Hatewatch Tweets
Hatewatch is managed by the staff of the Intelligence Report, an investigative magazine published by the Alabama-based civil rights group Southern Poverty Law Center.
Tea Party Nation: Oath Keepers is Last Line of Defense Against Tyranny
The Tea Party Nation, one of the more extreme factions of the Tea Party movement, has dipped deeper into the conspiratorial waters of antigovernment lore, most recently promoting the Oath Keepers and other antigovernment “Patriots” as the last line of defense for Americans increasingly confronted with “a government verging on evil.”
In a post published over the weekend on the Tea Party Nation’s website, regular blogger Alan Caruba painted a dire picture of the threats to freedom that lie in wait under President Obama, whom he calls a “red diaper baby” and a far-left functionary “raised from birth and mentored to embrace communism.”
“Obama’s disregard for the Constitution, its separation of powers, and Americans suffering greatly from his policies, suggests that he is not beyond making the greatest grab for power using a bogus ‘national emergency’ or manufactured ‘crisis’ to declare martial law,” Caruba wrote. He goes on to cite three recent executive orders as proof positive that Obama is setting up the nation to abandon its constitutional mandates and wage an all-out campaign against freedom.
And that’s where the Oath Keepers comes in.
Founded three years ago by former Army paratrooper and Yale Law School graduate Stewart Rhodes, the group operates under the defiant banner of “Not on our watch,” plying thousands of politically disaffected men and women with ideas of a totalitarian “New World Order” looming on the horizon. The group is composed of active and retired military and law enforcement personnel who vow to uphold their oath to the Constitution and disobey orders they deem to be in conflict. Inherent in the group’s “Ten Orders We Will Not Obey” is a roster of far-right conspiracy theories involving domestic prison camps, the dismantling of the Second Amendment and more.
Caruba is also the communications director for the anti-New World Order American Policy Center, so it’s no surprise that he would repurpose the Oath Keepers’ paranoid talking points. “The biggest question facing Americans is whether the members of our military and our law enforcement authorities would obey [Obama],” Caruba wrote. “My bet is that they would not.”
In a series of articles last year, Caruba lashed out at immigrants, Muslims, the LGBT community and, of course, Obama. In one of those articles, he likened Obama to Casey Anthony, the single mother from Florida who had just been acquitted of murdering her 2-year-old daughter. He has also been a perennial opponent of Agenda 21, a benign multinational agreement signed 30 years ago to protect the environment that has increasingly been compared on the far right to a blueprint for the New World Order.
on July 10th, 2012 at 5:00 pm
Anyone who thinks that a moderate corporate tool like Obama is a Socialist or a Communist is too dumb for words.
Anyone who can’t tell the difference between actual tyrants – such as some of those gems the CIA installed in various Latin American and Middle Eastern countries – and the Obama administration is also too dumb for words.
Especially since what the Tea Party advocates for is real tryanny in that it is a government where a handful of ultra rich individuals and coprorations control everything and the government is a mere puppet.
The only difference between the Tea Party and the Klan is that the Klan has less riduculous costumes.
on July 10th, 2012 at 5:20 pm
Mann and Ornstein recommend that press (and voters) start reporting who is telling the truth, who is taking hostages – at what risks, and to what ends. Can a candidate govern only if unified, or with divided government? Is a party ideologically punishing, rejecting dialogue or bargaining w/opponents? Without the skepticism and desire to understand these questions, how can we vote in our self interest? I think Mann and Ornstein gave us good advice in their op-ed “Admit it, the Republicans are the Problem” http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....ory_3.html
Your tracking of which party’s candidates does this kind of hate propaganda serve, combined with asking what are their policies’ effects and goals, helps inform voting.
on July 10th, 2012 at 5:26 pm
“Inherent in the group’s “Ten Orders We Will Not Obey” is a roster of far-right conspiracy theories involving domestic prison camps, the dismantling of the Second Amendment and more.”
Yes, but are you sure they are only far-right paranoia?
For example, does the SPLC have a view on whether the President does or should have the authority to order the killing of a person not charged or convicted of a crime?
What I’m suggesting is that your brush is too broad. At least some of the Oath Keepers are expressing legitimate worries about human rights.
on July 10th, 2012 at 6:58 pm
Well, of course, they mean he’s black, but since they can’t say that, they’ll say he’s a gray lizard Merovingian from outer space. As someone whose great-grandmother came from Greater Limburgh and who therefore has certain Frankish and possible Merovingian ancestry, I assure you this lizard stuff is nonsense (please pass the candied flies).
on July 11th, 2012 at 8:30 am
Oh geesh… (crickets)
on July 11th, 2012 at 8:31 am
My crickets are not in response to Erika. It means I’m staying away from this one.
on July 11th, 2012 at 8:49 am
Joseph, please pass those, also. Us Merovingians really relish a good breakfast.
on July 11th, 2012 at 9:05 am
I can’t help it…
Dan: If that person is not a citizen of the US (not protected by OUR Constitution), is not protected by the Geneva Convention, and poses a threat to the US, the President can order his killing until he’s blue in the face.
on July 11th, 2012 at 10:26 am
If their expert handling of Katrina, the National Debt, and even keeping our highways in passable condition are any indication, we have very little to fear from this government.
on July 11th, 2012 at 11:26 am
“Dan: If that person is not a citizen of the US (not protected by OUR Constitution), is not protected by the Geneva Convention, and poses a threat to the US, the President can order his killing until he’s blue in the face.”
Obviously you are not aware that the latest National Defense Authorization Act gave the President the power to kill US citizens, in the US, without charge or trial. Obama objected to the bill because he claims to have always had that power.
But going further, I’m sure you were taught correctly that most of the rights mentioned in the Constitution (those we would call human rights rather than citizenship rights) apply to all persons, not just US citizens. For example, it is not legal for the US government to deny due process to foreigners accused of a crime.
Thirdly, the Geneva Conventions also apply to everyone. I can’t cite the clause, but they contain language that specifically denies the power to claim that “these people don’t count”.
Lastly, your “poses a threat” claim is simply a restatement of the shameful Nuremberg defense. _All_ oppressive crapheads _always_ claim national necessity for their crimes. If that’s your justification you’ll have to take it elsewhere.
on July 11th, 2012 at 11:53 am
Thanks for that link, JaaaaayCeeeee. It’s good to see some pieces in the mainstream media that call out not only the politicians but what the media itself is actually saying about them. Calling a lie a lie is not being biased; it’s being accurate.
on July 11th, 2012 at 12:53 pm
No, we were not taught that the US Constitution applied to all people. I was not taught that in school, I was not taught that in the Navy, I was not taught that in Government, I was not taught that anywhere. And it’s not my job to memorize the entire document.
I know the Bill of Rights, and from what I can tell, that applies to Citizens of the US. I was not aware, in my 37 years of living, that the US Constitution applied to people in Greenland.
Now, a good person, would apply that to all humans in general, as long as they were peace loving and did not hurt other people, it’s the right thing to do.
I didn’t practice too much democracy until I got out of the Navy, and then it was time to “go to work and go back home”, but I still don’t have time to memorize the constitution. Or the Declaration of Indepedence, the Magna Carta, or the Gettysburg Address for that matter.
I’m a disabled Veteran who works as a legal administrator, it’s my job to know mortgage banking, not how to run our government. I’m lucky if I make it home without running a red light.
But no, I don’t have to take my justification anywhere. I’ll gladly be a craphead if that is your defense. “Poses a Threat” means my child is not safe, and the person that poses that threat, can go.
FYI – Like it or not, American Presidents have been “Ordering” the deaths of people for a LONG TIME. Longer than you or I have been here. And I wager to say that they’ll be doing it long after you and I have left.
And the US has been claiming National Necessity for a lot of things, for a longer than Nuremburg was in existence. You ever read about the Filipino Rebellion?
on July 11th, 2012 at 1:25 pm
Your making me read the NDAA and I’m not seeing anything President Bush didn’t do. And I like President Bush, I think the way he dodged that shoe was classic.
I can see why a lot of people don’t like the NDAA. Don’t see anything about murder though. President Obama took the oath to support and defend the Constitution also, and that includes not being very nice to terrorists.
As far as the Geneva Convention applying to everyone. I’m not sure what military you served in, but the one that I served in didn’t say that either.
Terrorists are officially non-combatants, they’re insurgents. They do not fight under a flag, they do not have an anthem, they do not answer to a president, premier, king, queen, parliament, congress, crazy dictator or constitution. They purposefully kill kids. They knock down buildings and blow up marketplaces and don’t care how many people are in them. They’re foreign and they’re domestic. And on top of all that, they’re not very nice at all. I don’t care how long they’re locked up.
And these patriots better be careful they don’t become them.
on July 11th, 2012 at 2:11 pm
Dan, the saying is that, “The Constitution follows the flag”. Basically, wherever the U.S. exercises *jurisdiction*, it must observe constitutional safeguards. It must observe the Geneva conventions when it has *taken prisoners of war*, or when finding disabled combatants. If an American abroad has taken up arms against the United States, he is in the same position as any other belligerent until he has been put hors de combat in one of the above instances or has otherwise fallen under U.S. jurisdiction. No act of Congress or Presidential decree can empower any arm of the law or government to execute without trial anyone within U.S. territory, though deadly force may be used against them if they resist arrest in a way that jeopardizes life, or (say) in a kidnapping or hostage situation. To claim that the President may, by ukaz, simply have any citizen killed is dangerous balderdash, and what you mean is that this President is black.
on July 11th, 2012 at 6:21 pm
“To claim that the President may, by ukaz, simply have any citizen killed is dangerous balderdash, and what you mean is that this President is black.”
Don’t misunderestimate me. I am merely pointing out that Obama claims the right to murder anyone without charge or trial (and that Bush did also).
Here is a source that lays it out. Or is Prof. Turley also a racist neo-nazi?
http://jonathanturley.org/2012.....-the-free/
You’ve made the same mistake the SPLC author made above, using a broad brush. Do you find it impossible to believe that a progressive might view Obama’s human rights record as very poor? Is it impossible that someone with right-leaning sympathies might have a legitimate worry about human rights?
BTW, I was wrong when I said above that it was the NDAA that authorized murder of US citizens. The NDAA authorizes indefinite detention of US citizens without charge or trial (also illegal). I couldn’t find the authorization of murder right away. Turley’s article suggests it is only a Presidential claim.
DanZ
on July 11th, 2012 at 7:25 pm
Does anyone else find it odd that Oathkeepers essentially take an oath to uphold another oath that they’ve already taken? I might add, that this is an oath taken by literally millions of people in this country, myself included.
I realize that it is a bit redundant, but then again, the current POTUS is, shall we say, not totally “white”. Our new BFF Joseph notwithstanding, this is essentially a conservative reaction to a black man in the White House.
on July 11th, 2012 at 9:19 pm
Why are the Black Panthers who interfered in the 2008 elections in Philadelphia not listed or did I miss them?
on July 11th, 2012 at 10:21 pm
Dan, how could I possibly misunderestimate anyone who uses such vocabulary as misunderestimate? But your attempts at refudiation display a refuddlement that is almost befreshing. Until you can cite chapter and verse for the President’s claiming an inherent right to *murder* an American citizen on American soil who is not bearing arms or directing their use against the United States, I’ll just have to stand on the subveracity of your statement.
And you mean he’s black.
on July 12th, 2012 at 7:33 am
Gregory, I agree.
Dan, thanks for the clarification, it’s appreciated. I coudn’t find a reference to the NDAA for murder either, although I will say that…to me…the NDAA is only an extension of the AUMF from an earlier administration.
I think any sitting President has one hell of a job, whether it’s Bush II, or President Obama.
I will note that my wife hated Bush II (I don’t like his father or Reagan) until she finished her Masters in Public Admin. Now, she doesn’t love him, but has said that his job required him to make very unpopular decisions and that any sitting President has an unpopular job.
I have to think that if President Obama orders the death of someone, it’s because he felt like he had to.
Now, conscience grabbing thoughts aside, there is such a thing as Targeted Killing, and that could be the term you’re looking for. Targeted Killing would be for individual(s) who are not protected by the Geneva Convention and/or they have lost that immunity.
Personally, I think there is a difference between killing and murder. I gotta tell you, I am not opposed to the practice.
on July 12th, 2012 at 11:07 am
“ ‘The biggest question facing Americans is whether the members of our military and our law enforcement authorities would obey [Obama],’ Caruba wrote. ‘My bet is that they would not.’ ”
In other words, Caruba is betting that Oath Keepers would violate the oath they’ve doubly sworn to uphold.
This is the actual oath sworn today by all recruits into the U.S. military, as specified by the U.S. Code:
“I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.”
So disobeying orders from Obama, or any other president, is automatically a violation of this oath.
I know, I know, the Oath Keepers and their supporters constantly natter about how they’ll only disobey orders they don’t like, as if anyone would disobey any other kind. It’s easy to see that they’re really just itching for a chance to “stand their ground” and show just how patriotic and freedom-loving they are, which they’ll demonstrate by breaking their oaths and essentially staging a coup against the legally and Constitutionally elected president who is, also according to the Constitution (Article II, Section 2), their Commander in Chief.
Real freedom lovers and defenders of the Constitution are well aware, of course, that there’s already a process in place for replacing politicians whose decisions or policies don’t seem to make sense. But that hasn’t worked out too well for the extreme right, because they keep finding out (but never really accepting) that they are a tiny minority among American voters.
on July 12th, 2012 at 11:18 am
Though I have always been a ‘left winger’, I’ll have to agree with the Tea Party on this one. Thank God for Oathkeepers. When we have a corporate tool like Barack Obomber who loves to murder children all over the world dropping drone bombs trying to force me to buy something that I don’t want, it is quite clear that tyranny has arrived on America’s shores. Barack Obomber is as bad as Bush was and worse, he’s a despicable excuse for a Democrat and should be quite ashamed of himself for turning Amerikkka into something that Adolf Hitler would have been proud of. When the govt puts a gun to anyones head and tries to force them to buy something that they don’t want to buy, that govt needs to be dealt with properly. Thankfully, America has the Oathkeepers to keep that govt in line. When tyranny has been eliminated from America, you folks here will thank us. Until then, keep drinking the kook-aid. You’re falling right into their trap, folks, just like Germans did in the 30′s and 40′s. Look what happened to them. Did they get what they deserved? One could argue that they did by their naivete and willingness to let tyranny run amok. Will Americans get what we deserve? If we continue to let this out of control govt run amok, we’ll soon be in the same boat that the Jews were in in 1940. Thank God for the 2nd Amendment…
on July 12th, 2012 at 11:38 am
Mr. Sanford, if you are a left winger, I have two right feet. This isn’t even firebagger insanity.
on July 12th, 2012 at 11:42 am
Stefaner… With opinions like those… You are not a left-winger. You are an idiot. And with Reynardine’s approval, you are the winner of today’s Golden Hammerhead Award, and a verbal beatdown.
on July 12th, 2012 at 11:45 am
Stefan, you talk about American soldiers killing people all over the world, but the Oath Keepers aren’t doing anything about that. They seem fine with it.
And Ralph, while the SPLC does list the New Black Panther party as a hate group, they did not “interfere” with any election in 2008.
on July 12th, 2012 at 12:08 pm
I like the 2nd Amendment as much as anybody, but Oath Keepers do not vow to take up arms. We vow NOT to follow unlawful orders.
Now, what is an unlawful order? When I was working military justice this question was always an immediate concern. What is unlawful and what is not.
It is basically agreed upon that a order to violate the bill of rights is an unlawful order. Given by the President or not, you can’t do that, and you shouldn’t follow that order.
And how you PROPERLY handle it is to formally file a conscientious objection to said order, in writing, with the superior who issued said order.
And yes, you can say no, to an order, and verbally state you have a consciencous objection to said order.
Conscientious Objector – Look up the term. Now you may say this is non-applicable. Well…there is no official term in the Uniform Code of Military Justice for an “unlawful order”. Or you can follow the order, but you have to understand, either way it goes, YOU RISK COURTS-MARTIAL. Where it will be decided if the order was lawful or not.
I took that oath, and went to school to learn out to enforce it at the Naval Justice School Detachment, Fleet Training Center in San Diego. You just don’t willy nilly follow orders. Because you can and will be held accountable not only for disobeying orders, but also obeying unlawful orders.
Now with that being said, again, what is an unlawful order??? Right??? Who determines what is unlawful.
Article 90 of the UCMJ is for disobeying a superior commissioned officer; Article 91 is for willfully disobeying a superior noncommissioned or warrant officer; and Article 92 is for disobeying a LAWFUL order. In a time of war, Article 90 is punishable by death on the battlefield.
However, these orders must all be truly LAWFUL, unfortunately, what is or is not lawful can only be determined by a higher competant authority than the one who issued the order, and although I cannot tell you the definition of an unlawful order, I can tell you that military courts have held that servicemembers are accountable for their actions while following said orders.
Sorry, I wish I had more info, but I bet there is a ton on the internet and you now have a good place to start.
I know what the oath says, and sorry to say, it’s not that cut and dry. “I was just following orders” has been a bad excuse for a long time.
on July 12th, 2012 at 12:21 pm
Stefan, your concern troll is showing…
on July 12th, 2012 at 12:53 pm
You folks need to stop drinking the mainstream Kool-Aid. the tea Party is not a radical right group. thier basic principals are smaller government and less taxes. they advocate for more individual freedoms and less government intervention into all things. This is hardly a “radical” view based on the Founding fathers original views of what the Courty stood for and how the Country was to operate. Now, that having been said, does it mean that every faction or person who is involved in the Tea Party is pure as the driven snow? the answer, of course, is no. This would also apply to any group that pushes its views. The Occupy movement has its shares of loons, as does the NAACP, etc..
on July 12th, 2012 at 1:19 pm
I’m waiting to see the various law enforcement agencies go para military on a, bring your guns, Tea Party function.
How many legislators call themselves NAACP legislators? What kind of things do they do in their legislative duties?
on July 12th, 2012 at 1:34 pm
The rabid Oathkeeper in my neighborhood is fancying that he will run for the Senate. He brags openly of having very large amounts of ammunition (he must have the guns to go with it, right?) and conducts firearms training sessions on his property. He feels very safe to advocate the armed takeover of the Federal government. Their answer to everything is a violent ouster of anyone who differs from their political views. He makes frequent threats against “Liberals” and routinely orders us to get out of “his” country or suffer consequences. These people are nuts.
on July 12th, 2012 at 1:36 pm
@ Orwell21, read the opening line of the article again. It specifically refers to the group called “Tea Party Nation,” not the entire Tea Party movement. Tea Party Nation is a radical right group of birthers, racists, Muslim-haters, and homophobes, not a group advocating smaller government, lower taxes, and greater individual freedom–except, of course, the individual freedom to torment other kids for being gay.
on July 12th, 2012 at 1:44 pm
What the Founding Fathers had in mind, Orwell21, is that in order to exercise your voting rights you had to be a white male property owner. I’m sure a great many teabaggers would like to return to that.
As for Stefan, I haven’t seen retro-trolling like that in years. You do realize that many of those who are loading munitions onto those drones, flying the missions, providing intelligence and logistical support, etc etc, are your beloved Oathkeepers. Same with other activities in the prosecution of our wars overseas. I’ve yet to see any mass resignations or courts martial of those refusing orders.
on July 12th, 2012 at 1:48 pm
“You folks need to stop drinking the mainstream Kool-Aid. the tea Party is not a radical right group. thier basic principals are smaller government and less taxes.”
Oh really? Where the hell were they when Bush blew the budget surplus and started two wars? And what do you mean “big government?” How do you measure government anyway? Since they seem fine with banning gay marriage and harassing women who want abortions we can’t imagine that they stand for liberty.
on July 12th, 2012 at 2:36 pm
For Reynard:
The claim that the President can have people killed was made by Eric Holder on March 5 at Northwestern University. Here is a link and a quote from an article about it:
http://jonathanturley.org/2012/03/06/holder/
“Holder proclaimed that “The president may use force abroad against a senior operational leader of a foreign terrorist organization with which the United States is at war — even if that individual happens to be a U.S. citizen.” The use of the word “abroad” is interesting since senior Administration officials have asserted that the President may kill an American anywhere and anytime, including the United States. Holder’s speech does not materially limit that claimed authority. He merely assures citizens that Obama will only kill those of us he finds abroad and a significant threat. Notably, Holder added “Our legal authority is not limited to the battlefields in Afghanistan.”
“The Obama Administration continues to stonewall efforts to get it to acknowledge the existence of a memo authorizing the killing of Awlaki. Democrats previously demanded the “torture memos” of the Bush Administration that revealed both poor legal analysis by Judge Jay Bybee and Professor John Yoo to justify torture. Now, however, Democrats are largely silent in the face of a president claiming the right to unilaterally kill citizens.”
And here’s further analysis:
http://jonathanturley.org/2012.....-doctrine/
The FBI Director told Congress that he “doesn’t know” if he has authority to kill citizens without charge or trial.
The point is that this is happening _right_now_ and there appears to legal scholars no limit on the power claimed by the President other than whatever limit the sitting President decides. That’s just the same Nixon doctrine that whatever the President does is automatically legal.
And for the record, in that last election I voted for Cynthia Mckinney, which make me far more liberal than you…
DanZ
on July 12th, 2012 at 3:11 pm
Supersonic, wait till the end of the day before awarding the Golden Hammerhead Award, for no matter how deserving any candidate may appear, one still more deserving can show up any time. However, even if one does, this one will surely still merit the Silver.
Welcome back, Ruslan. You were missed. Beer, wine, or coffee?
on July 12th, 2012 at 3:14 pm
Mr. Zabetakis, unless a truly superlative Hammerhead shows up, you have won the Silver, or at least the Bronze.
on July 12th, 2012 at 3:21 pm
Where were these Baggers when Bush II sat on the throne. Why do they think Tricky Dick Cheney is known as “Darth Vader”? …now that was a truly evil empire.
on July 12th, 2012 at 3:25 pm
If Romney is elected these Baggers will soon find themselves as beggars. Romney might end up president if Americans continue using crooked voting machines.
on July 12th, 2012 at 3:45 pm
“Mr. Zabetakis, unless a truly superlative Hammerhead shows up, you have won the Silver, or at least the Bronze.”
a) That’s Dr. Zabetakis to you.
b) Since it has become obvious that you are not reading my replies I won’t be replying anymore to you.
on July 12th, 2012 at 3:51 pm
Dan,
You voted for Cynthia McKinney? That doesn’t just make you leftist, that makes you nutty.
She makes H Ross Perot look reasonably well-adjusted.
on July 12th, 2012 at 4:23 pm
These folks need to read Milos Forman’s July 10th Op-Ed piece in the NY Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07.....38;emc=rss)
That’s what dicitoral socalism is.
on July 12th, 2012 at 4:56 pm
“You voted for Cynthia McKinney? That doesn’t just make you leftist, that makes you nutty.”
As you know, she was running against Obama on a reasonable Green Party platform.
I pointed that out so that another member of the forum (who didn’t read it) could see that I am not opposed to Obama because his is blackish. McKinney is black and female and was running with a female Hispanic. There’s Wrong and then there’s Reynardine Wrong.
Anyway, what both the Teabaggers and the Hopeniks refuse to see is that Obama is well to the right of center. There is scarcely a policy of Bush that Obama has not endorsed or extended.
And things are so confused that I get accused of being right-wing and racist for pointing out what legal scholars are saying about Obama’s Presidential power claims.
on July 12th, 2012 at 5:08 pm
The tea party nation is one of the few for profit organizations that most tea partiers refuse to follow. Along with them being for profit, they were the ones who put on the fancy Palin dinner. That is not the tea party way. We do not believe ppl should be making money off the movement, nor do we like events that cost money, since must of our group is the unemployed, under-employed, and seniors on fixed incomes. Here’s the wiki link, showing their roots to Judson, who’s made a lot of unethical money. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Party_Nation
on July 12th, 2012 at 5:17 pm
As an Oathkeeper I support all movements. I ask you to view us as we are: Defenders of the Constitution and Bill of Rights equally. Defenders of your freedoms and liberties equally. We need not agree with occupy or tea party. Our job is to uphold and defend our Oaths to the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic. Neither current movement is anti-American or anti-goverment… they appear to be anti- corrupt government. One fights the hand that bribes our politicians, the other fights the politicians for taking the bribes. They’re both correct in their fight. The bribes need to stop. Our govt is not for sale.
on July 12th, 2012 at 5:38 pm
I would like to respectfully disagree with many of the false characterizations made herein of the Tea Party and organizations such as the Oathkeepers, Defense of personal liberty in America should never be a debated topic, for when one American suffers loss of liberty, don’t we all suffer? Our Constitution is the guiding light by which other free nations have modeled their desired freedom, yet for all of our enlightenment and forthrightness I am saddened to see so many who enjoy the fruits of our liberty woefully fail to recognize their responsibility to protect it. The Oathkeepers, the Tea Party, and other like groups recognize that obligation and do so willingly and with the desire that ALL Americans continue to live as a free people.
on July 12th, 2012 at 5:52 pm
Mr. Zabetakis:
(A) Doctor of what?
(B) They have become functionally illegible.
on July 12th, 2012 at 6:10 pm
If we had an unbiased media and thinking folks who could see beyond the party lines they are fed, SLPC would be known as the extremist hate group that is has been since it was founded.
on July 13th, 2012 at 7:56 am
I’ve dipped my toe into these particular conspiracy waters, they make the MK Ultura stuff look reasonable.
on July 13th, 2012 at 8:45 am
Orwell21, the Tea Party is just the latest incarnation of what began in the 1850s as the extremely aptly named “Know Nothing” Party and likely reached its peak in numbers and influence in the 1920s as the Ku Klux Klan – it is a group for people who know that they are getting a raw deal from somewhere but aren’t quite sure who to blame so they lash out at minorities.
The interpretation of the “founding fathers” that they claim is in fact radical right – the “founding fathers” were not by any means a uniform group – some called for a stronger central government, some for more “state’s rights.” In any case, only a fool would think that the type of government which existed in 1789 when it took several days to travel from New York to Philadelphia and several weeks to travel from Boston to Augusta would work in 2012 when you can travel from Seattle to Miami in a few hours. To call for a weak centralized government in a country which is as interconnected nationally and globally in the U.S. would be a disaster – in fact, what the Tea Party really is calling for was a disaster even in the 1780s because they really want a government closer to the Articles of Confederation.
In fact, the Tea Party doesn’t even know what they really want – they are jusat calling for what their corporate sponsors are telling them to call for. Instead like their predecessor organizations they are simply directing their anger towards people with little or no power through old fashioned racism and ethnic bigotry – hence, they hate immigrants and hate the Black man in the White House simply because they are bigots and their corporate sponsors tell them to blame illegal immigrants or Blacks rather than blaming a callous social structure where the ultra rich control almost everything and the middle class is vanishing as infrastructure is inadequate and collapsing.
Quite simply the Tea Party is radical right – and they are nothing new – there were Loyalists during the Revolution after all. There are always people who are going to turn towards bigotry in times of social change – it happened in the 1850s, in the 1920s and 1930s, in the 1950s and 1960s, and its happening today. This is nothing new – eventually the Tea Party will collapse simply because there are a lot more Hispanics and Blacks – and Whites who don’t hate Hispanics and Blacks – in this country than there are bigots – just like the “Know Nothings” collasped, just like the Confederacy collapsed, just like the KKK collasped – they will fall for the same reason – they have no plan or program other than simple bigotry and anyone intelligent knows that you can’t blame your problems on the powerless. Its not the fault of illegal immigrants that this country is falling apart – its the fault of people who are too greedy to pay for basic infrastructure.
on July 13th, 2012 at 8:47 am
Bob:
If we had an unbiased media and thinking folks who could see beyond the party lines they are fed, the GOP would never win another election, and wingnuts like you would be forever marginalized from contributing to society.
on July 13th, 2012 at 8:53 am
Damned straight, Pete. See “Hammerhead Awards”, supra; we’re going to have to search the Periodic Table for more stuff to make them out of. Bob, there, though, gets just a little tin(foil) Hammerhead pin, as his offerings are quite unexceptional. We should probably create several categories of performance, though: MR. Zabetakis his given an exceptional histrionic exposition of narcissistic rage
on July 13th, 2012 at 9:12 am
Dan,
While I agree with many Green Party sentiments, I still think McKinney is at best, a goofy goober, and at worst, a disgrace to the office of Congresswoman.
Considering her assault on the Capitol security guards, her obsession over the ‘Tupac Shakur Files,’ and her many other silly and embarrassing quirks, I think the GP may not have chosen the best candidate. (Still more likable than Ralph Nader, though.)
on July 13th, 2012 at 9:21 am
Rey, as long as you don’t give out an Uranium Hammerhead Award.
That may well bring about too much radiant joy :)
on July 13th, 2012 at 9:42 am
Erika, I am, and always have been, worried about the Plutonium Hammerhead, likely to be the last one ever.
on July 13th, 2012 at 10:32 am
Reynardine – I think the Hammerhead award should always be lead. Lead it what best typifies the Hammerhead mindset and intellect.
Erika — Thank you for your discussion above regarding the historical Know Nothings and the on-going eruptions of Know-Nothing-tude that continue to plague us. And I would add, in regard to the whole “blame the immigrants” thing — this is despicable because at the same time many of the corporate sponsors of the Tea Party mindset are cynically manipulating people to embrace a far-right agenda (which will ultimately crush all of the “plain folks” and the rest of us, too), they have used and abused immigrant labor to keep wages down and to avoid paying medical and disability claims for immigrant workers, who are simply “sent away” if they get hurt. We should ALL be pushing the same things — a living wage, decent infrastructure, schools, and healthcare, and the ability to live without the constant fear of being downsized or outsourced–two shadow monsters that currently stalk all working people, but that get a complete pass from the Tea Party people.
on July 13th, 2012 at 11:54 am
” Our Constitution is the guiding light by which other free nations have modeled their desired freedom, yet for all of our enlightenment and forthrightness I am saddened to see so many who enjoy the fruits of our liberty woefully fail to recognize their responsibility to protect it.”
Actually our Constitution wasn’t the “guiding light” of most other free nations, but I know one nation whose leader asked his American comrade to write down the first sentences from the preamble, because he wanted to use them in his own constitution when his nation was free of occupation. The leader’s name was Ho Chi Minh. How did we treat him and his people?
” The Oathkeepers, the Tea Party, and other like groups recognize that obligation and do so willingly and with the desire that ALL Americans continue to live as a free people.”
Bullshit. If it were about “freedom” you wouldn’t have so many people openly opposed to gay marriage or who favor restricting women’s rights to abortion. If they cared about freedom they would have appeared back in 2002 when talk of the Patriot Act appeared. If they were about fiscal responsibility they would have been outraged when Bush started pushing for a war in Iraq. But they weren’t in the streets then. You can claim you were outraged then all you like, the fact is that people like you didn’t label Bush the way you labeled Obama, and you weren’t in the streets like I was in 2003.
Moreover, your idiotic Tea Party movement is so obsessed over taxes they neglected to actually LOOK at the history of US tax rates. They were screaming the loudest at the very time when Obama had actually LOWERED their taxes. Yeah, I want to put the future of the country in THOSE hands.
on July 13th, 2012 at 1:12 pm
See here, Coral Sea, they’re always lead, at heart, but we distinguish the degree and talent of Hammerheadedness by the color of the plating. In the event of Uranium and Plutonium Hammerhead awards, though, the lead had better be on the outside.
on July 13th, 2012 at 1:29 pm
A winner of the Lead Hammerhead Award shouldn’t despair however – as I understand it the best hammerhead alchemists are busy at work trying to discover how to turn lead into gold.
on July 13th, 2012 at 1:31 pm
Reynardine –
Thanks for the explanation. Yes — you are totally right. I think that the symbolism of plated lead is spot on (and let’s make sure that the electro-plating is sort of spotty and cheesy looking).
on July 13th, 2012 at 2:08 pm
“While I agree with many Green Party sentiments, I still think McKinney is at best, a goofy goober, and at worst, a disgrace to the office of Congresswoman.”
I agree with you. But what is the alternative?
You can either vote for a minor party with a clear conscience (and in full knowledge that it will only get at max 1% of the vote).
Or you can be a complete tool and vote for a major party and project onto them the values you wish they had.
The new Center is somewhat to the right of Ronald Reagan. Reagan’s main theory was “deniability”. He new that some actions (Iran-Contra, for instance) were illegal, but pursued them through the security services with the view that no one would ever be able to “prove” anything.
Today, we have the fulfillment of the Nixon/Bush/Obama view which is sometimes called “Unitary Executive Theory”. It holds that there are no checks on Presidential power, including the law, Congress or the Courts. I.e. As Nixon stated: if the President does it, it is legal.
on July 13th, 2012 at 4:33 pm
Rather than using a lead center for a custom Hammerhead Award, wouldn’t it be cheaper just to paint a hammer the color of the Hammerhead Award?
Of course, if there is a custom Hammerhead Award – and it is in the shape of a shark and the right size, then I want to win the Platium Hammerhead Award – I’m thinking it could make for a cute necklace or a good addition to my charm bracelet :)
on July 13th, 2012 at 4:50 pm
Erika, in your case, just shoot for a Platinum Shark award, with nothing Hammerheaded about it.
on July 13th, 2012 at 4:51 pm
First, the Oath Keepers are not the last line of defense against tyranny. The right to keep and bear arms explicitly recognized by the Second Amendment to the Constitution is that last line.
Second, The TEA Party has nothing to do with bigotry, and nothing to do with hatred of anyone….or any thing for that matter, except perhaps increased taxation and criminally negligent government spending, INCLUDING, I might add, these ILLEGAL WARS!
Perhaps most readers here don’t realize this, but the TEA Party got it start while George W. Bush was President, not Barack Hussein Obama.
The TEA Party agenda is nothing more or less than Constitutional rule of law for the United States. And that doesn’t just mean for us “little people”. That means our elected and appointed representatives are equally, if not more, responsible for upholding that rule of law in their own actions.
But time and again, accelerated quite a bit since 9/11/2001, representatives in government service break long established law, including procedural law, in order to expedite some draconian measure under the pretext of public welfare, public safety or “national security”.
If you folks can’t see you have more in common with the vast majority of TEA Party activists than with oath breaking, “Bankster” puppets in Washington and on Wall Street, you’re blinded by fear, hate or willful ignorance. Perhaps all three.
Has there been a single significant indictment or prosecution for the outright FRAUD that led to the real estate market crisis? Has Jon Corzine or anyone else from MF Global or from JP Morgan Chase been indicted or prosecuted for outright THEFT of $1.2 Billion USD from trading accounts?
No. And there won’t be any such thing so long as we keep electing weasels and jackals to office, and continue allowing them to commit perjury and sedition in the name of safety and security, and continue being distracted by non-issues while the Public Treasury is looted, the Supreme Law of the Land is trampled and crimes are committed by people we put in positions of authority.
Oh, and I’m an Oath Keeper. Just in case you were wondering, though I doubt if I left any room for doubt in my statements above.
-Ken
on July 13th, 2012 at 5:01 pm
It is almost sundown, which means the ultimate Hammerhead presentations should see print Monday morning.
on July 13th, 2012 at 5:15 pm
No Ken, there was no room for doubt. No room for doubt at all.
Nice rant, by the way. Do you feel better now?
on July 13th, 2012 at 5:51 pm
Orwell21 quoth: “the tea Party is not a radical right group. thier basic principals are smaller government and less taxes.”
My dear, if this is so, why all the jingoism from the Tea, given that 2/3 of our national budget is consumed by defense spending? If you don’t want tax, don’t attack Iraq, that’s my motto.
on July 13th, 2012 at 8:50 pm
Ken,
The notion that the Second Amendment is the last line of defence against tyranny is, gently put, a wishful fantasy. It has been that way since at least the early 20th Century, maybe longer. If you wait until you think you have to use your guns then you’ve waited too late.
The guns most people own give them a good chance against a criminal home invasion but anyone who thinks, despite the size of their personal arsenal, that they can go mano a mano with any military or paramilitary force backed by the Federal or State government is whistling past the graveyard. Indulging this paranoid fantasy may, in fact, lead to behaviour that not only defies reality but could get you hurt.
on July 14th, 2012 at 9:45 pm
Erika, I think you have a point.
We can either assume the reason Obama has run the country into the ground is that he is too dumb to know any better…
Or, we must assume he is an evil genius who has manufactured the demise of this great country to recreate it in his own image of a socialistic utopia with himself as supreme leader and Rev. Wright his spiritual advisor…
Or, is he just a political puppet carefully maneuvered by the evil puppet masters of the radical left. And as such was only supported for the office of president because he is easily controlled.
I find it hard to choose just one, so I’m going with dumb, evil, puppet!
on July 15th, 2012 at 7:45 am
Dan, so basically just to make a point you are willing to vote for someone you believe is a nutcase. And what sort of point are you making anyway? I’m willing to let a rancid ultraright winger in office than to vote for a moderate who I only partially agree with. Smart stategy there :P
The similarities to the Christian Supremacists who are backing Romney despite their [accurate] belief that the Mormon Church is a bizzare cult should be noted. Apparently their shared racism, mysogny, bigotry against homsexuals, and authotarian impulses are sufficient to reach common ground.
I mean I have been disappointed with Obama (who in my admittedly small sample was the only candidate I have ever actually felt excited to vote for and not just voting against their opponent), but I’m not stupid enough to believe that things wouldn’t be worse for causes I believe in if McCain won. And that goes double for Mitt Romney who actually seems to be even worse than George W. Bush.
on July 15th, 2012 at 8:03 am
Ken, as you prove the Tea Party really is just the latest incarnation of the aptly named “Know Nothing” Party.
No, the Tea Party didn’t start until the black man was in the White House. The Tea Party is completely corporately backed by the Koch Brothers who never would have gone against George W. Bush because he was the oil company’s puppets and the Koch Brothers own Koch Energy, an oil company.
The Koch Brothers primary interest in cutting taxes for the rich, oil industry giveaways, eliminating the estate tax to assure a permanent aristocracy, etc. They likely don’t care about bigotry or racism but use it as a tool. They knew that in association with hte right wing media they could use the bigotry and outright lies about tax increases when President Obama actually has cut taxes.
The spending – again, Obama has actually been much more responsible than Reagan or George W. Bush when it comes to spending. The increases under Obama were due to including the costs of the wars in the budget.
The fact that hte Tea Party is just the latest incarnation of the “Know Nothings” is best demonstrated by the fact that the majority of Tea PArty members are elderly people who depend upon Social Security and Medicaid yet they have been led by corporate conmen to support people who want to completely abolish Social Security and Medicaid and essentially leave the elderly and people with disabilities for the wolves to devour. The fact that the Tea Party is so ignorant that one of the most commonly seen signs was “Government Hands off of Medicare” (never mind that Medicare is a government program) speaks volumes.
Basically you are a very ignorant person who has been mislead by conmen – and I’d respect you more if like the Tea Party predecessor the 1920s KKK you’d admit that you are mainly fueled by bigotry (if you ever study the 1920s Klan you know that they really were all over the place in their hatred and who to blame for the problems – kind of like the modern Tea Party). Just look at all of the laws being passed or proposed by Tea Party candidates and you can see that the Tea Party is bigoted against women, immingrants, blacks, people with education, homosexuals, Hispanics, the poor, and “liberal elitists.” The most telling laws are how Republicans across the country are trying to prevent as many people as possible – but especially if they are Black, Hispanic, female, or poor (a poor Black Hispanic Female is pretty much doomed if the Tea Party takes over everything). Much of that hatred including the anti-immingration hatred has been present among the right wing since the “Know Nothings” of the 1850s.
At least the “Know Nothings” had an appropriate name – your so called “Tea Party” which is so ignorant that they are actually protesting against tax increases for the rich (which few if any Tea Party members qualify as) but in favor of plans that would substantially increase their own taxes (the Ryan plan would dramatically increase taxes while slashing services for the middle class and poor – but it would virtually eliminate taxes on the wealthy). You Tea Party idiots are so ignorant that you are actually protesting to increase your own taxes and destroy your own Social Security and Medicaid benefits.
on July 15th, 2012 at 8:23 am
Reynardine, but hammerheads are so cool looking :)
on July 15th, 2012 at 8:24 am
hammerhead sharks obviously :)
on July 16th, 2012 at 4:17 am
As nearly as I can determine, the Silver Hammerhead, with Special Recognition for Histrionic Performance of Narcissistic Rage over Refusal to Admit Double Hearsay Evidence, goes to *Dr.* Zabetakis. A bronze Anvil to Erika. Too many dreary little tin(foil) Hammerhead lapel pins to enumerate.
on July 16th, 2012 at 5:36 am
I read the first sentence and laughed.
TPN is not even recognized as a legitimate tea party!
It was formed and is run by a GOP consultant as a PAC in 2009.
The real tea party was formed in 2007 and their candidate is Ron Paul.
But of course since SPLC is probably the largest most well funded and notorious HATE GROUP in the country, it will attack anyone with an ounce of common sense or patriotism.
I think when internet censorship comes along this group ought to be deprived of its right to be on the internet for spreading so much hate, fear and uncertainty about average people.
on July 16th, 2012 at 9:08 am
Real Tea Party, trying to claim that you aren’t racist because you are backing Ron Paul who besides being a total nutcase also published a racist newsletter using the White Citizen’s Counsel’s mailing list is not a very good claim.
on July 16th, 2012 at 9:27 am
You know, I think Real Teabagger is right! I think it’s time to admit that the SPLC IS the biggest hate group in America… We hate idiots! Honestly, it’s the last form of acceptable discrimination. But if making the world a better place by calling out morons on their outright bullcrap is wrong… well, I don’t wanna be right. So, yes, I freely admit, I am a hater against racists, idiots, dweebs, radical wingnuts, and more.
Y’know, this website fills me with a mixture of both pride for humanity and utter despair, since it shows both the best and worst we have to offer at the same time. ^_^;;;;;
on July 16th, 2012 at 9:45 am
Also, did anyone here notice Mr RTP’s desire to suppress the SPLC through the use of a censored Internet?
I thought these idiot Teahadis were strict ‘Constitutionists?’ And isn’t there something in the Constitution regarding the right to free assembly, redress of grievances, anti-establishment, and freedom of petition?
I might be missing something, but I’m sure Real Tea Party can help me out.
on July 16th, 2012 at 10:14 am
RTP just craves one of those Golden Hammerheads, but by the end of the week, he probably won’t even rate the tin(foil) lapel pin.
on July 16th, 2012 at 10:19 am
Aron, don’t you know that according to the Tea Party First Amendment, an unacceptable violation of free speech is when an advertiser pulls their ads from the Rush Limbaugh Show or that Glenn Beck is no longer availble on cable television – but its okay for the government to suppress speech for liberals because the Constitution only applies to Republicans.
on July 16th, 2012 at 10:26 am
Sorry, Guardian, you were too late to qualify for the Hammerheads this morning, and the chances of winning those for this week are greatly diminished by the probability of contestants showing up whose originality eclipses yours.
on July 16th, 2012 at 10:36 am
RTP: If the SPLC is a hate group, not to mention the biggest, then please explain who they hate.
on July 16th, 2012 at 10:46 am
Erika,
Well DUH. ;)
on July 16th, 2012 at 12:40 pm
Actually, Ruslan, I believe we hate *things* here, such as bigotry, meanness, invidiousness, and hammerheaded stupidity. Those who identify with these *things* believe we hate them.
on July 17th, 2012 at 9:50 am
Real Tea Party:
The same Ron Paul who endorsed sending Black people back to Africa?
But in True Right Wing form, you’re a one poster right? No witty comebacks?
Ron Paul??? I think I’d rather vote for “Slick” Rick Perry. I got news for you and all Tea Partiers out there. You don’t endorse racisim for YEARS and then forget about it when it’s not convenient because of the internet.
Have you ever read Ron Paul’s “faxed” propaganda???
on July 17th, 2012 at 10:25 am
Aron, I actually forgot that it also violates the free speech rights of a right winger when you accurately post what they say or criticize them for what they say.
Its also racism to point out that a right winger is racist.
on July 17th, 2012 at 10:32 am
Reynardine, I believe that RTP’s open support for censoring people who he disagrees with may well provide him with extra hammerhead points.
Joseph, when I first heard about Ron Paul he merely seemed like an amusing loon – I mean, how seriously can you take a “libertarian” who supports having the government dictating medical decisions to women? The more I learned, I found out just how toxic he is (and his son may well be even worse).
on July 17th, 2012 at 1:50 pm
Erika, Ron Paul has had scary cult following in Texas that is growing with the Tea Party. We used to get his faxes at the law firm I worked at in Houston because it was tax defense, and of course Ol’ Ron is anti-IRS.
You cannot have propaganda like that – go out on your letterheard and then say “I didn’t know what it said” to cover your tracks.
Does he honestly think people are that stupid? I hope he keeps wasting his money trying to run for President – sad thing is it just might make him a martyr and give his son more steam.
They’re all a bunch of damn…don’t get me started. Hammerhead doesn’t even begin to describe that camp.
on July 17th, 2012 at 5:04 pm
Joseph, unfortuantely Virginia has more than its fair share of Ron Paul supporters – my guess is that many of the LaRouchites (supporters of Lyndon LaRouche who are responsible for the funniest “political” thing I have ever seen – standing at a Metro station in Northern Virginia yelling stuff into a megaphone and handing out little magazines proclaiming Dick Cheney to be the Son of Satan). I think that Lyndon LaRouche and Ron Paul have similarly insane positions.
The second funniest political thing I have ever seen is the Ron Paul blimp – which originated in Virginia. Such a perfectly symbolic symbol of the man – a crazy windbag :)
on July 18th, 2012 at 9:55 am
True, Erika, but a Newt Gingrich blimp would have had more physical versimilitude. And let us not forget Gov. Christie.
on July 18th, 2012 at 10:52 am
I’m imagining a David Duke ornithopter, if only because after pissing away all of his campaign contributions, that’s all he could afford.
This game is fun!
on July 18th, 2012 at 11:06 am
Newt would definitely need a zeppelin – filled with hydrogen, of course like the Hindenburg :).
on July 18th, 2012 at 1:09 pm
Erika, he already blew up.
on July 18th, 2012 at 3:16 pm
multiple times :)
on July 18th, 2012 at 3:55 pm
Rey and Erika,
And THAT’S why you don’t dope your skin with thermite!
on July 23rd, 2012 at 9:00 pm
Reynardine,
All I’m hearing from you is Hammerhead, hammerhead, hammerhead. How about trying some intellectual input and using your words to tell me where I’m wrong. And try some actual facts ‘a piece of information presented as having objective reality’.
on July 25th, 2012 at 11:18 am
Guardian, Rey didn’t give you a real response for the simple reason that you’re not worth our time.
Try harder in the future!
on July 28th, 2012 at 9:56 pm
Aron,
Thank you once again for making my point!
It’s not even trying with you guys. You just make it too easy.
on September 9th, 2012 at 10:04 am
I would like to weigh in on this, but first, please allow me to tell you a bit about myself.
I’m an Army vet and I am a practicing attorney. I am a libertarian (lower-case ‘L’) and am also an Oath Keeper. I come from a family with a long history of military service, and was raised to believe that the Constitution, and its Amendments, are vital to our way of life.
Years ago I would properly have been labeled a conservative. Today, definitely not. I do not agree with the inclusion of religious views in governance; I do not agree that the government should have the ability to exceed the restrictions placed upon it by the Constitution. I am very much in favor of equal rights, including LGBT rights, for example, and do not believe the government should have any basis for preventing marriage between same-sex couples.
Bush frightened me, the Patriot Act scared the daylights out of me. In 2004 I voted third-party. In 2008 I voted for Obama, not only because I hoped he would follow through on his promises to change things, but also because Palin is entirely too much of a religious nut for me to be comfortable with her being in office.
So, we went from Bush to Obama. Instead of rolling things back, Obama has only built on the policies left to him by his predecessor. Not only do we have the Patriot Act, not only is Gitmo still open, but now we have the NDAA, we have drone strikes killing American citizens who haven’t even been charged with a crime, let alone convicted. We have the creeping regulation of ‘free speech zones’ which render First Amendment rights ever more impotent. We have a degradation of our Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure (think stop and frisk, as a prime example). The list goes on and on.
As a vet, I feel very uncomfortable with the FBI and DHS memos that label vets as potential domestic terrorists or extremists. It sort of makes me feel like I am being singled out for special attention, and not in a good way. When I see guys like Brandon Raub being taken into custody for exercising free speech, when I see police crackdowns against Occupy protesters…it makes my blood run cold.
In short, my beef isn’t with Democrats or Republicans. It is with both, since neither party seems to have any inclination to reign in their gross abuses of unconstitutional authority.
Obama, to me, is not different than Romney, and is not different than Bush. I could care less about whether he is half black, I served with several African Americans in the Army, and they were outstanding human beings. I cannot stress enough that my concerns do not stem from race or position on the political spectrum. It is a matter of policies that have been continued and/or expanded.
As an Oath Keeper, I do not see it as my mission to initiate a revolt or join a militia. In fact, if you take the time to review our principles, it is abundantly clear that the organization does not stand behind such things. As with any group there are some who may hold views that are not in lockstep with our organization’s mission, I cannot dispute that. However, it is worth pointing out that vast majority of us are not a bunch of tin-foil hat wearing, conspiracy theorizing, racist, religiously motivated right wing nutjobs. Being a non-partisan organization, we do not, as a group, support any party or candidate; rather, we support a return to Constitutional governance. Our members, individually, may hold certain beliefs, or support certain parties or candidates, but that is not indicative of Oath Keepers as a whole.
If that sounds like extremist screed then I can’t say anything more that might disabuse you of the notion that we are violent fearmongers.
on December 8th, 2012 at 4:50 pm
SPLC has become the governments character assassin for hire. How about all you true believers do some research and aka why the SPLC is being sued for slander by Sherrif Mack. Another honorable man routinely stacked by the SPLC. The everything is secret puppet president Obama has done nothing to change the path the neocons have blazed in foreign policy. Why do people praise the man who signed the NDAA and fought to keep it when was declared unconstitutional by Judge Forrest. He signed the Patriot Act and HR 347. His NSA is spying on every American and keeping a record. Lied about the Afghanistan withdrawal. Lied about transparency. Prosecuted more whistleblowers than all previous presidents combined. He’s fighting for dictatorial powers over the Internet. Negotiating the fascist Trans Pacific Partnership in secret.He supports the killing of civilians in Pakistan and Gaza Strip. Worst of all, he supports the private, fascist Federal Reserve and its relentless theft of American wealth and value. When are you all going to wake the hell up and see this man fore what he is? A globalist central banker puppet. The very type of person JFK and Eisenhower warned America about. All of which is easuly reserched and are FACTS! Instead you attack the very people trying to fight this madness. Our government has been usurpt by globalist/central banker interest who do not have the interest of Americans at heart. Time to wake