Should Patriots Allow MSM Into Their Homes and Lives?

 In 2nd Amendment, opinion

Should patriots allow a liberal media organization inside their private life to report on it?

A lengthy article posted in the Washington Post recently about a Patriot and the Oregon Constitutional Guard may have looked objective to the reader…but actually, there were subjective messages in it, if you look closer.

patriot

BJ Soper speaks at a rally- youtube screenshot

The liberal view of the world 

In an article entitled “Primed to Fight the Government,” Washington Post writer Kevin Sullivan, along with photographer Matt McClain, spent time with B.J. Soper, the leader of the Oregon Constitutional Guard.

But the title tab that pops up when you pull up the article says “These ‘patriots’ want to protect the Constitution …by any means necessary.” That notation comes up quickly and disappears quickly, so you have to pay attention. Hover your mouse over their tab- you won’t be able to screenshot it easily.

Screenshot 2016-05-24 08.10.27

That is not the title, it’s something else entirely, and sets the tone of their article. Note the quotes around ‘patriots’ and the notation of ‘by any means necessary.’

OCG headed to pick up bottles and garbage, Screenshot from video by Washington Post

Target #1 – B.J. Soper and family

The liberal view of life is that people shouldn’t own guns, or if they do they can’t have “assault weapons” or anything that isn’t on their restrictive lists.

Mr. Soper showed the Washington Post reporter and photographer his AR (which liberals view as an assault weapon), and that he was teaching his children – and in particular a 4 year old daughter- how to shoot guns.

The very FIRST paragraph puts his family in jeopardy from liberal socialists… and Child Protective Services:

“B.J. Soper took aim with his AR-15 semiautomatic rifle and fired a dozen shots at a human silhouette target. Soper’s wife and their 16-year-old daughter practiced drawing pistols. Then Soper helped his 4-year-old daughter, in pink sneakers and a ponytail, work on her marksmanship with a .22-caliber rifle.”

Target #2 – the Oregon Constitutional Guard

Mr. Soper heads up a group of about 30 people that he created called the Oregon Constitutional Guard. But this article put that group directly in the crosshairs of the government, and a photo gave the government some of their faces.

The article states,

“The intent is to be able to work together and defend ourselves if we need to,” said Soper, 40, a building contractor who is an emerging leader in a growing national movement rooted in distrust of the federal government, one that increasingly finds itself in armed conflicts with authorities.”

And then there is this little gem:

…Those in the movement call themselves patriots, demanding that the federal government adhere to the Constitution and stop what they see as systematic abuse of land rights, gun rights, freedom of speech and other liberties.

Law enforcement officials call them dangerous, delusional and sometimes violent, and say that their numbers are growing amid a wave of anger at the government that has been gaining strength since 2008, a surge that coincided with the election of the first black U.S. president and a crippling economic recession.

Please remember what happened to Ammon Bundy, et al

The Washington Post has used several word choices that are an attempt to make you believe that these are a bunch of fringe extremists that are most probably racist because they came about after the “first black president.”

Can we as patriots PLEASE learn something about dealing with liberals – whether it’s the Washington Post or anyone else? As Outlaw Morgan told me, “never ague with someone who is willing to defend a lie.”

Liberals are ALWAYS willing to defend a lie. And in this case, they probably believe their article is quite “balanced.”

They mention that Mr. Soper was at the Bundy Ranch standoff in 2014. They mention that he went to the Malheur Refuge, though they mentioned he was there to ‘calm down the hotheads.’

They encouraged him to give his interpretation of the Constitution and posted a counterpoint from a law professor who disagreed. They marked his concerns about the federal government as part of the wider “conspiracy theory” about the New World Order.

I wouldn’t be surprised if at some point in the near future, Mr. Soper, his family, and his group were embroiled in a snarl with the Oregon government or the Feds. It’s not a “feather in your cap” to be featured in a liberal publication…it’s downright dangerous.

Leave a Comment

Start typing and press Enter to search