagging the somewhat inarticulate Bundy got from the liberal establishment media on behalf of the regime he dared stand up against. To destroy Bundy’s public image, a little creative editing was required. This interview was use to convince folks like Hannity that Bundy is a “racist” and therefore repugnant, despicable, et cetera:
That was the edited version, after the ultra-left non-taxpaying professional propagandists at Media Matters for America had their way with the interview. Now watch the unedited version:
See the interview in full at Ironic Surrealism.
Attentive viewers will note that Bundy is criticizing the federal government and liberalism, not any racial groups. His attitude toward blacks and Hispanics is clearly benevolent; he is taking their side.
Black former UN Ambassador Alan Keyes confirms that there is nothing “racist” about what Cliven Bundy said.
What does race have to do with a corrupt and tyrannical government deliberately driving ranchers out of business anyway? You probably know the answer. Anyone the authorities want to destroy, they portray as a “racist” — i.e., as a thought criminal. If Bundy is a racist, he is wrong in all matters, as is anyone who agrees with him about anything; therefore the federal government was right to send in 200 heavily armed agents to terrorize his family.
Imagine a medieval king encountering resistance while trying to steal someone’s land, then denouncing him as a witch to erode his public support. This is the exact equivalent.
The most shocking thing here is not that publications like the New York Times would quote out of context to discredit an honest citizen who stands up to federal tyranny. That execrable publication has proven repeatedly that it has no more integrity than Pravda did under Stalin. Nor should anyone be surprised that Hannity is an establishment tool who will build people up into demigods, only to tear them down at the command of his masters. You don’t get your own prime time show by adhering to principle.
What horrifies me is the frenzied desperation in Hannity’s voice when he denounces Bundy’s supposedly racist remarks, as if the worst thing that could possibly happen would be people not believing that he really really really condemns the rancher for being a thought criminal. It’s easy to imagine someone standing just off camera with a pistol trained on his head.
But in a soft tyranny, pistols aren’t required. The threat of losing his luxurious lifestyle is all it takes to get guys like Hannity in line.
Eventually people will stop listening to the tools and the sellouts. Then the establishment will be up against genuine Americans like Cliven Bundy. That’s when our rulers will need the pistols.
You can’t always learn what malignant objectives leftists are pursuing by listening to what they accuse the resistance of. Sometimes
Brooke Fox of Seattle’s MOVIN, 92.5 FM radio show “The Ladies Room” wants to know who would be worth risking
A Minnesota TV news story perpetrated a perfect example of one-sided “news” coverage especially where it concerns the politically correct