Dave & All,
I certainly agree with this statement: "For the most part, the media
tells the story spoon-fed by the Bundys."
But you're giving the Bundys far too much credit for linear thinking
here:
"How much support would the Bundys be getting had they come out and
said, 'We think these lands should be put back in the hands of
individuals so that big money interests can buy the rights to minerals
and natural gas .... Then, when we are done we are going to move on to
Yosemite and Yellowstone.'"
I have no doubt that this agenda is supported by some of the deeper
pockets that have been funding the 24-hour "rant spaces" that stir
people up. They need people like the Bundys: True believers who aren't
bothered by the cognitive dissonance between their announced aims and
facts on the ground (such as the fact that the Hammonds want nothing to
do with them).
The people who will benefit most from this aren't the Bundys and the
other dangerous clowns now sitting around Malheur HQ. Those clowns will
go to jail, sooner or later, after serving as useful fools for the
cause.
But their backers will exploit the public impression that somehow they
were representing legitimate grievances about "gummint oppression" and
"slavery to environmentalism," in the next election cycle. And then
they'll cash in on extractive resources, just like they've been trying
to do for years with the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
That's why it's so important to work on getting out the other sides of
the story, by every means available.
Joel
POST: Send email to boo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
HELP: Contact boo-moderators@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
