Thread: Glenn Beck and Tucker Carlson warn conservatives about Bundy ranch dispute

Glenn Beck and Tucker Carlson warn conservatives about Bundy ranch dispute

George Frey/Getty Images

Glenn Beck is warning conservatives not to get too caught up in the controversy over Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, who has been illegally grazing his cattle on federal land for more than 15 years. (Read more about the case here.) Yes, the federal government controls too much land out west — and yes, federal rangers went too far with their heavy-handed tactics — but Beck cautions that extremists are using this incident as an excuse to fan the flames of violence.

"We did some research online with PsyID today," Beck said on his show, "and found that there's about 10 or 15 percent of the people who are talking about this online that are truly frightening."

There are many "decent, small-government proponents from groups like the Tea Party" supporting Bundy, Beck continued, and they should be aware this controversy has drawn "violent, anti-government groups" who constitute "the right's version of Occupy Wall Street."

Tucker Carlson (my boss at the Daily Caller) made a related point on Fox News' Special Report Monday night:
I have a lot of sympathy for the Bundys. I think they were completely mistreated by the federal government. But I still think it's important to point out that this land does not belong to them and that's not a minor distinction, it's the essence of private property.

It's good to see conservatives are finally learning to eschew the knee-jerk impulse that assumes the enemy of my enemy is always my friend.
- - Matt K. Lewis

http://theweek.com/article/index/259...-ranch-dispute

RELATED

http://www.alipac.us/f19/blm-forest-...2014-a-301133/

THEBLAZE TV
Glenn Beck Warns Americans Against Falling in With the ‘Right’s Version of Occupy Wall Street’

Apr. 14, 2014 7:58pm Erica Ritz

The controversy over a Nevada rancher’s decades-long use of public land without paying federal grazing fees has quickly become a national issue — one that Glenn Beck on Monday urged Americans to fully understand before taking a side on.

“We did some research online with PsyID today, and found that there’s about 10 or 15 percent of the people who are talking about this online that are truly frightening,” Beck said on his television program. “They don’t care what the facts are. They just want a fight.”

Beck said there are many “decent, small-government proponents from groups like the Tea Party” supporting Bundy, and they need to be aware that the controversy has drawn “violent, anti-government” individuals who are “the right’s version of Occupy Wall Street,” as well.

Glenn Beck speaks about the controversy surrounding Cliven Bundy on his television program April 14, 2014. (Photo: TheBlaze TV)

“People can spot anger and vengeance from a mile away,” the multimedia personality said. “When I saw that video when [protesters] were lunging and jumping at the agents, I thought, ‘this is our side’s Occupy Wall Street.’ It’s happening all over again, and it will end the same way.”

Though Bundy has grazed his cattle on federal land for decades, the rancher has refused to pay grazing fees since 1993. Last week, the conflict sharply escalated after federal agents arrived in an attempt to round up Bundy’s “trespass cattle,” only to be met by protesters.

Beck said he wanted to be 100 percent clear on one thing he believes all Americans should be able to agree on.

“We need to agree on, ‘we condemn those who use violence,’” Beck said. “Inciting violence doesn’t solve anything. I vehemently denounce anyone who even hints at such tactics.”

For years, Beck has advocated peaceful protest in the footsteps of individuals like Mahatma Gandhi, Jesus Christ, and Martin Luther King, Jr. But, just like the left had Occupy Wall Street, Beck knows that the right will have angry advocates, as well.

“If we fail to turn to [God] now, and fail to follow the footsteps of the guy who said ‘shod your feet in peace,’ we will not succeed,” Beck reiterated. “I can’t make it any clearer.”

“It’s not who we are,” he added in conclusion. “We are not Occupy Wall Street. We are not the people who scream violent things. We are not people that shout them down. And it’s certainly not the way to win.”

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014...y-wall-street/

If Glenn Beck wants to back off of an issue, situation, person, or group, because his Internet crystal ball shows some frighting people then he will be of no use in any situation. In fact, he would need to abandon himself and his own show using such criteria.

Yes, identifying and addressing the extremes to keep them handled and calculated for is important. Abandoning an issue or individual due to their presence is conceding the issue to the extremes.

W

Originally Posted by ALIPAC

If Glenn Beck wants to back off of an issue, situation, person, or group, because his Internet crystal ball shows some frighting people then he will be of no use in any situation. In fact, he would need to abandon himself and his own show using such criteria.

Yes, identifying and addressing the extremes to keep them handled and calculated for is important. Abandoning an issue or individual due to their presence is conceding the issue to the extremes.

W

Actually Glen Beck has proven in the past he can't be trusted

Originally Posted by ALIPAC

If Glenn Beck wants to back off of an issue, situation, person, or group, because his Internet crystal ball shows some frighting people then he will be of no use in any situation. In fact, he would need to abandon himself and his own show using such criteria.

Yes, identifying and addressing the extremes to keep them handled and calculated for is important. Abandoning an issue or individual due to their presence is conceding the issue to the extremes.

W

IMO I do not think that Glenn is abandoning anyone, he is just sticking to his principles of standing without violence. On his site and facebook page people were posting threats of violence which he has always been against. IMO he does not want to be promoting a blood bath whether it be Bundy, feds or militia. Now of course because he is standing against violence those making threats of violence are attacking him. This is a vicious circle that is escalating everyday. Glenn picks his battles carefully from what I have observed and always makes his stands without violence.

Originally Posted by ALIPAC

If Glenn Beck wants to back off of an issue, situation, person, or group, because his Internet crystal ball shows some frighting people then he will be of no use in any situation. In fact, he would need to abandon himself and his own show using such criteria.

Yes, identifying and addressing the extremes to keep them handled and calculated for is important. Abandoning an issue or individual due to their presence is conceding the issue to the extremes.

W

I strongly agree with the above assessment, while I've followed Beck for some time and agree with the non-violent approach, peaceful protest in large numbers do work however he seems to go off the deep end on this one, not sure but it could be and I'm just speculating, that he and his crew are worried about liability issues, I do hope I'm wrong. He will lose a large number of people with his view on this particular case.

Tucker Carlson on Ranch Dispute: "The Bundys Don't Have A Legal Case"

TUCKER CARLSON: It was moving in an ugly direction and I think the Feds exacerbated it by showing up with snarling dogs and drawn weapons.That's appropriate when you are dealing with a drug cartel, not an elderly rancher. On the other hand, the Bundys don't have a legal case that I can see to be totally honest about it.

And this is public land, this is not land that they owned. And if you are going to use public land for profit, you have to pay for it. And they haven't. And so the bottom line is this is something I think conservatives ought to remember, if you want a ranch without any impediment at all, you have to buy your own ranch. That is the essence, that is the core principle behind private property which undergirds conservatism.

I have a lot of sympathy for the Bundys. I think they were completely mistreated by the federal government. But I still think it's important to point out that this land does not belong to them and that's not a minor distinction, it's the essence of private property. Sorry.

Related Videos:

Nevada Racher Threatens "Range War" Against Feds on "Hannity"

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid...egal_case.html