Out of Control Government

            Cliven Bundy and his family have been in the national news since 2014 when they faced federal authorities over a dispute of land. The government alleges that Bundy was grazing his cattle on federal land since 1993 without the required BLM permit and did not pay the required fees. Authorities allege that Bundy allowed his cattle to graze on public land even though there were court orders in 1998, 1999, and 2013 telling him to remove his cattle.

            According to Warren Henry, the BLM and its contractors attempted to impound Bundy cattle in April 2014. Bundy and his sons said that they would do “whatever it takes” to keep their property and took up arms. They were joined by “dozens of armed followers and militiamen who had learned of the confrontation.” The BLM stopped the operation after a week before any one was injured or killed, but they did not stop the case.

            Bundy, his sons, and other people were arrested, and cases were tried and retried. Cases were declared mistrials, but the government continued in its quest. Henry explains further.

The federal indictment of Bundy and his codefendants alleges that they engaged in a conspiracy to thwart the impoundment of the cattle. One of the alleged methods of the conspiracy was the use of “deceit and deception” to recruit followers and militiamen, including falsely claiming that the BLM had surrounded the Bundy ranch with snipers. The defendants were also charged with assault, threats against the government, firearms offenses, and obstruction of justice.

            As the case went trial, there was new evidence that “raises serious questions about the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) use of FBI surveillance and snipers to confront ranchers who were deemed nonviolent by several government agencies, and whose original offenses were alleged trespassing on federal land and nonpayment of grazing fees.” Just as jury selection started in Bundy’s case, events turned in his favor.

During a pretrial hearing, a National Park Service ranger testified that the FBI had set up at least one surveillance camera on the ranch, a fact the government had previously denied. At the same hearing, Dan Love, the special agent in charge of the BLM operation at the ranch, testified that there had been snipers deployed at the ranch. Love also testified that the government had commissioned threat assessment reports on the Bundys – reports the government had not provided in response to defense requests…

On November 27, 2017, Larry Wooten, a BLM investigator assigned to assess the government’s handling of the Bundy standoff, filed a whistleblower complaint with the Justice Department, alleging he was removed from the investigation after raising concerns about misconduct, including by Love.

            Jarrett Stepman of The Daily Signal compares the actions by the BLM with the Bundy’s to those of the IRS that targeted Tea Party groups. He writes that “Governments are prone to abuse, especially when unchecked.” He explains that in the Bundy case, the government overstepped its bounds.

A federal judge ruled December 20 that she was throwing out the Bureau of Land Management’s case against Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy because the prosecution withheld key facts. On Monday [January 8, 2018], the same judge ruled that the case could not be tried again due to the actions of the prosecution, which she said had been “outrageous” and “violated due process rights,” according to azcentral.com.

            Stepman says that the actions of government officials raised too many questions and “damaged the credibility of the case.” He continues with his article.

What is particularly worrisome is that the Bureau of Land Management appears to have acted punitively against political and religious groups they simply didn’t like…

The agents called Bundy and his supporters “deplorables,” “rednecks,” and “idiots” among many other worse names, Wooten said. They also insulted the Bundy family’s Mormon beliefs.

Their behavior showed clear prejudice toward “the defendants, their supporters, and Mormons,” Wooten wrote.

            As Stepman emphasizes, we do not have to believe that the Bundys were in the right in order to recognize that the government overstepped its boundaries. In this case, the government and/or its agents were out of control and needed to be reined in. We should be grateful that a federal judge was willing to recognize this need.

Bundy and Racism

                Sixty-seven-year-old Cliven Bundy is in trouble again but not with the federal government.  This time it is the main stream media that tried to trip him up.  Mr. Bundy made some comments that were taken out of context by the New York Times and other news outlets.  Because of their bad reporting, he has been ostracized.  Major talk show hosts such as Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck are distancing themselves from Mr. Bundy for what they deem to be racist remarks.  I consider his words to be the truth even though politically incorrect.

                Mr. Bundy’s statement is on a You Tube video and translated by truthrevolt.org.  If the main stream media had put Mr. Bundy’s words in context, there would have been no news item; so they took the middle of the statement and made him sound like a racist. 

                Here is the part of the statement printed by the New York Times and other news outlets:  “Let me tell, talk to you about the Mexicans, and these are just things I know about the Negroes.  I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro.  When I go … to Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, and I would see these little government houses, and in front of that government house the door was usually open and the older people and the kids – and there’s 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?  They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never, 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?

                “You know they didn’t get more freedom, they got less freedom – they got less family life, and their happiness – you could see it in their faces – they wasn’t happy sitting on that concrete sidewalk.  Down there they [were] probably growing their turnips – so that’s all government, that’s not freedom.”

                It seems real plain to me that Mr. Bundy was talking about the freedom of Blacks and other minorities and was very correct in questioning if they are better off living on the government plantation of subsidies.  The above statement was taken out of context; it was preceded -- as shown by the YouTube video - with Mr. Bundy in mid-sentence saying:  “… and so what I’ve testified to you – I was in the Watts riot.  I seen the beginning fire and I seen that last fire.  What I seen is civil disturbance.  People are not happy; people are thinking they don’t have their freedoms; they didn’t have these things, and they didn’t have them.

                “We’ve progressed quite a bit from that day until now, and we sure don’t want to go back.  We sure don’t want the colored people to go back to that point.  We sure don’t want these Mexican people to go back to that point.  And we can make a difference right now by taking care of some of these bureaucracies, and do it in a peaceful way.”

                If this first part of his statement had been quoted, no one would even think he was a racist.  To me, he sounds very compassionate and concerned about the plight of his fellow human beings.  He sounds sincerely concerned with how minorities were treated in the past and definitely does not want “to go back to that point.” 

                The heavily-quoted words – taken from the middle of the statement - were followed by Mr. Bundy talking about Hispanics.  “Now, let me talk about the Spanish people.  You know, I understand that they come over here against our Constitution and cross our borders.  But they’re here and they’re people – and I’ve worked side by side [with] a lot of them.

                “Don’t tell me they don’t work, and don’t tell me they don’t pay taxes.  And don’t tell me they don’t have better family structures than most of us white people.  When you see those Mexican families, they’re together, they picnic together, they’re spending their time together, and I’ll tell you in my way of thinking they’re awful nice people.  And we need to have those people join us and be with us – not, not come to our party.”

                How can any thinking person consider Mr. Bundy to be a racist?  Bumbling?  Yes.  Inarticulate?  Yes.  Opinionated?  Yes.  Racist?  No.  He showed great concern for the African-American people and even complimented the Hispanics.  He sounds to me like a man who is too aware that our government is taking over our lives and making them worse. 

                A black Marine that goes by the name of Charlie Delta wrote a letter defending Mr. Bundy:  “The media distorts information  to the point of social division.  This is a photo of myself and the resilient, often charismatic, and maybe not so tactful Cliven Bundy.  He’s a cowboy and a helluva family man, not an orator.

                “One thing he definitely isn’t – a racist.  I found his comments to not only be NOT racist, but his own view of his experiences.  Who the heck are we to determine another man’s perspective on the world around him?!  ….

                “Furthermore, if you take the time to do your own research, you’ll find that his statements about some black Americans actually hold weight.  He posed a hypothetical question.  He said, `I wonder IF’ … ____, I’m black and I often wonder about the same about the decline of the black family.

                “Bottom line is that we are all slaves in this waning republic, no matter our skin color.  Mr. Bundy could have used any racial demographic as an example:  Native Americans on reservations, whites in trailer parks, etc.  He noticed the crippling effects of receiving government `assistance’ and the long term result of accepting handouts….”

                Marcus Lloyd, another American who happens to be black, came to Mr. Bundy’s defense:  “Any decent, fair-minded human being would understand that Bundy was condemning the slavery of government dependency in his comments regarding Negros.  The elderly gentleman is a rancher who is not media-savvy, nor is he schooled in the nuances of political correctness….

                “Mr. Bundy spoke the truth about cradle-to-grave government dependency wreaking havoc in the black community.  We all know this.  But when any white person who dares to acknowledge the huge elephant in the black community’s living room is vilified and branded a racist….  Meanwhile, black families continue to suffer and vote monolithically for Democrats who vow to fix their problems but never do.

                “Black relatives of mine (several died young) lived wasted lives because they were addicted to government dependency.  They were Democratic Party slaves, enslaved with chains far more powerful than steel.  They suffered mental and emotional slavery.  My relatives were robbed of the self-esteem, pride, and joy of individual achievement and earning one’s way….”

                I believe that Mr. Bundy is absolutely correct in saying that government subsidies do not help anyone – black, white, or brown – especially when given long term.  Government subsidies are merely making more and more people “slaves” to the U.S. Government.  The government is providing the daily needs for too many able-bodied people who should be working to provide their own necessities and luxuries.  I believe that most of these people would be much happier if they were working for their daily bread and paying their own way.  In my point of view, the federal government is not doing the people any favors but are simply buying votes for the Democrat Party.