General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Maybe we should have a "I don't like Hillary" group [View all]merrily
(45,251 posts)Last edited Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:15 AM - Edit history (1)
I have posted my position on loyalty oaths many times. My position is:
At this point, it's counter-productive for a person who does not support Hillary as nominee to be taking a loyalty oath to vote for her in the general. No one in power cares how much a voter has to hold his or her nose in the voting booth, as long as they vote as desired. If loyalty oaths are appropriate at all, the time for them is when the primary ends.
Moreover, loyalty oaths remind me of Hoover and McCarthy. I find them odious, as did the Supreme Court, when the Supreme Court actually did good things for the country, like ordering de-segregation of public schools. If you think the way you and others are trying to use one has nothing to do with Hoover and McCarthy, think again. You are not government, at least not on this board. Other than that, same deal.
If you think I post lies, they should be easy to refute. If you think I am not posting lies, why shrink from facts at the pre-primary and primary stages? We are sure likely to hear what I post and more during the general. Isn't it better to think about them now? If you think I or anyone has violated the TOS, alert or bring it to Skinner's attention.
Other than that, quo warranto, you and the others who have been asking this question for months now? At least McCarthy was on a Senate Committee, vile though he made it.
Now, if you are the typical message board self appointed private eye, your knee jerk reply will be "I thought so. Thanks for confirming." If not, maybe you'll think about what I've said in this post.