Defiant rancher in Nevada beloved by militia groups is a horrible racist, surprising approximately nobody
Next thing you're going to tell me he votes conservative. Will the shocking revelations never end?!?
I bet he voted for Ron Paul, the king of dog whistles.
The rule should now be if you don't have any real friends that are black, then you don't have the right to have opinions about "them" (or any other "group" for that matter).
I think it's a pretty safe assumption that if you begin your statement with “I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro,” then you don't actually know the thing you claim to know.
Great. Now he's going to be lionized, just like that Duck Dynasty dude.
Christ, what an asshole.
I bet if you asked him he would tell you that he's just calling it as he sees it, and gets really angry with you for suggesting that he might sound racist when saying that black people should go back to picking cotton.
It's great that everyone is commenting and all, but as of 8:57PT the "Read Adam Nagourney's report" link goes nowhere.
Ah, it's been changed/fixed now. Proceed to talk about something you'd not yet read.
Oops, no it hasn't: still doesn't work. Continue in the manner in which you are accustomed.
It's the last dying breath of stupid old farts like this - people such as Hannity and his ilk are doing their best to whip up the teatbagger/racist (same thing) base, though. And rubes love other ignorant rubes. They revel in their stupidity.
Are you claiming that the quote above is a fabrication or was somehow taken wildly out of context? Because otherwise I think it's safe to assume this rancher is a horrible, horrible racist even without reading the full text of the article.
Possibly, but it seems like being racist lost its veneer of respectability some time ago. While things are changing what the Duck Dynasty debacle revealed is the extent to which being anti-LGBT is still acceptable.
Generally speaking, I don't like to assume anyone is a horrible horrible person unless I know for sure. It's just a decent way to behave towards others: not to rely on second-hand info. I'm not claiming anything is a fabrication, either. Just trying to be fair.
AFAIK, I don't have any real friends who are terrorists or white supremacists, but I do have opinions about "them".
It's not assuming anything. His words speak for themselves.
Just out of curiosity, though, what kind of context would be necessary to demonstrate Bundy was not, in reality, saying something ridiculously racist? I guess something along the lines of "A lot of racist people are idiots, and they say things like..." might do it, but anything else?
" ... and in front of that ranch, there is always at least one ignorant redneck with nothing to do but running his mouth.''
"...of course, some of my best friends are [gays|negros|white supremacist terrorists]."
So what is the difference between gov't handouts in the projects and .. oh, say grazing your cattle for free on gov't land? Both seem to me to be gov't subsidies. I'm sure I'm missing something.
But how can the Negroes have any pudding, if they don't eat their meat?
"His words speak(ing) for themselves" are all I wanted to confirm. And what context are you talking about? From the initial post "quote" on BB, there's just an atributed quote, nothing else. All I'm saying is that the link to the article didn't work. i.e. the article in which one might find out further details of the quote. Other than this horrible horrible person said this horrible horrible thing, just trust me on it. By now the link may be fixed, but at the time I posted (and the time others were commenting) it wasn't.