[marktwain]

It his hard to believe that people such as the author of this article can be both so incredibly naive and ignorant, and dangerous to the country as they are. Sharon Angle also swore an oath to uphold the Constitution.

Has Paul resolutely refused to read any history? Has he ignored all the articles about Venuzuala and Hugo Chavez? Does he think that the domestic enemies mentioned in the oath of office are simply place holders because the person who wrote the oath wanted to make it more wordy?

It is hard to read the article, which tries to be sarcastic and fails miserably, without thinking that the oathkeepers are a very nice thing to have around today.

[HuntsvilleTxVeteran]

I have my CHL and I am a proud member of Oath Keepers.

[GoCards]

Full court press here huh. So obvious. Should have caught Maddow last night it was disgusting.

[no dems]

They're self-described "patriots," who have pledged to uphold the Constitution (just like the president!) if it's threatened.
HECK YEAH!!! Where can I send her a donation?

[Eagles6]

It was clueless libs like the author, along with the hard left and racist "non-whites"(as they call themselves)that elected "commander zero".

They will not ever understand what this is about.

[rocksblues]

(Though you do wonder where these guys were, say, five or six years ago.)

What the heck is this maroon talking about?

[ASOC]

Article 90, UCMJ

“Any person subject to this chapter who—

(1) strikes his superior commissioned officer or draws or lifts up any weapon or offers any violence against him while he is in the execution of his office; or

(2) willfully disobeys a lawful command of his superior commissioned officer; shall be punished, if the offense is committed in time of war, by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct, and if the offense is committed at any other time, by such punishment, other than death, as a court-martial may direct.”

The Oath keepers is a great idea, but ‘if you choose wrong grasshopper, you will pay dearly’.

There is a difference between an illegal order and a manifestly illegal order. An illegal order can be in contravention of general legality, such as orders to make improper use of facilities, go beyond the speed limit in a military vehicle. A manifestly or patently illegal order applies to the protection of persons (civilians, prisoners, medical personnel and clergy), medical facilities, places of prayer, monuments, etc. (this list is not exhaustive). The US distinguishes a patently illegal order as one which orders someone to commit a crime.

[Oldpuppymax]

So people dedicated to the Constitution, the right to keep and bear arms and who are prepared to take on a criminal, tyrannical state are now “fringe” according to this writer??!! Well THAT sounds just about right! The US was founded by a bunch of fringe KOOKS, wasn’t it!!

[DTogo]

The Oath Keepers, with chapters in every state, are one of those fringe groups that share an ideology with the prototypical villain from the show "24."

HA!

[Kickass Conservative]

I support the Tea Party and I own a 44 Magnum. I haven't given much thought to Fluoridation of the drinking water though, but I do know the Oath Keepers are people that love and respect the Constitution of the United States.

Wow, I must be some kind of nut. I hope Jack Bauer doesn't come after me.

[Still Thinking]

Of course, were Angle to win her race, she too would be part of the federal government that the Oath Keepers find so nefarious.

If you're going to do the normal journalistic sleight-of-hand with logic, you'll need to practice more. They don't object to the existence of the federal government. How could they, all they say is that they won't do anything violating the Constitution and the Constitution specifies the existence of a federal government. What the OK object to is any attempt by the government to claim or to use more power than granted by the letter and spirit of that document. For any government that intends to fulfill the roles outlined there using no more than the powers it grants, you'd think that would be a completely non-controversial position.

[JenB987]

The people who founded this country would be considered traitors, miscreants, fringe and radical under today’s Obama regime. They are also the people who went down in history as war heros, countrymen and faithful fighters for liberty for themselves and all future generations. They are revered (at least by those of us who care about such things) for their desire, foresight and tenacity to see this country flourish.

Sick to know that those same men would be lambasted as fringe nut jobs in today’s society.

The Oath Keepers, the Tea Parties and all Conservatives will one day go down as the next group of successful freedom warriors.