Jonathan

The Left's New Darling Dingbat

Recommended Posts

Mickey Mouse

Disney has their "Club 33" that costs $40,000 to join and $15,000 annual dues.

33 is the number of the freemasons, who worship Lucifer, who also happens to demand human sacrifice.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is Rush Limbaugh's take on AOC's Eat The Babies townhall meeting.

He talks about Larouche and everything.

Who Knew the Green New Deal Was a Cookbook?

:)

The one thing I didn't know is that AOC has "moved on" from impeachment and said so in the townhall. It took too long for her millennial brain attention span and she got bored. :) 

That actually sounds about right.

Michael

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

The one thing I didn't know is that AOC has "moved on" from impeachment and said so in the townhall. It took too long for her millennial brain attention span and she got bored. :) 

Tim Pool thinks AOC punked Pelosi big time, albeit inadvertently.

Instead of my millennial brain quip, he called her "fickle." :)

Essentially, she roped Pelosi into this impeachment thing by taking a leadership stance with the press behind her, but now that it looks like it's going to backfire like "muh Russians!" she says she is bored and walks away leaving Pelosi holding the bag.

:)

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Here is Rush Limbaugh's take on AOC's Eat The Babies townhall meeting.

He talks about Larouche and everything.

Who Knew the Green New Deal Was a Cookbook?

:)

The one thing I didn't know is that AOC has "moved on" from impeachment and said so in the townhall. It took too long for her millennial brain attention span and she got bored. :) 

That actually sounds about right.

Michael

Michael,

I know how much you like or have liked them (as have I) so I’m sorry about how this is going to land but I think I currently have this partial list of fake on-our-siders:

Jones, Palin, Beck, Limbaugh.

(When did Napolitano turn? I noticed maybe two days ago that he did.)

I have thought this about Rush since before Trump got the nomination. He stood out to me at that time as not being part of Trump’s movement and as faking what he knows.

Rush was McStain-positive, for example, long after it was plain to everyone at his level of engagement and knowledge that McStain was a very shitty individual.

He’ll turn on Trump, very late, but we’ll see it. 2nd term.

I pulled this from the Rush link you gave:

“He (LaRouche) was absolutely insane. (LaRouche believed that) Henry Kissinger was the seat of the New World Order — and he pronounced his name “Kiss-singer.” He’d said, “Kissinger is going to destroy the world, Kissinger and his crowd.”

It was all rooted in the New World Order from the Trilateral Commission and all that.”

Kissinger is the seat of the New World Order and they were planning to eliminate 90% humanity* and both the Council on Foreign Relations and Trilateral Commission had Jeffrey Epstein and Kissinger for a members. (These orgs have CIA and FBI Directors for members as well, so it is a bit more uncomfortable than usual claiming ignorance of what Epstein was about.)

I don’t know exactly who was in charge of whom in their big sick world, but we need more attention on it, not the belittling that Rush engaged in, and at this late date it is inexcusable.

I know it sounds thin, a small tell, but it is another in a long, long series. He is Operation Mockingbird. His job will be to tear a bunch of Trump supporters away from Trump when the shit hits the fan. (His job has been fake opposition to [Them] to fill the space that real truth-tellers could fill and pose no actual harm by restricting to screaming loudly only that which had already gotten out and was being discussed anyway. This way no real opposition, only ineffective “opposition puppets” you control and who will not hit you anywhere soft and yet who your targets by the millions take for sincere voices of their movement.)

Speaking of Op Mockingbird and Council on Foreign Relations, many, many mass media personalities, authors, newscasters are members. This list appears to be ten or fifteen years old, but will do:

Many of our major network news anchors and media members belong to the CFR. 

NBC's Brian Williams is a member. So is CBS's Katie Couric, ABC's Diane Sawyer, and MSNBC's Mika Brzezinski. Former anchors Dan Rather (CBS) andTom Brokaw (NBC) are also members. Other media members include Bob Schieffer (CBS), Barbara Walters (ABC), Judy Woodruff (CNN), Paula Zahn(CNN), Lesley Stahl (CBS 60-M Minutes), George R. Stephanopoulos (ABC),Jim Lehrer (PBS), David R. Gergen, (CNN), Fareed Zakaria (CNN), Terry Moran(ABC), Charlie Rose (PBS), Rupert Murdoch (NewsCorp/FOX), Bernard Kalb(CNN), Morton Kondracke (The McLaughlin Group/Roll Call), and Garrick Utley(NBC/CNN).

Print journalists and columnists include Katrina vanden Heuvel (The Nation),Peggy Noonan (Wall Street Journal), David Schlesinger (Reuters), Judith Miller(NY Times), Gene Lyons (Salon),  Charles Krauthammer (Columnist), Marc A. Thiessen (columnist), David E. Sanger (NY Times), David Remnick (The New Yorker), Jack Rosenthal (NY Times), P.J. O'Rourke (Columnist), James L. McGregor (Journalist), Jon Meacham (Newsweek/PBS), Daniel P. Henninger(Wall Street Journal/FOX), Jim Hoagland (Washington Post), David B. Ensor(Journalist), Monica Crowley (Talk-Radio), Sidney S. Blumenthal (Salon), andMark Helprin (Time)

* For example, see Georgia Guidestones. Masons talk a lot about over-population, too. Who erected it and who controls that land is not clear to me. But rumor is that it is Turner, Ted Turner (CNN)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Jon Letendre said:

I know how much you like or have liked them (as have I) so I’m sorry about how this is going to land but I think I currently have this partial list of fake on-our-siders:

Jones, Palin, Beck, Limbaugh.

(When did Napolitano turn? I noticed maybe two days ago that he did.)

Jon,

Man, do we disagree.

Except maybe about Napolitano. I saw him turn months ago. He got it into his head that President Trump was going to nominate him for the Supreme Court and, when that didn't pan out, he turned. Now he's probably taking money generated by the anti-Trump wing at Fox (led by Murdoch's kid).

Each of the people you mentioned have their own personal problems, with emphasis on personal, but each of them follow their own stars. To me their stars are bright.

I don't see them collectively as Operation Mockingbird-like elitist wolves in sheep's clothing like you do--tools of the CIA. I see them honestly believing in what they do.

I can get pissed at times with what they believe in (like Beck suddenly taking on the role of an Old Testament prophet leading his flock to the promised land), but I see a basic goodness in all of them.

And even when my total trust has been broken like with Beck, I can still appreciate how he gets the right ideas distilled into layman's language and injected into the mainstream.

Like it or not, the American market actually works as it is supposed to. The crony stuff is a cancer on it, but the market itself exists. Each of the people you mentioned (except Napolitano, who took a ride on the media of others) made their fortunes doing it the old fashioned way of creating a product people in a target market love and putting in a shitload of hard work to sell it. Even Sarah Palin did that in her own manner.

That's what President Trump did, too.

I admire them all.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jon,

Specifically on Rush, if you try to see his work through his eyes and not yours, you will see what he is getting at.

He believes the only way to fix the world is defeat the Democrats since they are the biggest expression of a worldview he finds toxic. He is all in with the Republican Party as his bedrock, but gets pissed at them when they wimp out. It's like a family thing where you get pissed at your brother for acting like a fool, but he's still your brother. 

Defeating Democrats and the political influence of their worldview for him is foundational. First principle level.

I don't see an Operation Mockingbird connection with him at all and I'm pretty good at spotting this.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MICHAEL wrote: Defeating Democrats and the political influence of their worldview for him is foundational. First principle level. end quote 

I don't listen to Rush like I used to, but I haven't heard him say something I disagreed with for a number of years. I found an old letter I sent to Rush from about ten years ago, saying I did not like McCain but the only way to defeat Obama was to get together a John McCain and Hillary Clinton as VP ticket but I still have trouble not gagging  when I say that. Would McCain and Clinton been better than Obama? That is a tough on

This is from another letter I sent to Rush about McCain.

Joe Lieberman would be a good running mate for McCain because Joe is a mensch. Joe Lieberman would be a good running mate for McCain because Jews are rich 🐵 A lot of Jews live in New York, and as you may know, Joe is a Jew. He is a certified Jew. McCain may not be able to carry New York but it would still help with his popular vote. What if Hillary’s home state went for McCain? Hoorah!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Jon,

Specifically on Rush, if you try to see his work through his eyes and not yours, you will see what he is getting at.

He believes the only way to fix the world is defeat the Democrats since they are the biggest expression of a worldview he finds toxic. He is all in with the Republican Party as his bedrock, but gets pissed at them when they wimp out. It's like a family thing where you get pissed at your brother for acting like a fool, but he's still your brother. 

Defeating Democrats and the political influence of their worldview for him is foundational. First principle level.

I don't see an Operation Mockingbird connection with him at all and I'm pretty good at spotting this.

Michael

If that's the way Rush sees things, then the issue wouldn't be his being a plant ("Operation Mockingbird") but instead his being partly a dupe.

Reality is pretty much Democans/Republicrats - both run by behind-the-scenes higher-up global dominionists.

Sounds like Rush is at the place where Jon says he was four/five years ago - seeing things as presented on the surface.

Ellen

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Ellen Stuttle said:

Sounds like Rush is at the place where Jon says he was four/five years ago - seeing things as presented on the surface.

Ellen,

That would presuppose unawareness by Rush.

And that would be a mistake. He has frequent interactive access to a lot of heavy hitters, I would say most of them. Even his enemies.

If you look at the current cultural slide into the collectivist muck as a war and Rush as a general focused on a critical stronghold of the enemy, say a major logistical supply chain (which can be a kind of halfassed metaphor for the Democratic Party), and like a good soldier, he stays focused on his objective, it would be inaccurate to claim this focus is an indication that he is clueless that a war is going on and that other generals are targeting other objectives.

He merely lets other generals fight those other battles.

Sometimes he branches out and fights a different battle. For example, he believes (as do I) that an entire generation has been indoctrinated through the educational system here in the US into thinking that socialism is the best political system ever created and that the US is the cause of all evil in the world. So to combat that effectively, he doesn't focus on the lost generation. Instead, he targets those who are even younger by teaching them American values. To do that, he wrote and published a string of massive bestsellers aimed at young people, the Rush Revere series.

Notice that Rush does not have a social media problem. He doesn't use it. He does not have a cable TV news problem. He mostly stays away. Yet his popularity and influence is massive in the heartland--on the friggin' radio. It's so massive that major politicians often often schedule announcements to fall within the time he is on air or outside of it, depending on what their goal is. And we're talking about radio. Rush made radio this powerful of a political weapon. This is an indication of an extremely disciplined mind that knows how to stay focused.

I accept Rush for who and what he is, not for who and what he does not target. Within the restrictions he has put on himself, he is doing brilliant work.

No one will ever see him run for president. It's not within what he has chosen for his life. Also, I have yet to see someone take apart the thinking of Democrats and the culture that drives them to act politically better than him.

I think President Trump sees him exactly in this manner, too.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For people interested in the dingbat, Tim Pool just did a pretty good wonky discussion of her political electoral situation right now.

The big news from this video is where she gets her campaign money.

Less than 2% comes from her district.

Guess who are the biggest contributors to her campaign?

Google
Facebook
Amazon

Think about that for a minute.

Isn't that weird?

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...