Saturday, June 27, 2009

IN DEFENSE OF NATE HANSEN

MC trusts its readers to be educated enough to recognize Delacroix's "Liberty Leading The People." MC otherwise thinks little of the French Revolution and for the good reasons put forth by most historians. Dead bodies withstanding.

On a demonstrably less murderous note, MC understands that our friend and frequent critic Nate Hansen, Juris Doctor, has come under sustained attack. Why? He attacked, in the comments section of the online Pioneer Press, Joe Repya's article in which he attack the RPM, said he was leaving and invited other Republicans to leave with him.

MC addressed both of them here.

Since then, Nate has been attacked from many a source. Some were veterans. Some were people who lost out to his Campaign for Liberty ticket for higher office in the 4th CD. Both are misguided.

MC first wants to set aside the ridiculous notion that Eva Ng, conservative candidate for mayor of St. Paul, had anything to do with Nate's attack on the military. She did not. Eva is a true and fast friend of our men and women who have served and do serve to keep us free. Just ask her husband, a retired (not that there is any such beast) Marine. Better yet, ask Eva! We ask those of you who have kept us safe to think about these things. Support your supporter: vote Eva.

Some in the 4th want Nate to be removed. This is a serious mistake. He has done nothing to warrant such. His enemies have no ammunition except words that would tend to prove his worst remarks. Why do this? Certainly they have not followed the rules, of which one especially anal retentive critic would be bemused to find himself wanting. Hi John McC!

Do we want to be a party that cannot take shots? Can we not fight back against those with whom we disagree and still fight on?

The idea that we should dispel Nate Hansen is Bolshevik. MC wants nothing to do with it and will fight for him to the end. Yes, yes, we know Nate has called us both Neocons and Communists.

Just because he was comprehensively wrong doesn't mean we shouldn't be right.

We are absolutely certain if the tables were turned, Nate would be on our side.

MC thinks this is why we are in the same party and mean to keep it.