Submitted by Elaine Magliaro, Weekend Contributor
Cliven Bundy, the Nevada rancher and scofflaw, was hailed by some people as a folk hero and patriot recently when he—and his followers–engaged in a standoff with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Caty Enders (Esquire) described the scene in Bunkerville, Nevada, as pundits and politicians descended on the Bundy camp last week “to throw in their American flag hats with the BLM protestors.” She said that a FOX News van had been parked by the side of the road for days—and that “militia snipers kept a trained watch” up on a ridge “as Bundy held court.” She added that disciples of Bundy came from far and wide “to share their personal theories as to why the government was enforcing a court order.”
Bundy has had a number of advocates who have spoken in support of his militant stance against the BLM. Those advocates included some prominent politicians and members of the media. Sean Hannity was one of Bundy’s biggest boosters and helped to make him into a folk hero. Hannity talked with Bundy on a number of occasions on his Fox News show. Joan Walsh (Salon) asked a pertinent question about Bundy on Friday: “How does a guy who declared early on ‘I don’t recognize the United States government as even existing’ become a folk hero in the first place?” She said that both Hannity and Fox News should have realized that the Nevada rancher was “too toxic” prior to his “ongoing self-exposure as a racist.” She added that the extremism of Bundy’s statement about the US government “should have been warning enough that Bundy was not only crazy but dangerous…”
Enders posed a question that was in the same vein as Walsh’s: “Exactly how difficult was it, though, to determine pretty early on that Bundy and his followers were using the threat of force to back up some terrifyingly misguided beliefs?” Enders provided some insight into the thinking and beliefs of Bundy and disciples of his with whom she talked.
Members of the Bundy Brigade Speak Out
Enders spoke to a militia member named Mark who was affiliated with the Oath Keepers group. Mark explained to her “the truth behind public land management.” He said, “The assumption is that the BLM is part of the federal government. But we need to check the facts on that one. The BLM doesn’t work for the government: they work for the United Nations. They might as well be wearing blue helmets. If we find out there’s money being exchanged between Harry Reid and the Chinese government, no one should be surprised.”
Another Bundy disciple told Enders that “Bar-certified lawyers, like the ones who prosecuted Bundy, have sworn loyalty to the British government, whose statutes encourage sex with clients. ‘That’s what they do with all their clients.’”
Enders spent time talking to a former cop who chuckled as he related a story about one of his buddies who once worked as a sheriff in New Mexico. He said his buddy got into some trouble after he pulled over a group of illegals one night. He said his pal “didn’t have room to haul ‘em all, so he put a chain around their neck and put a padlock through it, went to the next one, then he chained ‘em to a tree!” Enders said that the former cop then buckled with laughter as he told her how his friend “left ‘em and went to town to get his pickup to haul ‘em all back in. So, you might imagine, that didn’t play well — ha! You’re a young’un, but everything wasn’t against the law, way back when.” The former cop also told Enders that it was now being proved that the Bureau of Land management was acting on orders “from Troy and Harry Reid, who want to build a solar farm on the land — or a wind farm.”
One of Bundy’s disciples drove a beige sedan covered with the following message:
IF YOU WERE BORN IN 1980 AND AFTER. YOU MAY BE IMPLANTED WITH A GOVERNMENT MICROCHIP WITHOUT YOUR KNOWLEDGE: GOOGLE DOCTORS THAT REMOVE MICROCHIPS.
Cliven Bundy, God’s Messenger
During the time that Enders spent at the Bundy camp, she witnessed one of the public addresses the Nevada rancher made to his followers. She said that as Bundy—who had just been given a standing ovation—took the stage, he didn’t seem pleased. She said that Bundy reproached the crowd “for failing to follow the word of God – to the letter …”— which he claimed was being “delivered through him.” He wasn’t happy that his supporters failed “to follow his instructions to tear down the toll booths at Lake Mead and disarm the Park Service.” Bundy added, “The message I gave to you all was a revelation that I received. And yet not one of you can seem to even quote it.” He continued, “The records of our bible — how long have they been kept? Thousands of years. They’ve been turned over generation after generation, buried, and all kinds of things happen to ‘em. And yet, here, something I felt was inspired [by God] and yet we haven’t even carried it forth for even a couple of days. Shame on us.”
Bundy expressed frustration because his followers hadn’t been able to deter the BLM “within an hour”—“as the revelation had prophesied.” When an hour had passed, Bundy reportedly got into his bulldozer and decided to march on the BLM himself. His dozer got stuck in the mud—and that led to Bundy’s receiving yet another revelation: “It come to my mind real plain — the good Lord said, ‘Bundy, it’s not your job, it’s THEIR job.’” Bundy reiterated that revelation a little differently in an effort to ensure that his followers understood what he had just told them, “This is not my job, it’s YOUR job.”
Bundy said that he received a message that morning after he prayed. He claimed that he heard a voice say, “Sheriff Gillespie, your work is not done. Every sheriff across the United States, take the guns away from the United States bureaucrats.”
Uncivil Disobedience
Even The Weekly Standard–as well as Glenn Beck–has been critical of Cliven Bundy. The magazine’s Scrapbook explained the whole Bundy situation with regard to grazing fees and court rulings. The Scrapbook said that what had transpired over the years didn’t sound “like the dread hand of tyranny, in Nevada or Washington, oppressing an innocent farmer, or pushing some law-abiding citizen around.” It said it sounded, instead, “like a rancher gaming the system to his own financial advantage, and disguising his scheme in populist rhetoric: refusing to pay a tax which others must pay, and ‘tying up the courts’—for two decades!—as he continues to ignore the law.”
The Weekly Standard:
Far from acting in an arbitrary or capricious manner, the federal government has shown patience and forbearance in the face of lawlessness that customarily lands people in jail. It is worth noting that Bundy’s rancher-neighbors and the Nevada Cattlemen’s Association, who contend with the same federal policies, offer him little support.
Apocalypse Cow – Welfare Rancher, Part 1 (The Daily Show)
Apocalypse Cow – Welfare Rancher, Part 2 (The Daily Show)
SOURCES
Fox News’ new laughingstock: Cliven Bundy — and Stephen Colbert — will destroy Sean Hannity (Salon)
Uncivil Disobedience (The Weekly Standard)
The views expressed in this posting are the author’s alone and not those of the blog, the host, or other weekend bloggers. As an open forum, weekend bloggers post independently without pre-approval or review. Content and any displays or art are solely their decision and responsibility.
Nah, I’ve had posted deleted as well.
Prof: I see you’ve deleted my post criticizing you. That’s got to be a first.
Hail,Ceasar
RTC, your comment was not deleted because it criticized me. It was deleted because it contained yet another dig at the same poster. I understand that you want to be able to hash this out on this blog and feel frustrated in not being able to do so. I strongly suggest that you either accept that we do not want to continue this tat-for-tat or find a blog that is managed more fairly in your view.
Prof.: There were times when my Irish mother-in-law would throw her three rollicking boys out the backdoor when they were fighting and tell them not to bother her unless someone was bleeding. The point is, sometimes you got to let people work it out for themselves.
There was nothing tit-for-tat in this thread involving me. My comment was straight from te heart. If you’re going to delete what I said, then you might as well delete ’em all; delete every comment, just shut it down.
This one action has convinced me more than all your blog entries about the evils of censorship.
At first glance it looks rather like Plato, and yes that would scare me and does.
Mr Keebler
I was answering your post 4/29@1916
Mhj,
I could not agree more, however, did you ever hear about the boy who cried wolf? I think RTCs deleted post was spot on. But it was deleted because of some infraction of the civility rules. I think equal enforcement should be had.
But it’s my turn again
“…But how can you defend something you are only familiar with one side of.” ???
I have only spoken to civility and respect in human intercourse. I’m not taking sides in this cat fight.
Gene, would you please change your avatar is scaring me.
mhj
Elaine M.
With the greatest respect and sympathy for your loss, you missed a perfect opportunity for the higher ground by being gracious to someone whose apology, to this observer, appears sincere.
*****
I did indeed take his apology as being sincere…until his follow-up comment at 5:17 pm. Many of us who comment here regularly have a “written” history on this blog. Those of us who have been around for years know others by their comments/written words. If I suspected less than sincerity in Nick’s apology after his follow-up comment, it was because of the critical comments he has made about/to me over the years. I can’t know what is in his heart. I may have been wrong. If so, I apologize.
Mhj,
I haven’t a clue what you’re talking about. But how can you defend something you are only familiar with one side of.
Mr Keebler
I can’t comment on RTC’s post as I haven’t seen it and the reference to the boy who cried wolf alludes me.
Enforcement shouldn’t be needed but I agree without pointing fingers rules should be equally applied. That said I think given the number of posts on the number of threads and the fact that some people have jobs and a life apart from this forum, it would be impossible to apply a fine comb.
RTC, I have deleted a couple more posts designed to continue the complaints about another poster. As I stated before, the personal jabs and dialogue has to end. I understand that you believe that I am being unfair in how I apply the rule. I have deleted comments on both sides of this particular division. You have made your point. You do not like how a poster writes and you do not like how the policy is being enforced. Again, I have to ask you to move on. I have reviewed this thread and I have deleted those comments that I believe cross the line or work to continue this tit-for-tat.
RTC, Thank you for your thoughtful comment. I look upon myself as tough, you have tougher adjectives. The critique I gave here does not fit any of those adjectives, I don’t even think it was tough. I think
Anyone who is objective will verify I always express sympathy, prayers and words of comfort. Ironically, I was mocked this past weekend for asking folks to chill while Jonathan was grieving. Again, on the souls of my parents and living children, my motives were as stated, to try and give a grieving person some slack. I could mention many other instances from the past, but if someone is prejudiced, it wouldn’t matter.
It seems the question that one should answer is this. If I knew Elaine was grieving, would I have critiqued her style, or said anything remotely controversial to her? I truly hope this ends right here.
Mhj,
I could not agree more, however, did you ever hear about the boy who cried wolf? I think RTCs deleted post was spot on. But it was deleted because of some infraction of the civility rules. I think equal enforcement should be had.
Jon,
Do you have any issues with this post, it seems a little undercutting:
on 1, April 29, 2014 at 4:14 pmNick Spinelli
Elaine, I have noticed an increasingly provincial behavior. You make many comments on your threads[actually links for the most part], and virtually ignore the posts made by Mr. Turley and your fellow Gbers. You have made 42 appearances on this post, and only 4 on all the subsequent posts to date. Sometimes we need someone to give us some perspective on our behavior. There have been some great posts and lively discussions elsewhere. This one, while voluminous, has been pretty toxic. The other posts are less toxic and stimulating. We miss ya’.
Prof: What? Are you kidding me?
No RTC I am not kidding. This thread has been a continual problem of personal attacks and your suggestion that it has only come from one side or one person is demonstrably untrue. We have stated repeatedly that we do not want or tolerate personal jabs. Saying that someone is being rude or baiting is no excuse to unleash personal attacks. If there is a comment that you believe violates the civility policy, feel free to email me. Otherwise, I ask that you either focus on the issues or move along to another thread or another blog.
Mr Keebler
There can never be enough civility and respect in human intercourse. A mea culpa after the fact is exactly the definition on an apology. And an apology sincerely offered and graciously accepted is a sign of civility and respect.
Mhj,
Sometimes the veil is worn too thin to be of any use. I think Elaine did take the high ground. A mea culpa after the fact is like, I’m sorry I shot you, I didn’t know it would hurt.
Elaine M.
With the greatest respect and sympathy for your loss, you missed a perfect opportunity for the higher ground by being gracious to someone whose apology, to this observer, appears sincere.
RTC,
I like what you said, but it probably went over like an 80 olds fart in the first pew during the sermon.
What is dumb and dumber?
Who is dazed and confused?
What is bevis and butthead?
Deletion Notice: A comment by RTC was deleted for personal attacks in violation of the civility rule. (Note: I mistakenly wrote a privacy rule in this posting. It is in fact a civility rule as posted above)
Constantly baiting and criticizing others with whom you disagree has been your modus operandi on this blog. That’s what your record shows. You have been consistent with regard to that kind of behavior.
My sympathies are indeed sincere. I was accused by Keebler of poor timing. I admitted, prior to that accusation by Keebler of poor timing, that indeed the timing was poor. The only point I was making was that I had no way of knowing of your grief. That is obvious by what you just said, that you chose to keep notification private. I have no desire to make you feel worse than you do. I swear, on the departed souls of my parents, that my sympathies are sincere. My record here shows a consistent respect for people dealing w/ death.