Juanita Jean Asks an Impertinent (and Relevant) Question

One of the blogs I read regularly is “Juanita Jean’s, the World’s Most Dangerous Beauty Salon, Inc.,” where “Juanita” sometimes appears to be an incarnation of the much-missed Molly Ivins.

There’s something about tough Texas women with drawls and rapier wits….

At any rate, Juanita has taken note of the seizure of a national park headquarters building by supporters of Cliven Bundy (you’ll remember Cliven, whose definition of “liberty” included the liberty to graze his cattle on public land without paying for the privilege.) As she quotes from news reports,

Militia members protesting a federal prison sentence for two Oregon ranchers convicted on charges of setting fire to federal land have occupied the headquarters of a national park, the OregonLive reports.

The protesters include Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy’s son, Ammon, and two of his brothers. Also among them is Ryan Payne, who organized snipers to aim weapons at federal officers during the Bundy Ranch standoff last year.

They told OregonLive that they are accompanied by about 150 others and are hunkered down at Malheur National Wildlife Refuge headquarters. The group is described by reporter Les Zaitz as “hard core militia” who adopted the ranchers’ cause as their own.

Her impertinent question/observation?

Now I want you to consider this: Let’s pretend it was Muslims who set federal land a’blaze and that Muslims overtook a federal building. In your wildest dreams imagine Fox News and Ted Cruz having a snarling cat over that.

Actually, it doesn’t take much imagination. As Vox recently headlined its story about the armed takeover, media coverage sure looks different when the demonstrators (terrorists?) are white.

Just one more day in America, where the double standard runs so deep that satire is on its deathbed, and self-awareness is likewise a vanishing commodity…..


  1. Pete, you are correct about the burns being used to cover poaching. The first article I read was in Capitol Press “The west’s Ag website” so they didn’t “bother” to mention the poaching. Oh well, a lot of invasive plants died, so I am happy.

    I haven’t had time to read all the argument above carefully, but I would agree that ranchers have a different outlook from urban residents, similar to the divide between political right and left, and they often feel beleaguered. I thought the judge was reasonable.

  2. Nancy I would agree with your posts on farmers. My father -in – law was farmer 200 and some acres. He was a dairy farmer, grain farmer and cattle farmer. More than that he had to be an accountant, negotiate loans with bankers and plan months in advance the deployment of crops. He also needed to be a mechanic to fix his machinery. If he wanted a vacation he counted on his friends that were farmers to hold down the farm.
    He found out the hard way as many other small farmers found out the power of big agri-business when the local grain elevators and slaughter houses were bought out. The seed companies such as DeKalb Seed were bought out by Monsanto. He was always felt the futures market for grain was being manipulated. He was very protective of his land as it was his source of income.

  3. Thank you for your comments Marv and BSH.

    BSH, I also was thinking that with each post Pete makes he digs himself deeper into a hole. He refuses to accept or admit that his generalization was ignorant and rude.

    Pete, don’t worry, I rarely read your posts. I typically scroll past them. On the rare occasion that I attempt to read them I generally give up after a few sentences. However, the first sentence in your post today definitely caught my eye.

    Pete, you really should re-read your statements that I copied and pasted below for you. You have categorized farmers and ranchers as people different than “us city slickers” (your words-you should have used the word we), yet fail to recognize that business owners, managers and supervisors actually do the very same thing. Utilizing your definition of how farmers and ranchers view land and life, city slicker business people most definitely view their employees (or chattel) as a means to make a living. They absolutely regard their assets (employees) as a means of production. If you can’t recognize that you categorized an entire group of people as being almost barbaric while holding yourself high above them, then there really is no hope for you. I rest my case.

    – “Ranchers and farmers have a different view of land and life than us city slickers do. They view both as slave owners viewed their chattel, means to make a living.”
    Who believes that slave owners, farmers and ranchers didn’t or don’t regard their assets as means of production? –

    And Marv, thank you so much for your post about Kodak. He didn’t even recognize what you were pointing out. I really do enjoy learning from your posts and appreciate your intelligence and wit.

  4. Louis, great insight. Monsanto – now that is a monster corporation that is killing off civilization with their GMOs and chemicals.

  5. BSH, any of them today.

    Marv. I doubt it unless it was George Eastman who I never met as he died before I was born. I did admire greatly his business vision though.

    I try to post accurately but don’t invest much effort in sensitivity. I don’t see most people’s feelings as my responsibility in a forum like this. How could I? I’ve never met the people here.

    One of the aspects of conservatism that rubs me the wrong way is their meme of political correctness which I regard as the absence of rudeness. I try not to be rude but if some people react to truth as rudeness on my part I regard that as more their issue than mine.

    That’s why I asked about veracity. If what I post is factual and feelings get hurt I’m generally not inclined to lie to save other’s feelings.

  6. BTW I’m still waiting for answers to “Who believes that slave owners, farmers and ranchers didn’t or don’t regard their assets as means of production?”

    Not that anyone owes me one but I’m amazed at the difficulty some are having with essentially an accounting question.

  7. Pete, if you read my 5:04 post I pointed out the lack of veracity to your post. You should at the very least realize that YOU were incorrect for not including the “city slicker” business owners, etc in your statement.

    “I try not to be rude but if some people react to truth as rudeness on my part I regard that as more their issue than mine.”

    When are you going to realize that your statement was in fact RUDE by virtue of lumping all farmers and ranchers together and not including city slickers, as I very accurately pointed out to you.

    I am going to assume that by you saying that I am in the lead for being rude you mean that your feelings were hurt when I pointed out your lack of facts and your faults.

  8. Nancy. The post was about the ranchers in Oregon. I also didn’t mention Doctors, astronauts, and fishermen in the post. Why? I was talking about farmers and ranchers.

    Veracity is about facts. Look it up. You’re talking about feelings.

  9. Prte, get over yourself. Your pist was not only about the ranchers in Oregon. You cannot change what you wrote earlier in an effort to justify yourself. By reaorting to lying now you are just digging yourself into a deeper hole.

    As for any veracity in your post – it was not there. You did not post any facts. You omly stated your opinion. Veracity – look it up – it does not include opinions.

  10. Pete,

    “You’re right. Reading probably isn’t the problem.
    “I should have said”comprehend”

    Sorry, but we can all comprehend what you. We all have I


    “You’re right. Reading probably isn’t the problem.”

    “I should have said “comprehend.”

    You’re right . Thankfully, most us can’t comprehend what you have been saying.

  11. I’ve taught lots of stuff and am aware that not everybody gets everything no matter how I teach it.

    Some can’t, some don’t want to. Remember Goper?

  12. Pete,

    “I’ve taught lots of stuff and am aware that not everybody gets everything no matter how I teach it.”

    “Some can’t, some don’t want to. Remember Gop{p)er?

    You’re right. I for one have learned a lot of good stuff from you. However, I would question your label as a “Liberal” from my standpoint. I think so do you, in a way, when you say something to the effect: “I appear to be the only Republican Liberal.” The reason for that is there aren’t any Liberals left in the Republican Party. Most have joined the Democratic Party or have become independent voters, like myself. You haven’t.

    I don’t mean any of this with negative intent. But, that’s where I think you lose me and I don’t think I’m the only one, on many occasions. A real political Liberal would have apologized to Nancy from the start.

    Not being a Christian fundamentalist or a bigot doesn’t make someone a Liberal. But I can see that might make someone think so if they were a Republican at this point in time.

    I apologize for coming on so strong, today. I have a lot of respect for you. We all need to understand that these are very difficult political times for us here in America.

  13. I try my best to avoid labels and make up my own mind based in evidence one issue at a time. That’s the scientist in me.

    My parents were devout Republicans who invested a great deal of time into the party. My not leaving it despite it having left me is really out of respect for them and their accomplishments. I would love to know today if they would have left the party or not. I suspect that they would have tried everything to change it back. Beside, other than primary voting there’s not much downside to staying.

    Both my wife and I devoted a great deal of time to the 2008 and ’12 Obama campaigns.

    I consider myself spiritual but not at all religious. I believe that collaboration is what gets good things done and religions typically stand in the way of it.

    I enjoy my time here both when people agree and disagree with me. I try to teach as much as I learn and have never met yet a person that I couldn’t teach something to and learn something from.

    Keep up the good work. Some days I wish I could have learned your profession as well as mine but time is limited. If I had inherited Trumps starting line I probably never would have left school. Like I said if there’s one thing that I was given a heaping helping of it’s curiosity.

  14. “I’ve taught lots of stuff and am aware that not everybody gets everything no matter how I teach it.”

    Pete; I have a great deal of respect for your intelligence and your vast knowledge on any and all issues on this blog, but…the above copied and pasted comment from one of your posts tells me what I have long suspected. You ARE lecturing us; you place yourself as teacher, instructor and source of all knowledge. I have to admit that, due to the length and wide range of issues you cover in a single comment, I often scroll past most of your posts. This probably means I am missing lessons and information that would benefit me and broaden my horizons but I do not read Sheila’s daily post to be lectured to. It is sometimes difficult to wade through your “daily lesson” to get to the point of your comment. I am well aware that I often (most of the time) post personal information regarding effects of certain issues which have touched me personally. Most of us do that because the issues covered by Sheila touch all our lives in one way or another. There is a time and place for verbosity; Trump is a prime example of this. You are more intelligent and in touch with reality than Donald Trump; please scale it back a little as I really do want to know your views on the daily issues here.

  15. JoAnn,

    That was terrific. Pete has a lot to offer. I identify a lot with Pete. It took me many years with my companion, Barbara, constantly “hitting me over the head” for me at least to start to change.

    Fortunately, Barbara wasn’t looking for a preacher and his sermons as a soul mate at that point of her life. Her deceased husband had been an Episcopalian minister.

  16. Pete, this is what I have “learned” from your posts yesterday. You have decided to use Sheila’s blog as an outlet to lecture to the rest of us. Maybe you should consider creating your own blog instead of daily hijacking Sheila’s blog.

    You believe, for some unknown reason, that you are wiser and more informed than the rest of us. Is that because the rest of us choose not to babble on and on while flipping from one thought to another in the same post or even same sentence?

    I am only guessing here (unlike you, I will not assume that I Know what others are thinking), but I think your Refusal to Acknowledge that You Did Lump all farmers and ranchers into a single category and then proceeded to condemn us all could be due to an inflated ego.

    Even though other people on this blog have pointed out that you did, in fact, attack all farmers and ranchers, you chose to later attempt to change it to not being what you said. Your original post is there for all to see and your Opinion is Very Clear. What you originally said is what is truly in your heart and your mind. There is no going back on it now that others have pointed it out.

    Finally, your inflated ego really showed up in a later post when you attempted to blame me for not “comprehending” what you said. I “absolutely comprehended” it and “called you out” on your bigotry. Actually, others have also pointed out your bigotry, but you still refuse to acknowlege it. That is a sure sign of an inflated ego.

    Really??? “I’ve taught lots of stuff and am aware that not everybody gets everything no matter how I teach it.” “Some can’t, some don’t want to. Remember Gop{p)er?

    *Please do not assume that you have ever been qualified to teach others.
    I do not believe that you are any more intelligent than the rest of us and, apparently unfortunately for you, I was willing to point that out after your display of bigotry.

    Really?? “I try my best to avoid labels and make up my own mind based in evidence one issue at a time. That’s the scientist in me.”

    *You have proven that you do Not do your best to avoid labels. You have proven that you do Not make up your own mind based on “evidence”. Any scientist would have called you out on your complete “lack of evidence” for the statements that you made. Your statements were based on “your opinion” only. You have no evidence to prove any truth to the statements that you made.

    *Please do not assume that “your opinions” qualify your statements as facts.

  17. Thanks Marv, as one who I’ve learned a lot from I do appreciate the time that you invest here. I’m pretty sure that we agree that those of us who have invested our time and talents in professions have extra responsibilities in this ever more complex world. We not only have to do for our clients honestly and professionally but also spread what we have earned to those who have been focused otherwise. This is why we’re here. Because Sheila doesn’t just worry about and study civic illiteracy but tries to reduce it with her efforts here and elsewhere.

    Now on to the topic du jour. take care.

Comments are closed.