dagblog - Comments for "Montanans launch recall of Baucus and Tester over NDAA"

It's weird isn't it, that I

tmccarthy0 — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 20:39:31 +0000

It's weird isn't it, that I could possibly have a much more nuanced view of NDAA, in general not approving of it, but also not willing to slit my own throat by dumping people who are more often than not on my side as a human, woman, parent and citizen.

Oath Keepers are a fringe group, and simply because they purport to be doing this because of NDAA does not erase the fact that as an organization their goal is overthrow of our democratically elected government. In their view this is the beginning of their march to takeover.

I will never align with people are so obviously against the Human race as are those Oath Keeper freaks. I apologize if my opinion of them offends you. /#noireallydont

I can play this game too

A Guy Called LULU — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 19:41:38 +0000

In reply to I can play this game too

I can play this game too LULU, do you support the right wing extremist group Oath Keepers in their mission to take up arms against the United States.

You do seem to be playing a game. You are playing it poorly. You are not addressing what I said.

What does any position I might have on the Oath Keeper [I have none and have not offered one] have to do with my objection to NDAA and my support of an initiative, not necessarily everyone involved in its creation, that goes after politicians that voted for it? Do you have any political position that is not shared by some loonies around the country who are nominally Democrats and who will attack Republicans whether they are right or wrong?

I specifically said that you were not violating the TOS you are careful to only attack outsiders in ways that would violate the TOS if they were part of Dag. What I did say is that you seem to me to imply [I should have said 'sometimes'] that those here deserve the same names you throw out.

...and yet, instead of simply debating the actual facts he would much rather call me a racist, thus ending any discussion.

I did not call you anything. Did you even attempt to answer any substantive question that I asked or are they questions you would rather dodge and then hope that part of the conversation ends?

I slightly edited the line about Oath Keepers.

Hah, you are right I should

tmccarthy0 — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 19:13:54 +0000

In reply to As a former military officer

Hah, you are right I should have called them the fringe of the fringe group.

I want to write an OathKeeper blog too.. How about this: Kenya is not a state in the Pacific Ocean!

As a former military officer

Oxy Mora — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 18:56:36 +0000

In reply to I can play this game too

As a former military officer I had been thinking of joining the Oath Keepers and had some blog posts in mind,

For example, eliminate the Fed, slander OWS and call them "chickens", rag on Obama as having lied to everyone, report on my trip to the Gun Carry Convention in Kentucky, as examples, but found most of these topics had already been covered. Besides, your comments intimidated me from visiting the site again or taking up any of their causes.

Try to be more circumspect in your descriptions of what you have a bad habit of calling "fringe groups". In the case of the Oath Keepers you totally forgot to mention that the reason these guys go to bed with their guns is that they are compensating for their small dicks.

Kgb, please check your email.

Michael Wolraich — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 18:26:19 +0000

In reply to Well ... it is usually the

Kgb, please check your email. If you violate the ToS again, we will temporarily suspend your account.

I can play this game too

tmccarthy0 — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:58:51 +0000

In reply to Your argument, in affect,

I can play this game too LULU, do you support the right wing extremist group Oath Keepers in their mission to take up arms against the United States.

And just an aside, calling the Oath Keepers white guys, (they are of course) does not violate the TOS because they are in fact, white guys! And they are also dipshits who support the violent overthrow of the government and they also love them some Ron Paul.

What I didn't do is call kgb names, I didn't call him a racist, or anything, and yet, instead of simply debating the actual facts he would much rather call me a racist, thus ending any discussion.

Your argument, in affect,

A Guy Called LULU — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:49:35 +0000

In reply to That isn't entirely accurate.

Your argument, in affect, becomes an ad hominem attack on the idea behind the initiative. Do you support the part of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2011 (NDAA) which allows for the indefinite military detention of American citizens? Do you think it is a small issue? Really? Or, is it just a fundamental change in our country's legal philosophy that you would rather not have brought up for public debate because it was signed into law by Obama? Would you have called any or all Democrat/s, and there are some who earn harsh name-calling, who initiated such a referendum six years ago an 'extremist dipshit'? Maybe, I really don't know, but I do know how I would bet.

Even if the individuals who started this are totally partisan and are of bad character, do you think everyone from any point on other aspects of the political spectrum who might agree with the stated reason of this initiative also fall into the same category? Might there be anyone who agrees with this initiative be doing so out of adherence to fundamental beliefs that are very defensible?

You continually refer to people whom fall outside the parameters of the local Dag rules, and who you disagree with, using some form of 'shit' as an adjective that applies to them and imply, imo, that anyone here who does not accept your characterization must fall into the same category. Slick, but wrong. It doesn't really bother me, but I think you are type-casting yourself.

What is most awesome KGB is

tmccarthy0 — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:09:30 +0000

In reply to Well ... it is usually the

What is most awesome KGB is you can never defend what you've written, or the facts you believe to be true and when you can't you stoop to name calling. It is the Libertarian method of shutting down discussion. I talk about the article, you call me names. It's awesome!

Well ... it is usually the

kgb999 — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:05:03 +0000

In reply to Oh wait let me revise it just

Well ... it is usually the racists that point their finger at everyone else for being racist.

You prove this rule.

Oh wait let me revise it just

tmccarthy0 — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:02:39 +0000

In reply to That isn't entirely accurate.

Oh wait let me revise it just for you, "two dipshit extremist white guys in Montana who would love to take up arms against the federal government, who love them some Ron Paul" is that better?

Everything I wrote was accurate. Those two are responsible for the idea and the push to make it happen. That is entirely accurate. It remains to be seen whether or not Montanans will fall for it.