An Ol' Broad's Ramblings
Dissolving Association With The Oath Keepers
Yesterday, I put up on a blog post on the Oath Keepers site. As is the norm with all such sites, blog posts must be approved by the moderator. I logged into the site this morning to find my post had been deleted, no explanation forthcoming. Considering the content of my post, I suppose I really don’t need one.
Since the moderator of the Oath Keepers .ning site has forgotten that he swore to uphold ALL of the U.S. Constitution, which includes the 1st Amendment, I am reposting the entire thing here.
Deleted post:
I was quite dismayed when I received an email from a friend this morning, linking to a post on a site I am quite fond of, and link to on my site.
February 24th, 2010
In the comments, BOHICATwentyTwo left this link to a Mother Jones article about the Oathkeepers. It was written by Justine Sharrock who visited us last year when she erred in writing an article about Adam Kokesh. Sharrock quotes folks like Glen Beck and Lou Dobbs as they praise the Oathkeepers, but I think Beck and Dobbs don’t know Oathkeepers like we know Oathkeepers. In fact, in a companion photo essay of the Oathkeepers, Mother Jones calls them “The Tea Party’s Military Wing” and they tout the participation in the Tea Partys. But on the last last page of the article, she quotes founder Stuart Rhodes, former Ron Paul
Congressional staffer on the IVAW;
After an Oath Keeper who is also a member of Iraq Veterans Against the War touted IVAW repeatedly on Oath Keepers’ Web forum, Rhodes deleted the guy’s online testimonial. “The IVAW have their own totalitarian mindset,” he told me. “I don’t like communists any more than I like Nazis.”
Yeah, Rhodes didn’t delete the online testimonial voluntarily. It took four days for members of This Ain’t Hell to convince Rhodes to take the testimonial down. It began here and ended here. What hasn’t ended, however is Oathkeepers’ support of Adam Kokesh which Bev Perlson told us earlier today. So, apparently Rhodes gets his marching orders from Ron Paul…still.
When the Oathkeepers first came to my attention, right after the 2008 election, it smelled a little fishy to me. All of the American servicemembers I know don’t need a group to tell them to uphold their oath – in fact, I take offense that Stuart Rhodes thinks they will not. Supposedly Rhodes was a member of the military – does he honestly think that the mothers’ sons with whom he served needed a boy scout troop to tell them to obey the law?
Maybe some of the assclowns who Sharrock interviewed in that article need adult supervision, but they are the exception, not the rule.
The bottom line is this; the Tea Party Movement, Glen Beck, Lou Dobbs, Dick Armey and any other Conservative group needs to back away from the Oathkeepers and their secret alliance with IVAW unless they want to be tainted by that special brand of crazy that comes with being a paulian.
The Tea Party’s military wing? IVAW? Supporters of 9/11 Troofer, Ron Paul? I’ve never even heard of Adam Kokesh.
Needless to say, I am concerned. While Ron Paul is dead on when it comes to most fiscal issues, when it comes to national security, the only way I can put it, politely…..sheets without a mattress.
I find the Mother Jones rag to be offensive to a thinking, rational person’s intelligence, but I have a lot of respect for the people at This Ain’t Hell.
If this organization is, in fact, strong backers of the Paulista types, I will have no choice but to remove myself. I stood with many others on 9/12 in Nashville, and took a very important oath. The same oath our brave military men and women have taken. It was one of the proudest moments in my life, second only to being washed in the Blood of Christ in the Jordon River. I will continue to uphold that oath.
If I am mistaken in my concerns, please let me know.
Thank you.
Since obviously, they will not allow me to ask my questions, I will be leaving the group. I, however, will continue to hold dear the oath I took, to uphold and defend the WHOLE Constitution, not just the parts that suit my whims.
Funny, I was just looking at their site….I saw an interview of the founder a couple of days ago. I thought it was a PERFECT idea. Then I researched the “Founder” and found out he’s a “Paulinista”….
That aside, the premise of the oath keepers is PERFECT, and it’s needed at this time because our constitutional rights are being infringed upon DAILY.
I loved this part “The military wing of the tea party” WTF? I’ve been to a tea party or two and I know a BUNCH of tea party faithful…Let me be perfectly clear….The whole tea party movement IS a military wing. There are enough firearm owners and avid shooters in the tea party, we don’t need a “Wing”….But it’s good to know a few good men will NOT obey some ideologues orders to limit our rights…
Oh, I agree 100% that the concept is much needed. What isn’t needed is a bunch of yahoos believing Ron Paul is the Second Coming, after Barack Hussein Obama, of course.
It is true, we are much better armed than your average liberal, but a ‘wing’ of the Tea Party? I don’t know of one Tea Partier than isn’t a supporter of the 2nd Amendment. LOL Actually, I’m fairly sure we are all supporters of the WHOLE Constitution.
I am a first time visitor.
Do you support the whole Constitution as originally written or as amended? There have been many changes as you know.
Suffrage? The counting requirements for representation that impacts Indians and Other Persons? The amount of Representatives per the population? Income taxes?
Welp, I’d like to see the 16th repealed, obviously. Seems that one violates all kinds of Constitutional issues.
That being said, what has come of that one Amendment just might not be what was intended. If it isn’t, then it damn sure should be abolished. Since I tend to believe it was the first step towards the downfall….it most definitely should be repealed!
I don’t mind counting people. I DO however mind the intrusion of the current version of the census. How many people live in the place. That’s it! The 14th Amendment dealt with the short comings of Article 1, Sec. 2, which, if I’m not mistaken was pushed by some yahoo in Delaware? Fuzzy memory hitting.
What other persons are you referring to? All LEGAL citizens should be counted, obviously. Illegals? Not so much.
(Psst! When you start a new blog, I really wish you’d let me know so I can add ya to the roll over there.
)
Thanks for the links and the kind words for our humble blog.
I’ve been having some back channel communications with several bloggers, more and more are arriving at your conclusions. Of course, the Oathkeepers won’t communicate with me or answer the questions I posed on my blog. Probably because of the way we tore IVAW to shreds last year – they don’t want to be our next target, but it’s too late.
I’m beginning to see Oathkeepers as Ron Paul’s military wing. Paul endorsed Kokesh this morning, the Paul-inspired Oathkeepers have endorsed him. Kokesh is a member of the IVAW which encourages members of the military to ignore their oaths. Kokesh illegally smuggled an Iraqi pistol back from his tour to Iraq. Why are oathkeepers supporting him?
I have been uncomfortable having Oath Keepers linked on MY blog since the founder IS a Paulinista, and I hate Paulinistas…
I think this just gave me ALL the reason I need to take that link down, us bog dwellers gotta stick together ya know!
John, y’all are a big blog, and I’m just taking up an itty bitty corner of cyberspace.
I can understand why y’all scare ‘em, but why on earth would they be afraid of my reasonable question? 
When I first checked out the site, I didn’t see a lot of Paulistas posting anything, but that has changed over the last few months. I started feeling a bit out of place, so stopped commenting, but kept reading. I was considering leaving the site anyway, and this was just the nudge I needed I reckon. Yep, us’uns gotta catch each others backs.
[...] It appears that we’re having an impact on Oathkeeper’s support. Ol’ Broad at An Old Broad’s Ramblings has just dissolved her relationship with them because of the post I wrote last [...]
I’m an Oath Keeper and read that POS, hack job of an article in Mother Jones.
It’s not my view and none of the 280 other Vet Oath Keepers that I associate with share that punk, wanna-bee militant’s view of what Oath Keepers is about.
Paulinista or whatever, the whole thing comes down to the Constitution and the feed up feeling folks have that go back further than the Patriot Act. Finally, folks are waking up to the losses of liberty and they are angry. Vengeance and redemption will be be a the ballot box, that is the Oath Keepers philosophy.
With that pistol packing, Avatar… I find it exceedingly amusing that you are against anything with a slight militant twinge.
Wow MilVet. You evidently did NOT read what I wrote. When the Oath Keeper’s .ning site denies me my 1st Amendment right to question, and hope for an answer from others on the site, by DELETING my post, without explanation, or a response, is that upholding the oath to protect and defend the WHOLE Constitution? Pay attention here!!
OB- The Constitution is about what government can and cannot do. It is okay if private companies and citizens censor you but not the State. I presume that you know this and that your point is that any organization that does not permit a public challenge is not likely to defend a challenge by another citizen towards the government. We agree on that point.
Yes, RC, that it is. And true, a privately run organization can set up rules. But I wasn’t aware that a group that professes to uphold said Constitution should be able to deny those same rights to others, i.e., anyone who poses a simple question.
Someone posted this on my Forum a little while ago. Here is what I said to the person who posted it:
<<I can tell you this much: Stewart Rhodes supports our troops 100%. I know this from PERSONAL experience. He moved heaven and Earth to get my son his ‘deployment package’ and he even sent the package overnight mail at HIS OWN expense because it wouldn’t have reached me in time to take to my son.
I have gotten nothing but support for my son over at Oath Keepers from Stewart Rhodes on down to every member, moderator and administrator. There is nothing but complete support for our troops in their literature, pamphlets and information.
I don’t know what this is all about – but I can assure you, I would not be involved with a group that did not support what my son is doing. Many of their endeavors and projects include traveling around to military bases and talking to the troops. They also supply free copies of the Constitution to deployed troops and troops state-side. They have had nothing but support for them in words and actions.
I have been a member of Oath Keepers since they began.>>
A proud mom of an American Soldier, deploying to Afghanistan in 60 days.
Stephanie, I wish you had read what I wrote. It seems you automatically assumed I was condemning the Oath Keepers out right. I was not.
I support, wholeheartedly, the work that Oath Keepers has done with our troops. I dissolved my association with the .ning group, for the reasons I stated. The 1st Amendment is part of the Constitution. By deleting my post on the site, with NO explanation, no answer to my sincere question, nothing, I question the moderation policies.
I also appreciate YOU, and the son you raised! You are both heroes in my book. Thank you!
Nope. Didn’t assume you were condemning OK at all. As I said in my post, that was my response to the person on MY forum that posted not only the conversation from this site, but parts of what was at Mother Jones. My quoted response above, was directed at the poster on my Forum, who WAS condemning OK. I just wanted you to know my personal stance on OK – at least until proven otherwise.
I have put in questions to three people at OK to respond to not just these allegations by Bev, but I want an reason for your post being deleted. I agree wholeheartedly with your sentiments about the 1st Amendment. I would hope that they would run their group without censorship.
Oh. Thought you might have been saving yourself some typing.
I appreciate that. If you ever get a response from them, I sure would appreciate if you shared.
The moderator on the .ning site has my email address, so they could have easily notified me of any problem.
It disturbs me..that all this OK bashing goes on..with bad attitudes AND info.. when its so easy to find one and ask. There are 17,435 of them registered at the main website. You found one..ask.
I’ve already heard back from the administrator for the Michigan OK. He too has heard about this and wants answers. He is working on finding out – I will certainly share whatever I learn.
I just wrote you via the Michigan board, Stephanie (PM). I hired Tim in Michigan, and have much respect for him. He will not go off half cocked, or blow smoke, and will work to resolve your issues. He has come to the OK Mod forum for answers..for you. In the meantime..how can I help?
Rex, I am the one who put up this post, and I am the one who had their post deleted with no explanation. Personally, I have not bashed anyone. If you have issues with other comments here, please direct them at the person. I, much to chagrin of many of my friends, at times, am REAL strong on that 1st Amendment.
I am not sure you understand it. The 1st Ammendment, I mean, in this context: someone above did make a clarifying point. But I am more concerned with the OK members questions. If you have them..ask…I invite them, and will do my best to answer. I would like to resolve the issue, if not, at least clarify a bit.
Well, gee, Rex, I guess I must be too ignorant to understand. Let me see if I have this right….because I put up a blog post on the .ning site, and it was deleted, no explanation, no answer to MY questions, I have no right to question the motivations behind the actions, on MY blog? I see. Got it.
Have you READ what I actually wrote? The questions were asked, and still unanswered. I’m not referring to the This Ain’t Hell post. I am talking about MY portion of the post.
Normally, I would apologize for coming across snippy, but having to repeat myself is starting to wear thin.
1. There is no “moderator” at OK. There are about twenty working the main web site board ( including me) .. and another 100 or so working 56 other boards. Blogs at national are go ..no go. IE: they stack up.. and someone makes the call to post or not. If there has been a major fire, and the blog post includes elements that will re-inflame it..most likely it would be cut. Thats why moderators exist. If it includes false charges against OK: It will be cut. OK does not support IVAW, and Stewart has written storngly agaist IVAW before this incident.. and neither Stewart nor OK supports Kokesh. After the flame up over bevs charge, posted by someone else.. and the IVAW guy problems: I would have cut your post. I spent hours documenting the denials all over the net at OK state boards. Without that fire..just days old: I would have approved your post and answered under in comment with links to document against. I did not see you blog post..but read the stuff above. It insinuates some things to be true..that are not. It does not ask a question to that point. There are literally thousands of posts a day nation wide into OK: no staff to handle responses to all cuts at national. The State Boards deal with known members, and are more responsive to anything they need to delete, and do spend much time to explain. But there (State OK boards) the posts are not held for moderation (as they are.. HERE). The 1st amendment does not include the right to make false charges against an org, on a board paid for by that org. I do understand that Stewart spent a year in DC as a new constitutional attorney on Ron Paul’s staff..long before OK existed.. that does not make OK Paulista, and Stewart..like me and you..can vote for who he wants. OK is non-partisan and will stay that way. Kokesh is running in NM.. Stewart is in Nevada. He has written at length on this issue, and all related points, before and after bevs charges.. except Kokesh..who he has nada to do with, and therefore no reason to deny an association before the fact of the charge. I do not know who bev is..or why she needed some one else to post her charges.. I did read them.. and they remain false. I do know some of the CPAC story..which may be where she became..ahhh..upset. But it had nada to do with any OK support for Kokesh or IVAW. Quote me on it: I am on the OK Board of Directors. Any moderator answering, most likely would not be. If you still have questions..I am at your service.
Rex,
I did respond to your message on the OK site, but having read your response you just posted here, I’d like to ask for clarification on Maresco. What exactly was he doing at CPAC wearing a Kokesh campaign button and bragging about having ‘gotten Kokesh to run’ for Congress, while supposedly working the booth at OK?
What is his relationship with OK? If he is a representative, has he been told this conduct is inappropriate?
Also, since it appears that OK is well aware of this exchange and that it is now making its way around the Internet (and that Genie cannot be put back into the bottle) will OK make a statement about this? Something like this is damaging and I certainly do not want my son to ever read that there is any relationship between OK and IVAW or Kokesh. (This does not mean that individuals who also happen to belong to OK cannot vote for or support whatever candidate they choose – what I am expressly talking about is the organization’s position.)
As I heard the story (reliable sources, Including Stewart) Maresco was there ( at CPAC) wearing a Kokesh pin. His right in my world. There was an OK sponsor table.. I didn’t see it..I was not there…dunno how it was set up, or staffed. I would assume it to be similar to ones I have run at gun shows. Maresco sat down..and had his Kokesh pin on. Someone who is an OK official ( not Stewart ..he was out and about) told him to take it off. Probably Chauncey Normandin BOD memebr rom FLA who was there. He did take it off. I do not know the man, or the circumstances of his presence: I can tell you he is: 1) Not a national official in OK; 2) Not in any state leadership position, and in NM where Kokesh is running..there is no State leadership yet for OK. There is not even one moderator, and only 112 people in OK NM. 3) not a working moderator anywhere in OK: I maintain the list of state moderators. I cannot say he is not an OK member, because even if I had the full name, sign in is open at OK national, and he could be signed in, in any nick. A run of Moresco or Maresco at national member logs produced no hits. I just checked ..by item… the NM OK board and he is not there (in true name). BUT: after looking about: there is a MichaelM that probably is him in NM:
http://oathkeepers.ning.com/profile/MichaelM
see also:
http://www.ronpaulriders.com/riders.html
His personal decison to sit with any political pin on ( I have seen NRA..etc..) was a bad call, and I understand it was only minutes before he was told to remove it. But not sure. I am sure of the national OK position, Stewart’s, The Boards, and mine: We do not support Kokesh..or IVAW. We cannot stop people from making the charge, and we do not screen members for favorite old or new candidates of choice.
Stewart has made statements where the flames are. The worst I am aware of was in Louisiana ..where a bunch of old Vets ( my age..Nam era) threatened to quit if it were true. The State Chapter President and I worked it for hours, till linked formal comments from Stewart cleared it up. He has already made national statements about IVAW, and one link to one of those ( posted at national) quelled it.
See Rex? That wasn’t so difficult, was it. I could have modified my post, but was never given the chance. I made NO accusations, just needed some answers. I was extremely disturbed that such an organization, for which I have a great deal of respect would have had these “attacks” leveled at it. I’m also one of the millions who watched Bill O’Reilly refuse to allow Rhodes to answer his questions, and decided I could no longer be a viewer of the show. It felt like I was getting the same treatment as Rhodes, from Oath Keepers.
As for my moderating comments? Damn skippy! Do you have any idea how many trash comments I get? I don’t care if “my site will give you a longer erection”, or “I can write your term paper” comments are allowed on others, but that won’t be happening here! I also get quite a few with language that would make a sailor blush, attacking me, and commentators. So, yes, I do moderate first timers. I do NOT, however, make it a habit of deleting comments with opposing views, unless said language is excessive.
WOW…some people here seem to think undeclared un-Constitutional wars are just fine (Congress not needed?)!! A trillion here…a trillion there…Oh Well!! Germany, Japan, and South Korea should have free military protection on OUR dime, not their own!? We should have our nose in everyone else’s business…Constitution be damned?? Would I be wrong to to call you Wolfowitz/Cheney/Kristol NEOCONS??? Give me Ron Paul Conservatism over NEOCON liberal…er…conservatism ANY DAY!! Obey Your Masters…Master of Puppets Pulling the Strings!!
Hint: It’s The Fed Stupid!!
Well, Walbangers, or, should I refer you to as a Paulbot? Either way, I’m afraid you have some major facts wrong.
Neoconservatism is a political philosophy that emerged in the United States of America, and which supports using American economic and military power to bring liberalism, democracy, and human rights to other countries.[1][2][3] Consequently the term is chiefly applicable to certain Americans and their strong supporters. In economics, unlike traditionalist conservatives, neoconservatives are generally comfortable with a welfare state; and, while rhetorically supportive of free markets, they are willing to interfere for overriding social purposes.[4] (Source)
If you would like label me, it would best if you get it right. I could possibly closer to the definition of traditional conservative. Without the Monarchy business of course. We tried that once upon a time, and look out that turned out.
I can make it easier for you. If you want to be accurate in name calling, try Christian, conservative, heterosexual, pro-life, pro-2nd Amendment, pro-U.S. Military. There are more, but that should get your started.
Read, first, the Declaration of Independence. I think you’ll find all sorts of useful information. Second, get a copy of the U.S. Constitution, and study it. Read it through, then go back and read it again, this time with your two brains rubbing together. Then, read it a fourth, fight and sixth time, if need by, until you are capable of comprehending the words, how they were put together. It’s a rather symbol booklet, you can get one free from Heritage. Carry it with you every where you go. Then, once you are starting to grasp the meanings of the words, and the document as a whole,. pick yourself up a copy of The 5000 Year Leap. You can get it from Amazon for $13.57 plus shipping. There is also quite a selection of ‘used’ copies. I’m also sure you’ll be able to find a copy at a quality bookstore in your area of Las Vegas suburbia.
Then, grab a history book. I don’t mean the type of history book they are teaching in schools these days. Those aren’t history, they’re pap! I’d suggest A Patriot’s History. The hardback is out the question, so I linked the paperback version for you.
Now, when you have been properly education, feel free to come back and discuss the merits of traditional conservatism, and the need for the U.S. Constitution to stay just as it is, and if we intend to survive, why we need to learn it, love it, live it.
The Fed sucks, I will not dispute that item, and must be dissolved at the early possible point. And I surely hope you were not calling me stupid. I’ve learn over my many years, when a person can’t express their thoughts, either from a lack of communication skills, or there are facts to present, and being at a loss of words, resort to name calling. I will assure you, I will not call you any names, unless the situation warrants it. I can’t vouch for anyone else, though.
Olbroad, You’ve got mad skills looking up stuff on Wikipedia…good for you! You’re a traditional conservative? Sounds just like Ron Paul! I’m curious…what is it you have against him? Not sure why you thought I needed a lesson on the Declaration of Independence and Constitution (got my copy here in my pocket!). Also, I have The 5000 Year Leap next to my bed and I read a few pages every night. As far as name calling goes, does this sound familiar? “What isn’t needed is a bunch of yahoos believing Ron Paul is the Second Coming, after Barack Hussein Obama, of course.”
Bottom line…I take offense when anyone impugns the name of perhaps the most honest politician in the history of our country!! I’m funny like that. When someone like yourself does it, I’m puzzled. He follows the Constitution to the letter and lives and breathes liberty and freedom…hard to argue against that!!
I call everybody yahoos. I type exactly the same way I talk, on any given subject….just with a Southern accent.
When it comes to fiscal responsibility, I have nothing but respect for Rep Paul. When it comes to national security? Not so much. Anyone who blames US for the attacks on 9/11….really hasn’t been paying a lot of attention to what has been happening in the Middle East over the last 1000 years or so.
When it comes to certain definitions, it’s a whole lot easier to do if there is a link, don’t you think?
Was it a coincidence that we have the Gulf War right at the end of the Cold War? Eisenhower warned of the military industrial-complex and anyone who thinks they don’t call the shots no matter who is President…really hasn’t been paying a lot of attention to what has been happening the last 5 decades or so!! May I suggest the brilliant documentary “Why We Fight” which clearly illustrates the nature of U.S. foreign policy and who controls BOTH sides of the aisle…here’s the link to it:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9219858826421983682&ei=WH-RS7uMMYT0qAO01d3-AQ&q=why+we+fight+documentary#
Damn Kate, you got you one of them paulinista’s humping your leg…A true conspiracy theorist… I got one for you wallbanger, how about the government taking over GM and all of the sudden, Toyota has issues that have to go before congress…. Whhoooo…
You know, kate, I’m not sure who the biggest threat to common sense is, the libturds or the morons like WB here, seems like they have a firm grasp on the constitution, but fail to remember things like:
IF we functioned as they suggest, we would have never set foot in Europe during WW2, nor would we have been to the moon (I’m sure this idiot thinks that’s a hoax too) we wouldn’t have much if any of the current tech. we have now, we wouldn’t have the ability’s that we have now… These paulbots only see the damage done they don’t look at the good things accomplished. That’s why RP will only be a thorn in the side never the side….Ok I’ll let you two continue your convo…Wall banger, hmmm, sounds like kate will banging her head against the wall while learnin you a lesson or two,….
@Robert
Leg humping! Mental image. BRAIN SCRUB!!! 
WB, what makes you think I have NOT seen the documentary? FYI, Eisenhower his took his FIRST oath of office shortly before I was conceived. Yeah…I’m familiar.
Now, here’s a little tidbit. If it weren’t for our military, as Robert has stated, it’s a real good chance we’d be flying under the Nazi flag! My dad’s parents came from Germany. Had relatives who DIED from Hilter’s actions, and US bombs, alike. My uncle was one of those who DROPPED the bombs. On my mother’s side, my uncle was a photographer for the U.S. Army Air Corps. Some of the photos of the concentration camps were taken by him.
Do NOT, under ANY circumstance, make light of the sacrifices of the men and women who have protected your freedom to be a Ron Paul supporter! You have retained that freedom, from their desire to protect this nation, and God’s Good Graces! Military complex? I thank GOD every day we have strong men and women who are willing to put their lives on the line, even in the defense of morons!
Looks like I’ve met my match with Robert and Kate. Can I count on you both to correct me if I’m wrong?? I’m human, so sometimes I do get it wrong. You both seem to have confident views on the Nazis and WWII and the involvement of the United States. We DECLARED war on Japan after they attacked Pearl Harbor in 1941. Soon after, we DECLARED war on their ally Germany. The war started in September, 1939 and FDR won a 3rd term based on non-interventionism in 1940…what he and most Americans thought was a sound policy at the time…right up until December 7, 1941!! Believe me when I say I DO NOT take our fine military lightly. My father was a Korean War and Vietnam War veteran and was buried in Arlington Cemetery in 2005. WWII was the LAST DECLARED WAR by the United States. The rest since have been illegal un-Constitutional wars…like it or not. It seems you two condone this on some level and have a shallow understanding of why we got into WWII. Like I said, correct me if I’m wrong! Robert and his ‘Pollyanna’ world-view would surely change if he took his head out of the sand and looked around a little. Can’t say I have that “Dueling Banjos” backwoods attitude you both have, but I won’t hold that against you!!
Wallbanger, it seems as though you are an all or nothing type of moron..I can understand that. Yep we declared war on Japan, but we went into Europe why? Neither Germany or Italy attacked us, so that would not be acceptable in your little tirade about legalities. YES it was declared. YES every war since then was less than stellar constitutionally, Yes you are correct, but what changed? You and your paulbot buddies seem to be stuck in the belief that we should all be running around with muskets and lead balls fighting the british…. You and your idiot buddies have lost touch with the fact that the world has changed. YES we probably could have stayed out of vietnam, Korea, Europe Iraq, Afghanistan, and a few other places but WE DIDN’T, most of that shit was done before I was born, not sure how old you are but if you were around at that time, where was the bitching then? My point is you can’t UNfuck the situation by whining about what should have been done. IT’s about what we do now.
As far as your little moron excuse for a rebuttal, I know why we got into WW2, I also know that the “Protectionism, non-interventionism” strategy cost many more lives in the long run didn’t it? I remember England and France doing a lot of appeasing before bombs started falling on their ass…
That’s my problem with you idiots, you guys are stuck on “We shouldn’t have done this or that” mentality, you whine and bitch about everything is unconstitutional, yet continue to use ALL the tools, technology and advancements made in our country that in your way of thinking would have never happened. hindsight is perfect aint it?
That’s exactly why Ron Paul will never have a chance, it’s not so much his views, it’s his idiot followers.
It appears Ol’ Broad condones ‘flamers’ like Robert on this ‘Comment’ board. I guess that’s her perogative. So Robert, you asked the question “…but what changed?” Well you tell me Einstein! There’s not much content in your posts is there? And if not Ron Paul, who did you support for president in 2008? What about 2012? What do you mean when you say “…the world has changed?” When you say “…I know why we got into WW2, I also know that the ‘Protectionism, non-interventionism’ strategy cost many more lives in the long run didn’t it? I remember England and France doing a lot of appeasing before bombs started falling on their as…”, are you suggesting that Pre-emptive War would’ve been the correct strategy for the United States? How very NEOCON of you! And don’t be saying “I remember…” anything!! You weren’t around during WWII so there wasn’t anything for you to “remember”.
What “tools, technology and advancements…” would have never happened in my way of thinking? A little incoherent aren’t you?
Continue “flaming” all you want Robert…serious debate doesn’t suit you obviously! Let’s see if you can answer the questions I posed to you though! Maybe you’ll learn a lesson or two…someday!!
Uh….I beg your pardon? First off, this is NOT a comment board. This is a blog! This is where I post links to items, and express my opinion. I invite comments, but I don’t have to. There are a lot of blogs that don’t, but I believe in civil dialog, until someone gets UNcivil. And you are pushing it.
FYI, Robert isn’t ‘flaming’ anyone, he is responding to your Paulbotness.
And yeah…a preemptive strike could have saved MILLIONS of lives. Unless of course, you don’t think there was an Auschwitz, or Bergen-Belsen, etc. FDR should have pounded the crap out of German the day after they attacked Poland!
Even though you didn’t ask me, I voted for Sarah Palin. Not John McCain…. PALIN!
Hey Wallnut, Kate has good taste, that’s why she allows my comments, she does have a flaw though, she allows yours.
The world changed nimrod, Islam became a force in the world, oppression, slavery, nuclear threats… A lot of world issues that left unchecked would propel us into another world war. By your logic we wait till we are attacked and or dragged into a conflict before action. YES we should have acted much earlier prior to our involvement in WW2, had we acted sooner, perhaps millions of lives would have been spared, A lot of AMERICANS, may not have died fighting a tyrant if the tyrant didn’t have time to become so powerful.
How about NASA numb nuts? With Ron Paul’s version of what should have been or what should be NASA would never have been funded, our space flight never would have existed, with space explorations came MANY advancements in Technology that we are using today…. You’d still be hanging out back of the barn shoveling pig sht instead of being a little piss ant on blogs…Might have been a good thing actually….
Serious debate? You paulinista’s are so full of shit it’s pathetic, there is very little debate that can take place with you and your kind. Anyone that believes 9-11 was an inside job, yet in the same breath says how stupid GWB and his admin were is a total moron. You and those like you have no credibility left, when you speak of financial responsibility is the only time you guys are correct. After that, you lose EVERYONE. Ron Paul’s federal finances is the only strength he has, and every time his followers open their mouth they lose fans for him…
And for your Info, I voted McCain/Palin, not because I liked either of them to be president, but more because the only choices were Obama/Biden or McCain/Palin. I will not defend my vote to a paul bot, if you voted for paul in a national election you should have just stayed home.
Robert wrote: “And for your Info, I voted McCain/Palin, not because I liked either of them to be president, but more because the only choices were Obama/Biden or McCain/Palin. I will not defend my vote to a paul bot, if you voted for paul in a national election you should have just stayed home.”
Voting for people you don’t want as President reduces your integrity. I recommend voting for people you do want, even when they are not running. I am pleased to say that I broke a bad habit when I stopped voting for the lesser of two evils. I encourage everyone to do the same. Be proud of yourself when you vote. Vote independently.
Reasonable…YEP that’s the truth. I never said I was “Proud” of it. But in hindsight I still in my heart believe it was the best choice. Look at those on the ballot…Obama/Biden, McCain/Palin Ron Paul and Barr along with a green party clown…Choices?
Should I have wrote in Texas Fred? Kate? YOU?
I know McCain was a poor choice, I know people that voted for Barr my question to them is “Where is he now?” if he was such a good candidate and a good possibility for POTUS, why have we not heard ANYTHING from him since the election?
Paul, I do believe McCain would have been better than Ron Paul as POTUS I’ll live with that.
Obama? Well truth be told if it was Hillary vs McCain I’d have voted Hillary, Hillary at least had an experienced voice in her household. I voted McCain strictly because Sarah Palin was on the ballot, McCain and foreign policy in this time of our world made better sense than Obama deciding factor.
What I did do is vow to fight to not ever have NO CHOICE. NO CHOICE is basically what we had in the last election, NO DIFFERENCE other than the fringe elements on both sides. I never even heard of Barr until 3 weeks before the election, and to me there was a real lack of record.
There is my reasons for voting the way I did, am I happy NOPE, but I also voted for Arnold, I voted for Reagan, I voted for Bush twice, I voted Clinton once too….Sorry to admit it, but the choice at the time was little choice. We have a two party system, we don’t need a 3rd party, we need to fix the one that is broke.
@RC We’ve all done things we regret. Shoot, I voted for Dukakis, fer the love of pete! Don’t ask.
Then, I’ll be darned if I didn’t turn around and vote for Perot, which, as we all know, got Clinton elected.
We weren’t given a choice in 2008. Basically, the media chose both McCain and Obama. I would have voted for Hillary before I could support Obama. Palin had more executive experience than Obama, so I held my nose. I disagree than I lessened my integrity. I did what I felt I had to do at the time. We had to settle. Well, we ended up with a real prize, didn’t we.
@Robert Fred can be prez. I want Biden’s job. I already do nothing, and if I can get paid for it too?
When we have terrible choices, no one wins regardless of how we vote. We have a government of lesser men now. And it is our fault in each and every state. You and I started it by voting for lesser men in local elections and by allowing each politician to do as he pleased instead of holding him (and her) to high standards.
Vote for the person best suited for the position and talk to your friends about why you are not voting mainstream any more. Vote independently.
I voted for Perot, too. And I would proudly do so again. We are not responsible for how other people vote but we are responsible for our own. Vote independently in every election.
If you believe in freedom then you should believe that having two choices is not freedom. It is control. If you accept that control then you have chosen what is important to you. If you reject that control, and vote your conscience, then you have chosen to be free no matter the outcome.
I urge everyone to vote independently. Shake and break the chains that bind you.
Well, I broke the binds of the Republican party not so long ago. Hmm.. Guess it was longer than I thought. Heh. Luckily, in my area, those who say they are conservative, actually ARE. Much to the chagrin of some the libs moving in from up there in Yankeeland. Lucky too, that quite a few of them are escaping the far left Dem control
At one moment in time, I thought a third party would send a strong message. Pffft! It’s not a new party we need, it’s the OLD party. This new RP is dragging us down to the Dems level, and I don’t like that! So, we take it back, from the bottom up! They don’t like it? TS! Like Glenn Beck said, this ain’t a circus, and we don’t need the clowns!
A Vote for PALIN/McCain=Explains non-intelligent, uneducated, blowhard opinions, war-mongering, name-calling, uninformed pontificating, etc. from O’ Broad and Robert
Sarah “Africa is a country” Palin?? Glen “I was for the bailouts before I was against them” Beck?? Really?? What a couple of dopes you are!! How does it feel to be irrelevant?? Wait..I take “dopes” back…since it’s acceptable for Robert to use it, you’re BOTH MORONS!! I could care less what you two feeble-minded hicks think and I’d advise you to refrain from breeding!! Palin’s Katie Couric dopey interview:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbQwAFobQxQ
And that Kate is a libturd meltdown. A vote for McCain, while something I can sure as hell live with better than the vote you cast for Obama, or the one you threw away with Paul….Don’t cry walbanger, I understand you don’t take truth too well, eventually you will grow up and listen a little. Until then ya piss ant find something else to do besides blow ol Ronny boy.. You are a bit annoying but no worse than a gnat.
Kate, Honestly I thought this wallbanger fellow would last a little longer before he went all china syndrome, I guess the libturds are getting softer and softer… Sigh..too bad I was so enjoying schooling the prick.
Robert, isn’t it a shame there are so mentally ill people right now? I was under the impression they had medication for this condition, but I suppose if they don’t know they have it, they can’t really be helped. sigh… Such a shame too.
Oh, well, fun while it lasted.
RE: Glenn Beck Try EDUCATING yourself headbanger, before you flap your gums.