Posted on 02/19/2010 1:53:24 AM PST by Suvroc10
Is the Tea Party-connected group, the Oath Keepers, an "extremist right" group as the partisan bomb-throwers on the left have been fond of alleging? That's the proverbial question of the day as Oath Keepers founder, Stewart Rhodes, made an appearance on the self-proclaimed "humble correspondent's," Bill O'Reilly's, No-Spin Zone. His appearance was the direct result of O'Reilly opening up this question of so-called "radicalism" among Tea Party supporters by hosting committed left-winger, Mark Potok (handsome devil, if you call overly gelled, curly hair and overly big eyeglasses "handsome"), of the Southern Poverty Law Center on his show a day before. The whole crux of the matter is basically that leftists like the Southern Poverty Law Center insist on raising the alarm about allegedly "dangerous" groups like the Oath Keepers because they apparently operate on "crazy theories"—like, oh my God, respecting the Constitution!! But are they really "extremists?"
(Excerpt) Read more at associatedcontent.com ...
BOR the bloviator strikes again!! I’m really wondering about him. Who’s side is Bill on??
Bill’s side. Period.
How can all of the Libertarians and moderates in the Tea Party movement really be from the far right?
Please remember that the Left says that Focus ont he Family is an extremist group along with any concerned parent that is “overly interested” in their childrens education.
The left wants blind and mute adherrants. They do not want you questioning it. To do so makes you a racist, bigoted homophobe, lying, extremist.
So what if they are connected? IMO, Oath Keepers is an honorable organization that people should respect. I appreciate BOR giving them a few minutes on his show to balance the attacks made @ them by the SPLC activist the night before.
I looked it up on the web today. Didn’t see anything extremist at all. The worst that can be said is that they have beliefs that indicate distrust of our government. There’s no advocacy of violence, not even any applauding of violence that I saw.
Essentially, they appear to be on record saying that if they are ever given illegal orders that they will not obey such orders.
Are US soldiers believers that the senior military leadership will inevitably issue illegal orders? After all, they are regularly instructed not to obey illegal orders.
O'Reilly is a clown and apparently hasn't ever been in the military. Soldiers are trained that it is their duty to refuse illegal orders.
Who cares what the socialist think. They caused problem and now its time we kick them out and start over. I don’t care if Washington is dead locked for the next 20 years.
They didn’t mention NAMBLA being coonected to the left? LOL
Does that include refusing orders from an illegal Commander in Chief? Because by my count, there’s only been about two who’ve had the balls to do that so far.
The courts will have to ultimately decide that, but hasn't Obama's admin backed down on each of those and recanted the order for deployment? It would appear that Obama is shy about having the case worked out in the courts.
That certainly happened with Cook. Not sure what happened with Rhodes though, I’ll do a bit more reading. What a sight it would be if the whole of our armed forces did this; Zero would have to show or go.
BOR is a good reporter, an old-fashioned kind of crusading journalist, but he definitely has limitations due to his background, class and experience.
BOR is wrong on environmentalism. He's wrong on Amnesty. He's wrong on guns. Recently, he had Mark Potok on from the Southern Poverty Law Center and did not identify the SPLC as a left-wing organization, which has put out biased reports on the right side of the political spectrum. SPLC's attack on the Oathkeepers is just another in a long line of smear attacks using the cover of a 'Civil Rights' organization. Why didn't BOR know this or if he did, why didn't he point this out?
SPLC is the ACORN of civil rights organizations.
“BOR the bloviator strikes again!! I’m really wondering about him. Who’s side is Bill on??”
BOR’s side. He’s quite a bit further to the left than I’d prefer. I recall when the Supreme Court made the ruling permitting corporations to fund political speech, he expressed concern that one might now “buy an election”.
No mention was made of 0’s expenditure of over $1 billion by turning down public funding, which he had pledged to accept. It was something like three times as much as had ever been spent on a Presidential campaign. I fail to understand why this is NEVER brought up.
“BOR called the Oathkeeper’s position on guns “extremist”, but it’s Federal Law.”
Yes, thanks for reminding me about this. Stewart Rhodes said a couple times that regular people should never be disarmed, it’s against the Second Amendment. BOR clearly disagreed, saying that in an emergency where there’s widespread looting, the government should be able to confiscate weapons.
I guess BOR is too stupid to realize that law-abiding citizens need the weapons to defend themselves AGAINST the looters and other lawless types - possibly including government entities. He called such a common sense position (endorsed by George Washington BTW) “extreme”.
i’m confused... i thought the oath keepers were the ones where LEO, military and ex-military take an oath to uphold the Constitution.
since when did that become an extremist view point???
WTF
An “extremist right” group is anyone who doesn’t shut up and give the liberals everything they ever wanted in their miserable worthless lives.
'nuff said.
No. He was never in the military. He went to college and after his 4 years college was complete (and his draft deferment ended) he became a teacher (a whole other deferment). If he hadn't have gotten a high number in the draft lottery I'm sure he would have been a teacher until the ripe old age of 26. When he brags about being a teacher, people of my age know exactly what that means.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.