Fox News host Bill O’Reilly on Tuesday asked a Cliven Bundy supporter how the “militia” that defended the ranch in its standoff with the federal government this month differs from the Occupy Wall Street movement.
After discussing that Bundy broke the law by refusing to pay his grazing fees, O’Reilly quizzed Scott Shaw, co-founder of the Oklahoma Volunteer Militia, about conscientious objectors.
“What’s the difference between Mr. Bundy and the Occupy Wall Street crew, that doesn’t respect the federal government for a variety of reasons and feels it has a right to go into a city like Oakland and burn things down?” O’Reilly asked.
“Mr. Bundy is providing a service to the nation,” Shaw responded. “He’s a cattle rancher. He’s providing the country with beef. The Occupy movement, to this day, I still don’t know what they’re providing the country with.”
“But they’re both dissenters. They’re both dissenting what they feel is an oppressive system,” O’Reilly challenged.
Shaw responded by arguing that the groups are different because the Bundy activists have not destroyed property or been arrested.
Watch the full interview via Fox News:
[H/t Mediaite]
I guess “a) we are openly breaking the law and b) we had lots of guns and pointed them at the cops” were too obvious.
Cattle ranchers provide a service to society?
Not sure the “dissenter” comparison is apt. Bundy grazed his cattle for 20 years without paying the fees, lost all his attempts to get that OKed by the legal system, then once he faced consequences suddenly decided the legal system was illegitimate and yelled for the militia crazies to wave their guns around so the oppressors would go away. He’s not a dissenter, he’s a deadbeat.
I think “scofflaw” is a better term for Bundy than “dissenter.” The obvious difference between the Bundy gang and Occupy is the Bundy gang was armed to the teeth and actually threatened to kill law enforcement.
Um, yes, the oppressive system of using public lands at a greatly reduced fee to generate private profit.