Media discovering Oath Keepers: part two

October 20, 11:24 AMGun Rights ExaminerDavid Codrea

Previous Next

20 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Gun Rights Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

  Courtesy Oath Keepers

---

Related Articles

• Media discovering Oath Keepers: part one

In part one, I refreshed readers on what Oath Keepers is and gave some background on Stewart Rhodes, the driving force behind the movement. Now that the "mainstream media" is in the process of discovering the group, it's important to ensure their message is heard amidst all the lying accusations feeding off the Southern Poverty Law Center's agenda-driven and calculated hysteria.

I'd be remiss in not crediting WorldNetDaily as being the first big media outlet to recognize and accurately report on Oath Keepers, as well as to follow up on the manufactured hysteria. I also think they'll forgive me if I don't characterize them as "mainstream."

Ditto for G. Gordon Liddy...

The current media interest has been sparked by a Las Vegas Review Journal story. The headline contributes to the hysteria:

READY TO REVOLT: Oath Keepers pledges to prevent dictatorship in United States

The subhead contradicts the violent implication:

Group asks police and military to lay down arms in response to orders deemed unlawful

Reporter Alan Maimon does present both sides, recognizing "middle ground of opinion is hard to find." Comments to the story reflect this, and those coming out against Oath Keepers seem to base their entire argument on name-calling, ignorance of what the group stands for, and a predisposition to offer uninformed and opinions as obnoxiously as possible. Left unsaid is what orders these apologists for the state think should be obeyed without question, and whether the judgment at Nuremberg that "only following orders" is no excuse still applies.

With the publishing of the LVJR article, other "big names" are noticing. Glenn Beck told his radio audience about Oath Keepers on his October 19 Premiere Radio Network program, observing this about SPLC fear and hate-mongering when they called the group "A particularly worrisome example of the Patriot revival.":

Boy, what would our Founding Fathers say? Just on that sentence? ...The people saying the government is getting too big and too out of control--all they want to do is make sure you keep your oath to the Constitution of the United States.

Also weighing in is conservative commentator Patrick J. Buchanan, who just published "Alienated & Radicalized" with this perceptive assessment:

Prediction: Brother Rhodes is headed for cable stardom.

And if the Pelosi-Reid progressives went postal over town-hall protesters, calling them “un-American,” “Nazis” and “evil-mongers,” one can imagine what they will do with the Oath Keepers.

They'll try doing it tonight on "Hardball." Stewart Rhodes will face Chris Matthews, he of "Bill Clinton is the voice of God" and "Obama sends a furrowing up my leg" fame. Stewart tells me they are trying to set up a debate with Mark Potok of SPLC. (I do hope if they start in with accusations of violence someone gets a chance to ask Chris about jamming a CO₂ pellet in Rush Limbaugh's head...)

And they're trying right now: The heavily-visited Little Green Footballs blog dismisses Oath Keepers as "very bad craziness," inciting their enuretic comments mob into a state of very bad craziness, indeed. One way to ensure this is by squelching any dissent:

You can promote the Oath Keepers at some other website, because you're not welcome at LGF.

Only those in agreement need apply.

But my personal favorite comment illustrating the mentality that attacks men like Stewart comes from the "progressive" Media Matters:

Fill the jails with these oath creepers.

Gee, that wouldn't be hate I'm detecting in that political prisoner-taking mentality, would it? And just "Wow." Think about what this twisted creature just endorsed. What a useful idiot.

Still, if anyone in "authority" were inclined to issue such orders, wouldn't it be nice if maybe there would be those in the ranks who would remember their oaths, and who would refuse to obey such evil, un-American orders?