Stewart Rhodes introduces Sheriff
Richard Mack at April 19 rally on Lexington
Green (Courtesy Oath Keepers)
Related Articles
As we discussed yesterday, Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes appeared on MSNBC's "Hardball" with Chris Matthews. (See parts one and two.)
Colleague Kurt Hofmann, the St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner also asked "How is a vow to uphold the Constitution a 'threat'?" Matthews and his special gang-up guest, Mark Potok of the Southern Poverty Law center did their best to make it appear that it is.
Anyone at all familiar with MSNBC should not be surprised.
They started with a classic trick--focusing in on points they thought they could exploit to create a negative impression, in this case, only four of the 10 orders Oath Keepers will not obey, presented with no context, of course. And Matthews used his trademark bullying style in an attempt to dismiss Stewart's direct response to questioning.
His very first question, "Do you guys have the current firepower to stand up to the federal government?" is what's known as a "lie." The point of Oath Keepers is to stand down, and Matthews knows it.
Matthews then makes a big deal about Oath Keepers being "potentially armed." We're talking current and retired police and military, so one would expect that to be so in many cases, but again, he's ignoring Stewart's answer and trying to paint the group as violence initiators.
Notice when Stewart brings up My Lai, Matthews doesn't want to listen because it's in the past. Yet Matthews feels free to bring up whether or not Oath Keepers would have stood down in the Civil War during the discussion on state sovereignty--not so subtly equating people who wish to restore Constitutional principles of federalism with antebellum Southern slave owners.
Matthews portrays himself as "too normal" to understand Oath Keeper's points, and tells Stewart "people think you're crazy."
MSNBC fans, perhaps. But they don't think, they feel.
And again with the accusations of "call[ing] forces together and challenge the U.S. government" and "putting people together on a war footing."
Here's another Matthews trick that demonstrates for all what a dishonest debater he is. Watch at about 4:38 into the video:
You know what I think you're up to? It's creating a mindset...you want to have people in a militant environment...you keep people in a mindset of rightwing thinking so that you can achieve some immediate political goal...
Compare that to this earlier Matthews assertion:
I don't question motive...It's the worst thing you can do in journalism is try to figure out motive. There's no way to determine it.
So what is it, Chris: a lie or bad journalism?
But enough. We can see what's going on for ourselves.
Click here to watch the YouTube video of Stewart's appearance. I especially liked his rejoinder at about 5:37 to 5:41.
I also found Matthew's accusation of Oath Keepers being "a vigilante group" not just a damned lie, but more reflective of his hysterical paranoia than anything else. It truly is projection going on--that and agenda.
Likewise, if Matthews is going to suggest that unhinged people will be inspired to violent acts, perhaps he'd do well to avoid introducing the idea of "jamming a CO2 pellet" into his ideological opponents' heads.
Unfortunately, this version of the video ends before the segment is complete, so you need to click here to watch Mark Potok's hollow denial about SPLC tying Oath Keepers in with racists. He's equivocating. Because SPLC definitely wants you to make that connection.
In "Return of the Militias," Oath Keepers is lumped in with "white supremacists, anti-Semites, nativists...and a range of other activists of the radical right [that] are cross-pollinating and may even be coalescing."
I think Matthews and Potok have given us the answer to Kurt Hofmann's question at the start of this piece.
UPDATE: Here's the complete video from MSNBC.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Comments
David, you are a better man than I. I could not watch the video all the way to the end. Matthews proves himself to be a moron, a shill, a lair and a fraud. How Chris Matthews ever got as far as he did will remain a mystery for the ages.
I couldn't watch the whole YouTube segment - Matthews is such a self-serving, self-important hypocrite that I can't listen to him anymore. I got past the part where he didn't want to talk about old history like My Lai, but wants to talk about the "Civil War." His diaphanous agenda is nauseating.
So no tingle up the leg Chris? What was I thinking, Chris only gets those when he's talking to/about a gun banning socialist who's trying to ruin our nation.
rhodes got his butt whipped in that interview. matthews made him out to be a right wing lunatic that believes that the governemt is like the one in those starwars movies in which the entire republic is at the disposal of the dark sith lord who is after complete universal power and who will destroy any and everything in its way. and chris was right! i gave these oath keepers the benefit of the doubt, but after reading their site info, i believe that they are nothing more than a frienge group if not an out right militia in the making. the idea of government pawns standing up to the governemnt is a honorable one, however its nothing more than an idea. people have been repressed by government for decades, none of these pawns have stepped up and denounced government actions. maybe one or two AFTER the fact out of guilt, but they didn't have the guts to do it when it counted. and oh yeah, those who actually did refuse to follow government orders, were labeled traitors/unamerican/deserters.
Good job. MSNBC is certainly at the bottom of the rotton barrel when it comes to "journalism." Matthews, of course, got his start in Tip O'Neill's office, but even old Tip would shake his head over how far to the left the guy has come since. Oath Keepers is a breath of fresh air; good for them.
"people have been repressed by government for decades, none of these pawns have stepped up and denounced government actions. maybe one or two AFTER the fact out of guilt, but they didn't have the guts to do it when it counted. and oh yeah, those who actually did refuse to follow government orders, were labeled traitors/unamerican/deserters"
With an attitude like that, we'll be forced to find out, now won't we?
welcome to the party, Kevin. i ask you, when is the last time you witnessed government employees taking a stand to defend the people? ah that's right, you haven't. now take the blinders off and look at what i am saying, the freedom of the people will not be found in government. it will come from those UNAFFILIATED with the government. they will defend freedom and vivil liberties, not the crooked cops, or the blind servents of the governemnt. get your head out of the sky and look at the world you live in!!! read before you patronize me you mindless drone!
correction: i meant civil liberties, in sentence 4.
All I can say is wow, Matthews is a moron- he is an absolute moron!
Says Ray, presumably with a straight face: " . . . but after reading their site info, i believe that they are nothing more than a frienge [sic] group if not an out right militia in the making."
What's wrong with a militia, Ray?
in a decently run society, nothing. in a society that is as polarized as ours, a lot is wrong with it; mainly misunderstanding of what they would be fighting for. comprende?
"now take the blinders off and look at what i am saying, the freedom of the people will not be found in government. it will come from those UNAFFILIATED with the government...read before you patronize me you mindless drone!"
Wow, look who knows so much about me. Ray, you may want to check your waders.
let me put it this way....let me annoint glenn beck as the voice that calls to arms. if you have some one like him, getting these frustrated, often under educated as far as the issues of importance, people motivated and giving them marching orders...what kind of chaos do you think will ensue? to the best of my knowledge, beck is no military vet, he's not a person capable of commanding a militia, hell, he's only on tv and barking like a dog because it pays him.
now if you have people following his lead...well then a militia is not a good idea. now this oath keepers guy does not strike me as being all that much more competant. his reasoning is flawed and his motivations are seeped in if's and buts. i don't trust him with that much power either in comparison to beck.
welcome back kevin....i guess paying attention is not your strong point....if it were you'd know that mr. rhodes is comprising people who are government affiliates. i got my waders on, you sir stepped into a cowpie barefoot. now go away.
"...i guess paying attention is not your strong point...if it were you'd know that mr. rhodes is comprising people who are government affiliates. i got my waders on, you sir stepped into a cowpie barefoot. now go away."
Drat. Bested again. I suppose I'll repair now to that other place I go to screed on about how the state will save us all.
(David, sorry for the diversion. It made me giggle.)
All I can say Ray,is you must be seriously maladjusted. I happen to agree that most government employees, present and former will not, when push comes to shove, risk their pensions, let alone their lives, fortunes and sacred honor to do the right thing. But I am very cynical from living around people like you too long.
E.g., when is a better time for a militia than when the nation is so polarized? One side desiring to completely control every thought and action of the citizen and the other side only wishing to be left alone? Do you not think before you talk, or type? Is your position that militia should only exist when everybody is in agreement and that their purpose would then be to agreed while armed? Isn't that just a little stupid?
That is just one of the things I note that is wrong with your thought processes. Are you not aware that the founders of this nation in the beginning were a fringe group? Are you not aware that every advance mankind has made, [cont}
[cont] whether it be in the fields of science, mathematics, agriculture, philosophy, politics, manufacturing, medicine, sports, humanities, et. al. has been initiated by "fringe groups". People outside the accepted practices of the time are who has advanced society? Do you not know that those who proclaimed the earth was not the center of the universe and that the sun did not revolve around us were a "fringe group", a highly persecuted "fringe group"? The appellation of fringe group has no connotation, positive or negative, without the understanding of what that particular group is about. It is sophomoric of you to insist that lack of popular acceptance equals invalidity. That's an adolescent's argument.
What really clued me in to your lack of mental skills was when you called Kevin a drone and intimated he might not be bright. Kevin and I don't always agree, but unlike yourself, I always detect reasoning behind his words, even if I disagree with it.
Grow up.
With all due respect to the "Oath-keepers" and their organization, it is not a good idea to send in an honest citizen to do verbal battle with a shock jock and a lawyer with a leftist agenda.
No criticism meant to the OK's. I am really criticizing how the so called "news commentators" conduct themselves.
Always pick your battle ground when possible.
Disagree, EdinSac--I understand your concern about these sleight of mind hucksters being practiced at what they do, but we live in a mass media culture and we must master those skills as well--we need to be able to wage this fight any time, anywhere. And we need to know their arguments, the verbal traps they'll set, everything, so that we can parry and then counter. The only way you develop sparring reflexes is to spar. It also doesn't hurt to expose lying manipulators for what they are.
@straightarrow: i have a friend, he's been telling me for years how the people are waking up, and how they're going to take the planet back from the evil, the corrupt, and the tyrants. and he'll go off into a few examples of history and how some people in a few countries have revolted against the government, over thrown them, and went back to living happy little lives. my reply to him...they never had to battle agaisnt cable news now did they? this is the epicenter of my agruemnet here with you. IF you could muster a militia whom had competent leadership, a clear mission, and would be willing to relinquish their power once their objectives were met...then maybe a militia would work. but here's the problem with that idea, right now as it stands, your militia leader would be glenn beck, not this rhodes guy. its beck and limbaugh who have the power of influence of these people who only now, have the want to 'save their country'. cont.
cont. these are the same people who have done nothing for 60 years prior to 2008 and now all of the sudden, with beck/limbaugh going gonzo do these people now see the bad shape this country is in from all the years of treachery, robbery, and whorring. this is the kind of person you want in the militia? these are the leaders you want affiliated with a militia? thinking the world is flat is a huge difference from thinking the president was born in kenya! these so called militias are not made up of people who are well versed in history, law, or politics. these are people who only see that they are losing their grasp in the world and are losing their minds over the fact. they're scared; and scared people do not work well in pressure situations. you want to march them out with weapons and a license to kill. go ahead, watch the carnage that ensues. need an example? i give you blackwater(now Xe). pretty great militia there huh? they think they're christian cruesaders, like erik prince.
@straightarrow, and finally for good measure, everything that is listed under "orders we will not obey" are completely warrantless. they are speaking about fictional events that have been fabricated by, i'll use this term again so that u understand better my usage, FRINGE persons who believe that the government is out to get them and wants to take their guns away. if that were the case, that would have happened long ago. people have been polarized and asleep at the wheel long enough for just that kind of scenario to have played itself out already. and guess what? hasn't happened yet. this whole list that is on the front of the site is full of ideas that would not happen here, and u don't need a militia to see to it that it wouldn't happen. too many people freak out about a middle eastern in an ariport, do you think that the us govt could effectively confiscate all the weapons from people who have guns, including myself? u are living in a make believe fantasy and u are losing your grip.
@straigharrow
you said: "most government employees, present and former will not, when push comes to shove, risk their pensions, let alone their lives, fortunes and sacred honor to do the right thing."
now with all that said, i am glad to see that at least one person here can recognize what i mean by govt affiliates not being the ones who would save america. maybe a decent militia can do the job, but its not going to be the O.K.
The UCMJ allows for refusing Unlawful Orders. Groups like Oath Keepers that specifically target law enforcement and military personnel are dangerously flirting with sedition. They need to be watched.
Kudos to Mr. Stewart Rhodes.
He at least had the stones to step into the snake pit hosted by Matthews and stood by his convictions knowing that he was going to be painted as a malcontent, agitator, and war monger. That takes guts! Something that seems to be in very short supply of late.
IMO he embodies the outrage I and others have towards the very recent events such as the National Guard simulated weapons search in Arcadia, Iowa this past April, the wholly illegal gun confiscations in New Orleans post-Katrina by out-of-state police and federal officers, and the recently leaked Homeland Security report which classifies virtually every patriotic American and returning war vet as a potential terrorist threat, and the newly signed ammunition/gun ban in CA that takes effect 02/2011 just to name a few situations.
Make no mistake, no matter how this confrontation evolves, he who wins the public opinion debate will win, and the pro-gun supports need to become polished and media savy.
Former Marine wrote: "The UCMJ allows for refusing Unlawful Orders."
Former Marine, I have no military experience but I am curious. Has the Unlawful Orders statute in the Uniform Code of Military Justice every been put to the test? I mean a real test where the Commander-In-Chief issued orders which were refused by the Joint Chiefs of Staff under this statute?
My knowledge of Military Law is lacking to say the least in the area. Can you provide any corroborating cases where this has occurred please. Thanks.
ray, you are just too damn ignorant to debate. You build straw men, then knock them down, you assign motives and ambitions to people contrary to what they have stated and what they have shown by their actions to be the case. You conflate things that have no relationship to each other and call them cause and effect.
But worse, much worse, is you are completely ignorant of history. Even history so recent it could still be called recent events. Then you state unequivocally that the things the OK's say they will not do not only haven't happened, but couldn't happen. Despite the recent undeniable fact that they have happened,in some cases very recently. This is not my site and I won't use it all up to try to educate you. Grow up and learn something. Educate yourself, right now you're a waste of time.
Point of clarification, I said most won't do the right thing, not that none would. Look up Sgt. New on Google. He paid a price but he did the right thing,and the .gov didn't push
Great Article,
Sadly the US is heading for a second civil war and this war is very much created by those who have lent a hand in the past seven to eight wars in us history. The best way for these individuals to stir things up is to get to pit the majority against each other. It really looks like the OathKeepers are just looking to defend a very solid constitution from the more realistical tyrannical government that is now in place on our homeland.One need not apply the term crazy to this idea, one needs to open his/her eyes to the obvious. Unless we take action now as a whole,you could say we are royally#$%^ed. They say ignorance is bliss, well when you wake up to reality some say its worse than the longest hangover of your life.
Former Marine says:
“The UCMJ allows for refusing Unlawful Orders. Groups like Oath Keepers that specifically target law enforcement and military personnel are dangerously flirting with sedition. They need to be watched.”
The UCMJ is a legal code and is no better than the men willing to enforce it. The Constitution is superior to the UCMJ a thousand times over, but it too is a legal code that is no better than the men willing to enforce it. How in your wildest imagination can you believe that the Constitution is being treated as anything other than a fancy doormat by all three branches of government? How can you claim to possess the slightest shred of rationality and accept the blatant disregard for the Constitution as practiced by the current crop of gooberment baubleheads, and simultaneously blather that the OK’s are flirting with sedition! One last question for you Former: Did you take an oath, and did you hear the part about domestic enemies? That was NOT a backhanded r
opps...ran out of space. My closing comment in full reads:
That was NOT a backhanded reference to a squabble between husbands and wives!
USMC 1978 - 1985
@straightarrow
you seem like a reasonably intelligent person, the flaw in your arguement is that you are showing a bias for the O.K. you're already 'all in' on their behalf, so obviously you are incappable of arguing the legitamate concerns about this group. which makes you part of the problem, just like 'party line voters'. im expressing my concerns over this topic, and speaking of building straw men, you are trying to insult my intelligence. i believe you are nothing more than a straw man yourself. this is the first exchange i have had with you and i am sure more will come. and i look forward to them.
Matthews is very good at yellow Journalism. To bad he isn't an actual reporter.
SPLC, another name for hater. They would make great Nazis.
Hey straightarrow,
Do you have any more info on Sgt. New, such as a first name?
Olaf
Spc. 4 Michael G. New: Out of his entire battalion, he refused to wear a UN insignia cap and instead wore the "olive-drab flat cap that is authorized to be worn with the Battle Dress Uniform."
For that, he was made an example of.
See mikenew.com for details.
Not that I want to detour these comments into a discussion on that case--please all, return to opining on the topic of Stewart's "Hardball" appearance.
@Ray: Beck and Rush are just as empty suits as Obama. People with weak minds might follow them on the radio, but they could never command <i><b>leadership respect</b></i> from a militia, in real life.
Southern Poverty Law Center is a hate group. They absolutely HATE anybody who does not bow down to their agenda. No more bowing down. I am a disabled American vet who saw a lot of friends die for this Constitution. I do not really give a damn what socialists think about either me or Oath Keepers. Keep in mind that for every one new member of OK, there are thousands who WILL stand with them when the time comes.
well, see jake, that's my point. i agree back and rush are empty suits, but they are influencing alot of people and they're not doing it with anyone's interests in mind but their own. having people get fired up over their rhetoric is what bothers me. know what i mean?
The Oath Keepers were created to support a pre-existing paranoia as a way to make that paranoia seem legitimate. What if there was an organization of cops who signed an oath not to summarily execute people they arrest? Everyone would be asking "Wait, are there cops being ordered to do that?" and of course the answer is no. But if such an organization came about everyone would be asking if cops were somehow being compelled to attack civilians. The vast majority of rational law enforcement officials and former military personal know themselves well enough that they do not need to take some phony politically motivated "oath" to do the right thing. The Oath Keepers are marginal wackos who dream of dying for some noble cause that they can't even define but they are certain they will need a lot of guns to do it. My guess is they are mostly angry paranoid white guys who hate Obama and have gotten tired of playing paintball.
@Little Bob
well said!!!
Yes, just like those FRINGE Jewish business owners who said the government was out to get them in Germany. Like those Russian farmers (capitalists) who swore the government was out to get them under Stalin. There are many historical precedents for such a commitment to the people OUTSIDE of the oath taken for the gevernment job. I see neothing wrong with this and I feel more comfortable with every name that signs on board. Those who took an oath to uphold the constitution would not have observed direct orders to infringe the second amendment following Katrina (which the National Guard DID). It is obvious disingenous political spin by the government and I hope it makes them show their hand proving these gentleman right. The purpose is not violence, but rather to resist orders of violence against their fellow citizens when given in violation of the constitution. Regardless of Nuremburg, not enough people know history and will follow orders blindly.
Chris Matthews is not the sharpest tack in the box.
my apologies to everyone out there who think every post by me is, well, by me. there's some jerk who seems to want to be me. dude, pls stop posting under my name. get your own identity.
Ray, you are a perfect example of a blind follower. You state that if they wanted to take our guns away they would have a long time ago. I guess history is not your strong suit. Taking the gun issue alone, they have been trying to take them away in incremental steps since 1934. We have gone from a country where guns were commonplace and not paid a mind, to where a good little brown shirt will call the cops if they see someone carrying a gun public. Over the last 80 years the sheep, like you, have been conditioned to be afraid of an inanimate object. Please do grow up and grow a set. If that is not possible, just go away.
Oh, and where you get the insane idea Matthews destroyed Stewart? What little I saw was a pompous ass who would not allowed Stewart a chance to speak. That is how low IQ fools attempt to debate, they just shut down the opposition.
Rhodes shouldn’t even go on these types of shows it only hurts the cause.
He can get plenty of legitimate press through the alternative movement.
The Oath keepers are not some wacko group they are legitimate and are trying to educate law enforcement and the military about following illegal orders.
There are police and military that will take out Americans and confiscate guns if told to do so; this whole movement is about throwing up road blocks to that type of behavior.
Chris Matthews could not have tried any harder to asked biased, trapped questions..
He ask if he believed if people's 2nd Amendment rights could be taken away at the end of the clip.
well yes they can. Just look at Hurricane Katrina in NO. Over 1000 legally owned firearms were confiscated from citizens illegally by police and military.
It was so Unconstitutional that the court found the city of NO and the police chief in the wrong and ordered them to return all firearms.
So you see it can happen.
well Bill, im pretty much done with this thread, but i'll post one last time. chris made rhodes out to be a paranoid backwoods militia hick who was fearing events that have not yet happened and not realistic in todays society. o.k. is a group of people who are living in fear of life. they fear changing times, they fear dark skin people(yeah, i went there), they fear that their way of life is disappearing. this o.k. thing is a fad, it will die off in less that 4 years. they won't do a thing to stop corrucption, and if you ever hear of them in the news, its because one of the retards will flip out and kill a 'community orginizer' or something. these guys are a joke, if u want to show me how real you are, takeover the irs or something. until that happens, you're all abunch of xenophobic ladyboys. im done with you losers. go invade the waffle house or something. losers!
Now that "Ray" is officially gone, let's get this thread back on topic and move onto something more productive shall we?
[QUOTE from Jim]
I do not really give a damn what socialists think about either me or Oath Keepers. Keep in mind that for every one new member of OK, there are thousands who WILL stand with them when the time comes.
_____________________________
Amen, Brethren!! I am one of the Thousands...Ive been ready since 1992.....
I have no training except backyard brawls......but I have a heart the size of Texas..
And I Stand with my Brethren.......because I know the score if choose to sit....
I have a Wife and three Children to think of....not myself.....
Apparently, Chris Matthews is auditioning for thought police czar. He's stunningly ignorant.
madashell - I disagree. Rhodes was the only calm, sane individual in that exchange. Matthews repeatedly reacted with sensationalism and paranoia throwing in loaded phrases like "armed individuals" and "violence" for effect. With crazy kooks like Matthews around, that only makes me thankful that there are people like Rhodes!
Pages
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!