tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post2963940345014249472..comments2024-02-05T03:41:13.688+01:00Comments on Mikeb302000: Oathkeepers in the NewsAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.comBlogger35125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-758390599704874102013-10-02T15:33:46.756+02:002013-10-02T15:33:46.756+02:00Its not treason when your govt declares that is ha...Its not treason when your govt declares that is has the right to kill any citizen without Trial and his one has. It has violated the right of conscience with Obamacare, and has begun systematic spying on citizens as well as using non-partisan agencies to persecute political opposition, as well as the localized violation of 2nd amendment rights. It is not treasonous to the constitution to rebel a government that isn't following the constitution. The only traitors here are those who want to use the government as a weapon against their fellow citizens to violate their rights and compel them to live their way. That would be you, lefty. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-78736742408258910922010-01-27T20:59:08.822+01:002010-01-27T20:59:08.822+01:00Zorro:
In other words, you have no answer for why...Zorro:<br /><br />In other words, you have no answer for why your hero is, apparently, a liar as well as a conspiracy nut.<br /><br />I know how much you and your fellow three percenters (and the various, previous iterations of "True Americans") hate it when there's a touch of inconsistency in your brave leaders' bios, resumes or logic. But, there it is.<br /><br />I think Mikeb30200 is right that you fellas ought to just go back to the "We likes our gunz!" justification since, when all else is said, that's your real reason for having them. <br /><br />That you feel your 2A rights are threatened by the Obama administration and that the entire Bill of Rights was not being threatened duringh the Bushco era (or at least not to the extent that anyone thought the formation of the Oath Keepers was necessary until AFTER Bush left office) speaks more about your fear than any government program that sudddenly became a threat in March of 2010.<br /><br />Or is it that Mr. Rhodes is so slow on the uptake that it took him eight yeatrs to figure it out?<br /><br />Regardless, if one citation for his having a "long history" of opposition to Bushco--or for that matter a dozen, with no other activity on his part--it's hardly compelling evidenc.democommiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08714733977927594559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-90648834595485868152010-01-27T17:48:15.681+01:002010-01-27T17:48:15.681+01:00Oh, I guess this is another one of those situation...<i>Oh, I guess this is another one of those situations where the truth is a nuisance.</i><br><br>Yeah--<i>that's</i> it. Apparently you've mistaken "too busy with other obligations to bother swatting gnats," with "frightened off by Democommie's unassailable facts and logic <i>(HA!)</i>." Don't feel bad--that's a common mistake--of the pathologically delusional.<br><br>Now that I do have a moment, I see you've got . . . <i>nothing</i>.<br><br>And I have no more time for this silliness. If you wish to take my inability to maintain interest in this "debate" as a "victory" on your part, then by all means do so, and enjoy it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-19518451683346204862010-01-27T04:53:40.116+01:002010-01-27T04:53:40.116+01:00Oh, I guess this is another one of those situation...Oh, I guess this is another one of those situations where the truth is a nuisance.democommiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08714733977927594559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-6408263378708175492010-01-25T15:03:47.627+01:002010-01-25T15:03:47.627+01:00One citation does not a "long history" m...One citation does not a "long history" make.<br /><br />Since you do not believe that the "Oath Keepers" are racists and the black man at the rally doesn't then that trumps other acounts?<br /><br />Ron Paul, for whom your hero, Mr. Rhodes. worked also said that he was not a racist, even though his "long history" gives the lie to that.<br /><br />These links:<br /><br />http://www.austinchronicle.com/issues/vol16/issue9/pols.paul.side.html<br /><br />http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/5/15/124912/740<br /><br />http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/10/paul.newsletters/<br /><br />cast doubt on Paul's assertions that he is not a racist. <br /><br />Of course he could clear this all up by releasing his entire back catalog and letting folks know who, exactly, wrote the screeds that he now says he didn't write--although it appears he had previously admitted to writing the material with "tongue in cheek, academic" tendencies.<br /><br />Ron Paul's son, Rand, currently running for an open congressional seat in Kentucky has had some probems of his own re: racism. Oddly enough, the fella accused of being a racist--his, now, ex-campaign spokesman--has like Paul, Sr. denied he ever wrote or posted anything racist on his blog. Of course I know that if I worked for someone and was unfairly smeared by political operatives from another camp, and then thrown under the bus--by the guy who hired me, while he was saying that he believed I hadn't done anything wrong--I'd think, "Man, what a stand-up, principled guy!".<br /><br />http://nky.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/AB/20091217/NEWS0103/912180366/<br /><br />http://chattahbox.com/us/2009/12/18/rand-paul-aide-quits-over-myspace-racism-afro-americans-have-kkk-radar/<br /><br />Of course I'm sure that neither of the Paul's is in any way connected with the Oath Keepers.democommiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08714733977927594559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-15376767812614766672010-01-24T16:07:28.224+01:002010-01-24T16:07:28.224+01:00Mikeb, I'm going to respond to your points in ...Mikeb, I'm going to respond to your points in reverse order. I don't see it the way you do. The new oath does nothing to violate the one made upon enlistment (or upon being commissioned). The two oaths will only come into conflict if an order from the top is unconstitutional (and thus illegal). An illegal order is one that must be disobeyed--no matter <i>who</i> issued it. That concept seems to have been pretty well established at the Nuremberg Trials.<br /><br />As for the timing, as far as I know, it's pretty much as you and Democommie have described it. I think the Oath Keepers are less than a year old, and I assume the wording of the oath came from the same time.<br /><br />Here's my question: so what? Like I said, Rhodes seems to have been pretty busy before--with his work for the Paul campaign, and before that, his obtaining of a law degree from Yale (I hear that can keep a guy pretty busy). But even if he <i>didn't</i> "have an alibi" for not getting around to this before--that makes him <i>racist</i> for doing it now? Even if there were no record of Rhodes criticizing government excesses before the Obama administration, does that mean he gives up any claim to a right to do so now? Would it be OK with Democommie if Rhodes waited until there was a white president again? How the hell does <i>that</i> make sense?<br /><br />If what is permissible depends on the race of the president, I submit that there's racism here, but it's not Rhodes who is exhibiting it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-31978098406241943182010-01-24T11:27:51.498+01:002010-01-24T11:27:51.498+01:00Zorro, Thanks for the link which you provided in a...Zorro, Thanks for the link which you provided in answer to democommie's remarks. That guy Rhodes sounds like a fascinating man. I'll read more about him.<br /><br />Bact to democommie's thought, although Rhodes' criticisms predate Obama, is it true that the Oath Keepers came after? And would the wording of their oath which omits the part about obedience to the CIC also come after Obama took office? And finally, regardless of the exact chronology of these events, what do you think about my idea that this really amounts to VIOLATING the oath taken previously and replacing it with a new one, making the entire claim of "keeping" anything a bit suspect?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-28234374277036942262010-01-24T00:09:24.838+01:002010-01-24T00:09:24.838+01:00You are one high-maintenance individual, Democommi...You are one high-maintenance individual, Democommie. Despite my owing you nothing, <a href="http://stewart-rhodes.blogspot.com/2006/10/government-supremacists-neocons.html" rel="nofollow">here's a 2006 piece</a> written by Rhodes criticizing Neo-Con abuses of power. Notice at the top of the blog, Rhodes apparently perceived a need to deny being <i>liberal</i>.<br /><br />By the way, in the video of Dyer speaking at a rally, did anyone tell the black gentleman about the supposed white supremacist sympathies of the Oath Keepers? Perhaps he's a self-hating black man?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-41768071816688473232010-01-24T00:05:25.842+01:002010-01-24T00:05:25.842+01:00mikey:
You really are a note song, aren't you...mikey:<br /><br />You really are a note song, aren't you. <br /><br />How's that Gay Rights thing on your blog going? Has it increased your traffic?democommiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08714733977927594559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-77287326742786787482010-01-23T21:12:55.348+01:002010-01-23T21:12:55.348+01:00I've been too busy to run down all of the lead...I've been too busy to run down all of the leads to Mr. Rhodes, Ron & Rand Paul (whose campaign manager--as of a few weeks back) was an avowed racist, and the various racist groups that they are wooing.<br /><br />This link: http://www.gossip-boy.com/July4Patriot.html<br /><br />will take you to a page where there is a screen cap of an Oath Keepers blog page with info about Mr. Dyer speaking at the OK Oath Keepers' rally. Apparently Mr. Rhodes has denied that the July4thPatriot is one of his own. That denial is suspect.<br /><br />When I have time to do a little digging I'll see what else I can come up with. In the meantime, Mr. Zorro, YOU made tjhe statement that Rhodes has a long history of opposing Bushco'sx policies, prove it.democommiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08714733977927594559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-39560561310493133902010-01-23T19:58:37.905+01:002010-01-23T19:58:37.905+01:00I ask for some evidence, and mention Rhodes' h...<i>I ask for some evidence, and mention Rhodes' history of libertarian advocacy. Your response? No evidence, and a demand for multiple citations from me.</i><br /><br />Don't worry Demo's been doing that to me for quite a while. It's just how he rolls.<br /><br />He NEVER presents facts because he simply doesn't have any.Mike W.https://www.blogger.com/profile/03425962910696301026noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-5582778537975303642010-01-23T16:09:25.525+01:002010-01-23T16:09:25.525+01:00Now don't go losing your famous sense of humor...<i>Now don't go losing your famous sense of humor.</i><br><br>My sense of humor, such as it is (I've never claimed to be the next Steven Colbert), is intact--I just see no humor in impugning the honor of good people, without evidence, based on preconceived (and wrong) notions.<br><br><i>Speaking for myself, I'm not on any kind of a campaign and I'm certainly not libelling anyone. I'm just talking.</i><br><br>Yep--and Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck (etc.) are "just talking," right?<br><br><i>You seem to be saying the Oath Keepers (is that the best rendering of it, or Oathkeepers?) are squeaky clean examples of all the manly virtues with nary a taint of racism or misogyny.</i><br><br>Two words--"Oath Keepers"--is the nomenclature used by the group. Whatever I "seem to be saying," according to you, bears little resemblance, as far as I can tell, to what I've <i>actually</i> said--but I guess that's you "reading into" my comments, eh? Well, I'm not here to defend what you've "read into" my comments.<br><br><i>Are you really saying you've never seen a trace of these things in your fellow members? </i><br><br>Well, actually, I <i>am</i> saying that, but you should know that I personally know only 4 other Oath Keepers--not, I'll be the first to admit, much of a sample.<br><br><i>If, on the other hand, you're saying the organization is not based on racist or misogynist beliefs, like say the Aryan Nations or the FLDS, I could buy that.</i><br><br>How generous of you. You do realize, don't you, that they explicitly and publicly <a href="http://oathkeepers.org/oath/about/" rel="nofollow">disavow exactly the kinds of noxious things you're talking about</a>:<br><br><i><b>We are Not advocating or promoting any act or acts of aggression against any organization or person for any<br />reason including, but not limited to; race, religion, national origin, political affiliation, gender or sexual orientation.</b></i><br><br>Fairly unambiguous, no?<br><br><i>The question would then be, how prevalent are these ugly attitudes among the membership, which I'd answer with a strong but ambiguous, "very prevalent."</i><br><br>Again, my sample size is admittedly quite small, at 4 (or 5 including myself)--but I'm guessing that's 4 (or 5) more than <i>you</i> know personally--but in that sample, you're 0 for 4 (or 5). Clever of you to make your answer "strong <i>but ambiguous</i>," allowing you to shrug and say, "Oh, well," if you turn out to be proven wrong.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-58324762987143147592010-01-23T08:00:22.361+01:002010-01-23T08:00:22.361+01:00Zorro said, "I'll continue to consider an...Zorro said, <i>"I'll continue to consider any such accusations to be unfounded libel, perpetrated by people who either don't know any better, or are engaging in a deliberate smear campaign."</i><br /><br />Now don't go losing your famous sense of humor. Speaking for myself, I'm not on any kind of a campaign and I'm certainly not libelling anyone. I'm just talking.<br /><br />You seem to be saying the Oath Keepers (is that the best rendering of it, or Oathkeepers?) are squeaky clean examples of all the manly virtues with nary a taint of racism or misogyny. Are you really saying you've never seen a trace of these things in your fellow members? I wouldn't believe that, because men are men, and unfortunately we're all tainted to one degree or another.<br /><br />If, on the other hand, you're saying the organization is not based on racist or misogynist beliefs, like say the Aryan Nations or the FLDS, I could buy that. The question would then be, how prevalent are these ugly attitudes among the membership, which I'd answer with a strong but ambiguous, "very prevalent."Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-25739317931588347022010-01-23T06:37:38.917+01:002010-01-23T06:37:38.917+01:00multiple citations needed.You make a vile, unsubst...<i>multiple citations needed.</i><br><br>You make a vile, unsubstantiated accusation, and I ask for some evidence, and mention Rhodes' history of libertarian advocacy. Your response? <b>No</b> evidence, and a demand for <i>multiple</i> citations from me. No, sir--it doesn't work that way. I don't owe you shit. <i>You're</i> the one making vile accusations--any evidentiary burden is on you. If you can't pick up that burden, then you've just exposed yourself as a pathetic hatemonger, talking out your gaping ass.<br /><br />Until you come up with some evidence backing up your libel, you have wasted more than enough of my time, sir.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-39755078195281045072010-01-23T05:29:40.710+01:002010-01-23T05:29:40.710+01:00"The Oath Keepers' founder, Stewart Rhode..."The Oath Keepers' founder, Stewart Rhodes, has a long history of libertarian ideals, and was a harsh critic of many Bush policies."<br /><br />multiple citations needed.<br /><br />Why didn't he start it earlier? <br />There wasn't a scary black man in the oval office earlier?<br /><br />Promise Keepers, Oath Keepers, Minutemen. All mostly white, very frightened guys with guns.democommiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08714733977927594559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-2049549720860538782010-01-23T03:32:32.094+01:002010-01-23T03:32:32.094+01:00"In reality, the militia or so-called 'pa...<i>"In reality, the militia or so-called 'patriot' movement actually began in the early 1980s. There you found groups like Posse Comitatus, Freemen, Phineas Priests, Christian Identity, Aryan Nation and the like. A lot of it was about the 'New World Order'"</i><br /><br />Myth, urban legend, never happened.FatWhiteManhttp://fatwhiteman.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-58305002762754185242010-01-22T17:35:36.990+01:002010-01-22T17:35:36.990+01:00. . . a little too cozy with the Aryan Nation sort...<i> . . . a little too cozy with the Aryan Nation sort of folks . . . </i><br><br>Citation needed.<br /><br /><i>But when the person is a leader, one who makes speeches and recruits others, then it becomes more than one man's evil and it does reflect on the entire group.</i><br><br>So the fact that no one who brought him into a leadership position with the Oath Keepers <b>predicted</b> that he'd turn out to (allegedly) be the kind of scum who would rape someone, reflects on the group? I can see that, if the Oath Keepers claimed to be psychic, but . . . we don't.<br /><br />The Oath Keepers' founder, Stewart Rhodes, has a long history of libertarian ideals, and was a harsh critic of many Bush policies. Why didn't he start the group earlier? How the hell should I know? Maybe he was too busy working with the Paul campaign. Maybe he needed to get the capital together. Maybe he just hadn't gotten around to it yet. There's a whole long list of "maybe" explanations, and somewhere near the very bottom of that list, I suppose one must include "maybe his willingness to defy unconstitutional orders is related to the racial makeup of the Commander-in-Chief." Leave it to Mikeb and Democommie to seize on that remote possibility as the only one that makes sense to them.<br /><br />When I see <i>any</i> compelling evidence of an organizational link to racism, misogyny, etc.,I will withdraw my membership. Until then, I'll continue to consider any such accusations to be unfounded libel, perpetrated by people who either don't know any better, or are engaging in a deliberate smear campaign.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-28657455911883908962010-01-22T13:55:10.709+01:002010-01-22T13:55:10.709+01:00Zorro said, "I see one alleged rapist, who al...Zorro said, <i>"I see one alleged rapist, who also identified himself as an Oath Keeper. Not a proud day for the Oath Keepers, certainly, but one man's evil does not reflect on the entire group..."</i><br /><br />That might be true is he were a simple member. But when the person is a leader, one who makes speeches and recruits others, then it becomes more than one man's evil and it does reflect on the entire group.<br /><br />I wouldn't be surprised if you, Zorro, were the exception to the rule, the rule being that the Oathkeepers are mainly comprised of insecure, racist, misogynist white men who suffer from paranoia and other mental illnesses.<br /><br />I don't think they're as innocuous as Sebastian was saying.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-7477485901255765762010-01-22T11:16:52.488+01:002010-01-22T11:16:52.488+01:00I think this is an important point made be democom...I think this is an important point made be democommie:<br /><br /><i>"They go back all the way to 3 months or so after the Obama inauguration."</i><br /><br />These Oathkeepers are about opposition to Obama. Of course they deny any element of racism, but I don't buy that. They say it's about socialism and about the Constitution and other nonsensical things. <br /><br />Their oath is interesting. They claim to want to keep the oath they'd made in the past, but the wording of the new oath has changed. The reference to obeying the President is missing. So what it boils down to is violating the original oath they took when entering the military or whatever and replacing it with one they like better. To me it sounds more like treason than patriotism.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-4020915866806941852010-01-22T07:15:06.203+01:002010-01-22T07:15:06.203+01:00"Both are usually minimally educated, and eco..."Both are usually minimally educated, and economically and socially challenged by changing times they cannot hope to adapt to. They are desperately responding to feelings of having been marginalized, and disenfranchised, from the American dream."<br /><br />You've described the average gang member.AztecRedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00027951757285806109noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-61668887755581718082010-01-22T00:24:49.661+01:002010-01-22T00:24:49.661+01:00"Are guys like Charles Dyer patriots or lunat..."Are guys like Charles Dyer patriots or lunatics?"<br /><br />Neither. He's a criminal.<br /><br />Which is sad, because he was otherwise a nice guy.AztecRedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00027951757285806109noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-77452716109390480412010-01-22T00:16:12.393+01:002010-01-22T00:16:12.393+01:00Sebastian is wrong but that's to be expected. ...Sebastian is wrong but that's to be expected. He relies heavily on David Williams rather sloppy and superficial overview of today's militia movement.<br /><br />In reality, the militia or so-called 'patriot' movement actually began in the early 1980s. There you found groups like Posse Comitatus, Freemen, Phineas Priests, Christian Identity, Aryan Nation and the like. A lot of it was about the "New World Order"<br /><br />Basically, the militia movement and gunloons share much in common. Both are usually minimally educated, and economically and socially challenged by changing times they cannot hope to adapt to. They are desperately responding to feelings of having been marginalized, and disenfranchised, from the American dream.<br /> __JadeGoldAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-50344861939345855552010-01-21T21:46:35.352+01:002010-01-21T21:46:35.352+01:00Hey, Zerro, you like knocking people down from the...<i>Hey, Zerro, you like knocking people down from the cozy nest of your computer. You don't seem to do too much else of use.</i><br><br>Where you get the notion that you have <i>any</i> idea what I do when I'm not laughing uproariously at you is . . . come to think of it, not really of much interest to me.<br /><br />Be that as it may, I do have other responsibilities to attend to, when I'm not indulging in my new hobby of provoking increasingly shrill, spittle-flecked rants from you. Fortunately, I really don't need to put much in the way of either time <i>or</i> effort into that.<br /><br />Hope you're having a <i>lovely</i> day (or evening, I suppose, in your case)--I certainly am, and you're contributing to it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-83049081742636228472010-01-21T21:34:53.844+01:002010-01-21T21:34:53.844+01:00Oh, yeah, Zerro, I am NotJadeGold.
It was fun to ...Oh, yeah, Zerro, I am NotJadeGold.<br /><br />It was fun to accuse you of being that to show you up for being a jerk. Too bad your smarter than I give you credit for being. You do have a slightly higher IQ than a rock.<br /><br />As I said, I used that when I posted anonymously at work. I still do, but I shall now post as Laci so that you can't have your little chuckle fest.<br /><br />Although, my question was about your military service and discharge, or are you just revolution for the hell of it? Fight tyranny--whatever that is.<br /><br />Anyway, I wanted to distance myself from JadeGold--especially since I have to quarrel with Sebastian. I rather like him and find him fairly agreeable.Laci the Chinese Crestedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07371541369012938298noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-84814711206627355422010-01-21T21:26:26.261+01:002010-01-21T21:26:26.261+01:00Hey, Zerro, you like knocking people down from the...Hey, Zerro, you like knocking people down from the cozy nest of your computer. You don't seem to do too much else of use.Laci the Chinese Crestedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07371541369012938298noreply@blogger.com