Good thread for you to read over on Twitter, and it hits on what has been on my mind about this effort to ban Marjorie Taylor Greene from public life. He talks about resisting the Democrat Words of Power which freeze debate. Noting that we’re allowed to talk about tax cuts (but not spending cuts!) and nothing else because whatever else we want to talk about will be called racist, sexist, homophobic or what have you and our “leaders” get terrified when such accusations fly…and they then proceed to knife whomever is the current target of Democrat ire because, they are sure, if they can just show the Democrats that they aren’t “one of them”, they’ll be liked and respected.
I don’t really know much about Greene. I had heard about her when she won the GOP primary in the R+27 Georgia 14th, which meant that she was certain to be a Congresswoman. If you take a look at her Wikipedia page (Wikipedia is worthless as a source of info on anything remotely connected to politics: an army of liberals continually edits the entries to keep them current with whatever the Liberal Narrative is) you’ll see that she’s called a Conspiracy Theorist. Maybe she is, maybe she isn’t. The bottom line is that I don’t care if she is. This is not because I support Conspiracy Theories but because I know what is going on here:
- Any time we point out the rank corruption and hypocrisy of the Ruling Class, that is called Conspiracy Theory.
- The purpose of calling us Conspiracy Theorists isn’t to exclude Conspiracy Theories from the public square, but to exclude our dissent from the public square.
The Democrats have it as an article of faith – and if you are of the Left and dissent from this, you will be ruthlessly excommunicated – that “hands up, don’t shoot”, happened. It absolutely did not happen. Witness statements and forensic evidence proves conclusively that nothing of the sort occurred. But it is an article of faith. It is one of the prime supports for the liberal argument that America is an inherently racist nation which has racist cops hunting unarmed, innocent black men. “Hands up, don’t shoot” is a Conspiracy Theory. And, as I said, it is an article of faith on the left. No one expounding it is excluded from public life. And this is just one of scores of Conspiracy Theories that the Left embraces and celebrates. And now we’re supposed to be all worried that they are accusing one of ours of being a Conspiracy Theorist? We’re supposed to turn on one of our own and hound her out of public life on the Left’s say so?
Sorry, but that is bullsh**.
We’ve been playing this game with the left for a long time – every since William F. Buckley led the charge to purge the John Birch Society from the right. To be sure, there were some kook aspects to the JBS – but any coalition of people is going to have oddballs. But pause for a moment to consider what the JBS wanted to do – work at the grassroots level to prevent leftist influence in American life. They weren’t really out there to capture the GOP Presidential nomination…their brief was to work with things like the local school board to defend America against what they saw as a concerted effort by domestic and foreign elites to subordinate American life to the dictates of a Corporatist and Socialist world order. Now, doesn’t that strike a bell? Doesn’t that seem like what we’ve got here in the United States in 2021? That, just maybe, if the right had had a grass roots efforts working on school boards and such in the 1960’s and 1970’s we wouldn’t quite be in the position we find ourselves?
Buckley went after the Birchers primarily because, pottering between Manhattan and his swank home in Connecticut, he didn’t want to be associated with those grubby people. After all, how does one explain a relationship with some Bircher to John Kenneth Galbraith and Gore Vidal? The Birchers were “those people”. You wanted their votes and their donations to your magazine, but you didn’t want them around you…and you certainly didn’t want any of your liberal friends to think you respected them! The price for Buckley to remain in the club, as it were, was to divorce himself from normal people who, maybe very inarticulately, still managed to understand that what was at stake was a way of life. Buckley leading the way, the right shifted away from trying to stop socialism at the school board and, instead, embarked on a campaign of lowering taxes and military confrontation with the USSR and assorted “liberation movements” supported by same.
To be sure, this was some useful work – but, in the end, the tax and regulatory policies simply worked to move our manufacturing to the third world and while defeating the USSR was a good thing, it was useless by 1991 as by then the worst aspects of Marxism were firmly implanted in American education and entertainment. We traded a scary looking parade of missiles in Moscow for a Stalinst re-writing history textbooks to say that America is an inherently racist nation. Which turned out to be the real threat? The chances that the USSR’s nuclear missiles would ever be fired at us were near zero. We’d be better off today with the parades in Moscow but no Marxists in education. Essentially, the Conservative movement, purged of the Birchers, did the exact wrong thing.
For many decades after our defeat – after, that is, we had decided that we wouldn’t work to prevent Socialist infiltration of American social and economic life – the normal people still kept faith with the purged right. We gave it our money and our votes and they kept telling us, promise!, that once everything was all set, they’d get around to addressing our fears that our jobs were going away and some real lunatics were forcing their views on American life. But, hey, what do you know: each time we got them into power, it turned out the only thing they could manage was a few tax cuts and the bombing of some poor, brown people. Reagan campaigned on dissolving the Department of Education. The damned thing had only been created in October of 1979: Carter’s payoff to the teacher’s unions for support in 1980. By the time Reagan was sworn in, it had only been in being for 15 months! Shutting it down would have been easy. We held the Senate. The Democrat majority in the House had been severely reduced. A bit of hardball and the Democrats would have signed off on terminating the effort. But, nothing. Now its 41 years in – and the Department of Education under Biden is going to start pushing local schools to impart even more egregious anti-Americanism into the curriculum. And this was Ronald Reagan! Not some Bush squish. Even Reagan left us high and dry.
But, we still kept at it. And again and again and again, we were betrayed. Even when we awarded the GOP with undisputed control of the American government in 2002, still no movement in our direction. No reform of entitlements. No curbing of immigration. No programs to restore American manufacturing. Just some more tax cuts and some more poor, brown people being bombed. At last we had had enough: and so Trump came in. And it was we normals who put him in power in spite of the best efforts not just of the Democrats, but of our own “leaders”. It was our triumph.
And then look what they did to him, and to us: slanders flew fast and furious. He and we were racist, sexist, homophobic Nazi dictators. Our “leaders” joined in the chorus and worked diligently with Democrats to hamstring every Trump effort to address the issues we cared about. In spite of all that, Trump did quite a lot and we were delighted. So much so that 12 million more of us voted for him in 2020 than had in 2016. But our effort was nullified. We are sure it was by fraud; but by hook or by crook, we know for certain that the entirety of the American and larger global Ruling Class had united against our champion. Whether or not fake votes gave Biden the victory, we know full well that if Trump (and we) had merely been treated fairly, the election would have been won in a landslide. So, now Trump is gone. We have no leader to defend us. And what are the Democrats and the Conservative leaders doing? Trying to make sure that our mere concerns are illegitimate. Make no mistake about it – the campaign against Marjorie Taylor Greene is not an effort to keep lunacy out of politics (the Ruling Class is absolutely insane), but to keep us out of power.
The slander campaign against Greene is an effort to tell us that we had better keep our mouths shut. That if we do speak up, anything we say can and will be used against us. That whether we say silly things or not, what we say will be presented as pure evil…and huge pressure will be exerted to get GOP office holders to go along with squashing our champions. They want us silenced. They want anyone who might decide to assume a leadership role among us to be scared off the task. They want our side to be lead by milquetoast compromisers who will sell us out for a tax cut. They want the GOP to purge the Birchers one more time – but this time, completely. They want, in the end, the GOP leadership to condemn their own voters as Deplorables.
Whether or not this campaign will be ultimately successful depends primarily upon our reaction to it. If we keep strong and keep pressure up on our own GOPers, then we can ride out the storm – and maybe even teach the GOP a lesson that vast power awaits them, if they’ll simply stop caring what the Democrats are saying. Don’t play their game any longer. “You’re a racist!”. “F*** you.” That’s all we need say – because it doesn’t matter what we say. Whether we condemn loudly or fight back, the Democrats and the MSM are going to call us racists, sexists, etc. Look how many times Trump condemned white supremacy – it didn’t matter. They just kept pretending that he hadn’t. And for all the True Conservative worries that this accusation was going to collapse Trump’s support…well, after being called a racist for 4 solid years, Trump did better than any GOPer among minority voters in 50 years. And, as I noted above, likely would have done better but for the slander campaign…which campaign was made vastly more effective by “Conservative” voices joining in. Had we been a united front, our faces set like flint against our enemies, Trump would have crested 90 million votes.
If there is to be a purge of the right, then let is start with a purge of all those on the right who are going after Greene. Let them be the outcasts. We don’t need them. In fact, it is suicidal for us to keep them because we know that every time the Democrats work up a slander campaign, they will join it. We must defend people like Greene. Not because she’s anything special, but because she represents us. She stands, at this moment, for each of us. If they get her, they get all of us. Self defense require us to defend her. And if we can do so – if we can keep her in office in spite of their efforts – then we will have finally and at last started to roll back the left.
Blogs For Victory 
We often talk about all the promises Trump made and kept, all the things he accomplished, in spite of being hounded by his adversaries 24/7, that made life better for the average American. The one thing we rarely talk about is the number of average Americans that became active in the political process because of Trump. The last time an incumbent president had an increase in votes over his first election to the extent that Trump did — AND LOST, was Martin Van Buren in 1840.
Now, to be sure, a great many of the people who became political active because of Trump voted against him. We’ll never know the exact number of even a close approximation, because a lot of states, most certainly the closely contested states certified vote totals that they knew were inaccurate.
So where will the mood of the voters be in 2 or 4 years? Will the 80 million who allegedly voted for Biden be champing at the bit to give him even more power? My guess is that, with no one to vote against, a huge number of them will stay home. Will those who oppose his policies turn out in numbers too large to be overcome by cheating? I wish I had a functional crystal ball, but my sense is that the majority of Americans are going to be fed up with Leftist governance long before November, 2022.
…my sense is that the majority of Americans are going to be fed up with Leftist governance long before November, 2022.
And my sense is that if we have a lick of sense we will nudge this disillusionment along and help it develop into resistance.
Again, we need to drop identifiers such as “Democrat” or even “Joe Biden” and focus on messaging of structure: This is what happens when power is consolidated in the hands of a few. This is what happens when people who think they are elites who know what is best for the earth, for the United States, for the people, have the power to impose their visions upon us.
And “every person who wants to silence opposing points of view is exposing his or her Inner Tyrant and we need to pay attention to these people and think about what life will be if they gain complete control.” No one wants to think of himself as a tyrant, or be seen as one, and it will help people who know budding tyrant wannabes to be able to identify them and see them for what they are.
This is the time to point out that the Constitution is not archaic, or outdated, but is a rule of law that protects citizens while making sure they retain personal liberty to pursue their own goals, dreams and aspirations. That we are experiencing the abandonment of that concept as the Constitution is ridiculed and ignored in favor of petty tyrants assuming the right to dictate what we should want, what we should do, and how we should think and feel. We need to remove the imagery of “tyrant” from the big picture of meaning only a president or king, and bring it down to the level of the individual and how he believes individual freedom should, or should not, be allowed.
This is the kind of pressure each of us can exert on the people around us. This is the kind of messaging that will build in scope and intensity if we are coherent and consistent in our communications with the people we know and come in contact with. Not to attack individuals like Biden, et al, because that prompts defensiveness and when people feel pressured to defend a person or even a particular party—and Identity—- they become irrational and unreachable. But ideas are different. It is a lot harder to defend the concept of consolidation of power in the hands of a few who feel they have the right to make decisions for all of us and then impose those decisions. In fact, it is a lot easier to discuss things like this and even agree with them in the abstract, which is an important first step for those who are not used to thinking in terms of ideas rather than emotions.
a lot of states, most certainly the closely contested states certified vote totals that they knew were inaccurate.
And in some states, if not all of them, this is a felony. It can and should be prosecuted and this is within the authority of each state’s Attorney General. Yet so far at least not one of them has had the backbone, the integrity, the courage to do anything.
Think of the simple message this would send. It’s not about who won or lost, it’s not about how votes should be considered to belong to one candidate or another. It is about the responsibility of the citizens of any state to elect officials who will follow the laws, laws ranging from how to conduct an election to how to count votes. And it is a reminder that the failure of citizens to do this means their votes will not be counted as well as a reminder that the reason we have penalties for breaking laws is to discourage lawbreaking and it is the responsibility of our law enforcement officials to apply those penalties for that reason.
I have a question: why is it that the Dems forgot to defraud down ballot Republicans? Surely while they were changing votes WRT Trump, they could just as easily have defrauded the other Republicans on the same ballots. But they didn’t. What’s up with that? Are they really that stupid? I mean they way it is, they’re going to have a very tough time passing any of their pet projects.
I’m not a mind reader, but my best guess would be that losing a dozen or so House seats wasn’t even on the Dems’ radar. It was supposed to be a blue wave — all the polls said so. Democrats were counting on winning as many as 20 or 30 seats. In several close races that were decided by a handful of votes, the Democrats were still trying to find ballots for weeks, and in a couple cases, months after the election, so in that aspect they were true to form — keep counting or re-counting until you win. Another factor, and I don’t know how prevalent this was, is the fact that there were, by a number of accounts, a lot (how many is anyone’s guess) of ballots that contained only a vote for Biden and no down-ballot races.
The last undecided race is still not resolved.
Another factor, and I don’t know how prevalent this was, is the fact that there were, by a number of accounts, a lot (how many is anyone’s guess) of ballots that contained only a vote for Biden and no down-ballot races.
Why is it “anyone’s guess”? If it’s “anyone’s guess”, how do you know it happened? Is it just because Trump lost? That would be called a tautology, and it is blatantly illogical.
Rico, you appear to be arguing that because no one was allowed to physically examine the ballots that were identified by multiple witnesses as having only votes for Biden we don’t know this happened? How convenient.
As for your delving into your dictionary for a ten-dollar word, you need to use it properly. Whatever you think “tautology” means, it doesn’t have anything to do with the belief that if evidence is withheld that means it doesn’t exist, much less that the validity of hidden evidence would depend on who might benefit from its revelation. Or whatever it is you are trying to say. (speaking of “illogical”, another improperly used word in this context)
A tautology is the unnecessary repetition of an idea, statement, or word whose meaning has already been expressed. My favorite tautology is the common phrase “VIN number” which, of course, means “Vehicle Identification Number number”.
Bundles of ballots were seen by multiple witnesses, ballots alleged to represent mailed-in ballots as they were not among the in-person ballots counted separately. These bundles not only showed votes only for Biden, they showed markings so precise they appeared to have been done by a printer and were identical on all the ballots seen, and furthermore the ballots were not folded, meaning they had not been in envelopes, meaning they had not been mailed. These ballots have been withheld from examination, which would approach them on several criteria: Were they folded, were they marked by a printer, and would examination of embedded printer code show that they were printed by the same printer?
The “anyone’s guess” comment referred to the inability to know exactly how many of these evidently fraudulent ballots were counted—or how often they were counted, as there is a video of at least one bundle of ballots being run through a counting machine several times. It’s pretty easy to understand what the phrase meant, as it was linked to only one concept—that of not being able to know with accuracy how many of these ballots were counted. You know how I know that? Because that is what he said: a lot (how many is anyone’s guess) Do try to keep up, and just for grins start trying to respond to what was actually posted and not those voices in your head.
Rico, you appear to be arguing that because no one was allowed to physically examine the ballots that were identified by multiple witnesses as having only votes for Biden we don’t know this happened? How convenient.
Of course people were allowed to examine the ballots — the ones that were authorized to examine them. So you appear to be arguing that somehow Democrats managed to infiltrate the official vote counting process with a huge bunch of partisans willing to commit a major crime, while at the same time somehow preventing Republicans from any role, even in Republican dominated states. It seems to me that that would require an amazingly large cabal involving many Republicans as well as Democrats, and one which was organized into a national conspiracy. That strikes me as an extraordinary claim. And you know what they say — extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. But you don’t seem to have any — at least none that makes it from the right wing fever swamp into an actual courtroom. And because it can’t, one therefore has to assume that the courts on may levels and jurisdictions are all involved in the conspiracy as well. And if all of that is the case, if we can’t trust neither the election process or the courts, then by definition our democracy is dead and we live in a banana republic. And yet, especially considering how extensive the conspiracy is required to be in order to buy into it, down-ballot republicans (as has been already pointed out) did pretty well. That makes for a very crazy conspiracy. I think it’s a whole lot easier to say that Trump lost — not the Republican party.
Whatever you think “tautology” means…
A tautology is an argument that cannot be proven false. It is thus not a logical argument.
In several close races that were decided by a handful of votes, the Democrats were still trying to find ballots for weeks, and in a couple cases, months after the election, so in that aspect they were true to form — keep counting or re-counting until you win.
I imagine that both sides were looking for ballots in their favor all the way through. But what you’re talking about here is a couple hundred votes at most, NOT tens of thousands (or hundreds of thousands). It’s much easier to claim fraud in such cases, because a certain amount of fraud happens in every election. Massive fraud, on the other hand, requires an equally massive conspiracy. And there simply is no evidence of that — unless, of course, you believe in unicorns, too.
Back to the sneering insults, I see. It’s mildly interesting that you are unable to make an argument on its merits, without resorting to some infantile personal attack in an effort to denigrate the other side. It’s a pattern—-declare what you claim is an absolute truth and then say that anyone who does not accept it suffers from some sort of mental deficiency. Or is “absurd”.
Amazon: It’s mildly interesting that you are unable to make an argument on its merits, without resorting to some infantile personal attack in an effort to denigrate the other side.
Hahaha!! So says the amazon of adhominem attacks. Pretty funny!
bicker bicker bicker
So desperate for attention
By the way, Do you believe in unicorns?
Your reputation for silliness, inanity and superficiality is well established. You can quit reinforcing it
Amazon: Your reputation for silliness, inanity and superficiality is well established.
Well, I will admit to a certain affection for the absurd. I guess that’s why I like you so much. 😉
Meow. Cattiness is soooooooo manly
Well, that and your insistence at getting the last word. It’s so endearing.
Is this supposed to be a serious question? With some of these trolls it is hard to know what is a seriously intended query that just illustrates ignorance or just an effort to post some nonsense because that is the job of most trolls.
My understanding, regarding the Dominion system, is that these machines were programmed to shift a certain percentage of votes from Trump to Biden—not a huge percentage, because that would have called attention to the fraud, but a percentage based on analysis of how many votes would be needed to overcome what was predicted to be a slight vote advantage. As a theoretical example (as we don’t know the precise calculation of how many votes would have to be shifted based on original election predictions) let’s say that every machine was programmed to kick every 50th Trump vote over to Biden. That programming was not terribly complicated and could be buried in the code. To expand that to the down-ticket candidates would have been more complex, calling for specialized programming for each state and then, if working on House candidates, each district in each state. The focus has been on the vote manipulation of the presidential part of the election, but it is certainly possible that in some key states the programming did include the Senate candidates, which would not have been overly complicated.
The Dems were smugly confident that they would gain seats in the House, so rigging the House votes wouldn’t be necessary.
The theory posited after the election was that this strategy of gradual bleeding off of Trump votes blew up when the sheer volume of Trump votes “broke the algorithm” and by midnight or so it was obvious that simply moving every 50th vote to Biden (or whatever the calculation had been) would not be enough. There was no way to gradually overcome a 300,000 or so margin. So all vote counting had to be stopped, which coincidentally happened at the same time in the four states where the focus on vote shifting had been concentrated, and the Dems had to go to Plan B, or Plan H, or however far down the alphabet they had to go as one plan after another fell apart. This why subtlety was discarded as it became necessary to run off photocopies of ballots to run through machines, sometimes several times, not even taking the time to fold them so they would look a little more like they had been mailed in envelopes.
That just addresses the machine fraud aspect. We can guess that people who voted twice, or who voted illegitimately for other reasons, voted the entire ballot.
The point is, there is proof that fraud did occur. The frantic efforts to qualify the fraud in one way or another—-“not enough to change the outcome” or your own “then why didn’t it extend down-ballot?”—-don’t change the key factor in all of this which is WE DON’T HAVE ANY WAY TO KNOW WITH ANY DEGREE OF ACCURACY WHO GOT HOW MANY VOTES.
Which is why certifying uncertifiable vote tallies should be prosecuted because the states, at least some of them, actually have laws in place making this a felony.
Is this supposed to be a serious question?
I guess not.
My understanding, regarding the Dominion system, is that these machines were programmed to shift a certain percentage of votes from Trump to Biden…
The funny thing is, every state had a hard copy of every ballot that was counted. That hard copy was independent of any voting machine, so the allegation that they were somehow changed by the voting machines should be easy to confirm. And yet they weren’t — everywhere where a hand recount was done came up with essentially the same numbers that the voting machines delivered. So it’s a little hard to argue that the voting machines changed the votes. And yet Sydney Powell, among others, still claim that voting machines were responsible — a fact that the Dominion company mentioned in their $1.3 billion defamation suit against her. So, here’s a perfect opportunity for Ms. Powell to actually show her “kracken”! Of course, if she doesn’t, she’s toast. Likewise, Mr. Giuliani. Lawyers have an obligation to tell the truth in court. And that is exactly why Mr. Trump has had a hard time finding lawyers to defend him.
Rico,
Have a printer at home? Just checking.
Now, print out a document with 2 check marks at the top and nothing but text below. Might be a little too complicated for someone “without a “mail merge” type program but if you have one (many available for free) try it again with all down ballots selected for whomever. 2 selections –practically zero. 15 or 20 selections over a couple of seconds each.
Crap. Takes a lot of time to fudge ballots when time is critical–lets leave off the down vote.
Gosh, that sounds very impractical — not to mention traceable.
Much more difficult, actually. Voter fraud can only be successful when you have total control over the count process. In GOP and GOP-leaning districts, that total control is lacking. Democrats managed to get around it in CA using “ballot harvesting” but the GOP nullified it in 2020 by simply harvesting their own ballots.
It works like this – and it worked exactly like this on 11/3 – you have total control over an area. You wait until you know approximately how many votes you need to win and then, presto, you come up with them. Mostly because you’ve already got them pre-filled and usually with votes only for the race you particularly want to steal.
I know you’ll never believe it, but it is an absolute certainty that Joe Biden is in the White House today because of voter fraud. There was nothing that could really be done about it due to cowardice on the part of the GOP leadership and the Courts. But, moves are already afoot to apply Florida’s standards for the future in the contested States and that will make a repeat of 2020 much harder to do. This was about the most blatant bit of fraud in American history. It would have made Daley and Johnson blush. It also pretty much ensures – because even GOPe squishes don’t want to lose like that – that this is the last time it can be this successful. It was an all-in push to get Trump out. They were terrified of him having actual control over the Executive come 2021. They hoped to beat him legit…but they always planned on fraud as their back up.
I think you just proved my point — that you have to believe in an extraordinarily massive conspiracy that involves not only Democrats but “cowardly” Republicans as well as courts in numerous numerous levels and jurisdictions. And if you believe that then you can’t have much faith in our democracy.
I have not followed the Marjorie Taylor Greene saga, or the QAnon hysteria. The only reason she came up on my radar is because she is clearly Target # 1 for the Left. I am sure that Lauren Boebert will be next. The Department of Personal Destruction isn’t going to lay off any of its eager participants just because they lost Trump, they will just turn to the next person in line. And, like all predators, they will try to take down those on the fringes of the herd, those with less protection. In this case, that means the two newly elected women, especially given the fragile majority held by Dems in the House.
I still get Erick Erickson newsletters, in spite of asking to be removed from the mailing list. I used to think he made some good points but I watched him hit a death spiral of TDS that destroyed any respect I ever had for his judgment or character. In addition, when a self-styled “political pundit” depends heavily on the term “leg-humping” he loses credibility, at least in my mind. But the other day as I was getting ready to dump Erick’s latest whatever as I emptied my junk folder, I took a minute to see what he said about Greene. And, true to form, he was all in regarding the smear campaign.
So this thread is timely. I read it, followed some links, and came to a long and detailed rant on why Greene must be considered radical, loony, beyond the pale, dangerous, whatever. I waded through it, and found it to be heavily based on simple snark. One example of the objective analysis of some of Greene’s old writing:
No lie, I think my favorite part about this article is that Greene doesn’t seem to know that writing “The Clintons” or “The Podestas” doesn’t require an apostrophe, because their names aren’t fucking possessive. Oh, her double exclamation marks when she proudly, and in bold font, proclaims: Make American Great Again!! For emphasis!! Just!! In!! Case!! You!! Didn’t!! Understand!! How!! Serious!! This!! Is!!
Wow. What compelling political analysis !! And then it just gets funny.
But it’s not just the bad writing that’s a problem here—it’s the bad journalism. Greene relies on completely unreliable sources and blatant conspiracy theory to weave a false story about the tragic 2016 death of DNC employee, Seth Rich.
Yes, this overheated screed finds disinformation based on “completely unreliable sources” leading to a “blatant conspiracy theory” to be proof of lunacy and disqualification to hold public office. But I’ll bet he was on board all the way on the “Russian collusion” conspiracy theory about Donald Trump, so clearly based on “completely unreliable sources”.
This is an effort to be a hit piece, but it is as hard-hitting as a third grade slam book where jealous little girls try to outdo each other in petty insults about some targeted victim.
Actually, as I waded through the allegedly damning evidence of Greene’s defects and lack of character I found the examples to be, for the most part, proof of her qualifications to be in Congress. Not to say she was always right, but she seemed to be always wanting to find out what is true and what is not, and always had the courage to speak up, ask questions, and admit when she was wrong. I look forward to her being in the House, and hope she makes life miserable for the boot-licking Leftist lap dogs who will do whatever they can to smear her and get rid of her.
BTW, this “little blue dots” poster, whose vitriol and hysteria have gained him a whopping 13 followers, is not only another fan of the “leg-humping” imagery, he sounds an awful lot like one of the trolls who regularly tries to squirm his way into this blog.
Just before I came here and read your comment, I noticed on Twitter that #ProsecuteBoebert was trending. Its like you know how these people “think”, Amazona!
I have been studying the Left for about 3 decades now, watching how the same tactics and strategies resurface time and time again. The Left is remarkably predictable once you understand its agendas and its rigid control over its followers. If you have ever been to a large commercial aquarium and seen the swarms of sardines, thousands of them swimming in unison as if they are a single organism, you have seen an example of the Left.
I have noticed that this swarm of Leftists has chosen QANON as a focal point, believing it is a point of weakness that can be built upon. Boebert’s opponent made a big deal out of a couple of casual comments by Lauren indicating that she was a little curious about some QANON allegations after her mother called her attention to them, and I remembered this when I saw the attack on Greene focusing on QANON. Also, Boebert (1) is boldly outspoken; (2) basically challenged AOC and The Squad (whom I think of as The Pack because they remind me of mongrels who get what passes for courage by being part of a pack) and (3) is openly pro-gun, pro-open carry.
And possibly living in the wilder parts of the West gives me a little more exposure to how packs of predators work, targeting those on the edges of the herd who are more exposed. A big cat will usually go one-on-one with its prey, but scavenger types like hyenas, jackals and coyotes will pack up and isolate a target, wearing it down and then savaging its legs till it can no longer run or stand before ripping into it as it falls. The Left has always worked like this, targeting what it thinks are the weaker elements of its opposition (in this case being new and not yet fully assimilated into Congress with a developed support system) and having what can be exploited as a point of weakness (alleged QANON sympathies).
What sets predators in the animal kingdom apart from their human relatives is that when a pack of predatory scavengers isolates a chosen prey and sets upon it, members of that prey’s herd will not then turn on it and help the carrion eaters take it down and destroy it. There is no Mitch McConnel equivalent in the animal world, no Mitt Romney watching from the sidelines to be ready to jump in and help the predators take down their prey.
If you have ever been to a large commercial aquarium and seen the swarms of sardines, thousands of them swimming in unison as if they are a single organism, you have seen an example of the Left.
So, which states did the sardines vote in? Were they just the ones bordering an ocean, or were there farm raised anchovies involved? And where do Republicans like Mitch McConnell, Bill Barr, Republican election officials, and the courts fit in? Are there anchovies involved there, too?
The Squad (whom I think of as The Pack because they remind me of mongrels who get what passes for courage by being part of a pack)
Gosh, I think I’ve identified something we agree on! I’m not a fan of The Pack, as you call them, either. But likewise, there are plenty of Republicans “getting courage” by being a part of the pack as well. Just look at Greene herself — when confronted by McCarthy she disavowed many of the beliefs she espoused in the past. That’s not very courageous. I don’t know if she disavowed that thing about Jewish space lasers, though. I wonder how that would work. Is it a legacy of the Reagan Star Wars program from long ago? Now THAT would be a conspiracy I could get behind!
I’m not going to defend QANON because I don’t know enough about it to do that even if I wanted to. But I can address a tactic of the Left that might apply to the reputation that suddenly arose, as if orchestrated, around QANON.
Because I avoid social media like the plague it is, I was never aware of what was apparently a claim by an anonymous person about some wrongdoing at high levels of government. This seems to be a summary of the core Q posts: Followers of the QAnon conspiracy theory believe there is an anonymous figure inside the federal government, known as Q, who has inside knowledge into President Donald Trump and the deep state, and allegedly provides cryptic clues for people on the internet to decode. Many also believe that the government is hiding a secret report by the Justice Department’s Office of the Inspector General
If you take out the phrase “allegedly provides cryptic clues for people on the internet to decode” the rest of this core analysis of the original Q is not that far-fetched. As one Q follower said, “Q” really was a government whistleblower revealing the truth about the world.
Add to this the idea that Trump was aware of Deep State activists, an idea supported by his speeches about the Deep State and the swamp. There was a belief, shared by people who never heard of QANON, that Trump posed a very real threat to the Left as he not only understood what the Left had accomplished in penetrating the American government he was going to use his position to start weeding out the embedded anti-American activists.
What I am getting at is the core of the original alleged whistleblower reports is not only quite believable, it is consistent with what the president said and did.
So what could the Left do about this kind of amorphous, unidentified, unidentifiable, source of information that was gaining so much attention not just nationwide but all over the world? It couldn’t shut it up. It couldn’t make it disappear. So the only thing to do was contaminate it by posting statements and claims alleging to represent QANON by taking factual commentary and expanding it to absurd levels easily ridiculed by the obedient lapdog media.
One example: John Podesta, close Hillary supporter, was invited to attend a “spirit dinner” hosted by a known and admitted Satanist: Marina Abramovic has long been associated with the occult. Her performance art often features Satanic themes and mock human sacrifice. A “spirit dinner” is an occult ceremony: Marina Abramovic demonstrates what Spirit Cooking is in a YouTube video. Painting a wall with pig blood, Abramovic smears the sentence “WITH A SHARP KNIFE CUT DEEPLY INTO THE MIDDLE FINGER OF YOUR LEFT HAND EAT THE PAIN.” Another daubed message reads “FRESH MORNING URINE SPRINKLE OVER NIGHTMARE DREAMS.”
Abramovic then throws blood over a small statue in the corner of the room, before writing “SPIRIT COOKING.” Blood is then ceremoniously run around the four corners of the room. Another message on the wall reads “MIX FRESH BREAST MILK WITH FRESH SPERM MILK DRINK ON EARTHQUAKE NIGHTS.”
John Podesta’s brother Tony was part of this cult, and there is an email from Abramovic to Tony saying she hoped John would also attend this “spirit dinner”. Therefore, there is a connection between Podesta and the cult and its Satanic element. This is not only not invented, is not “disinformation” but is something that is verified. And it is so easy to take this and expand it to a claim that QANON claims the government is riddled with Satanists, instantly shifting QANON into lunatic fringe territory. All that would be needed would be to identify it as a “far right wing” organization. And so that was done.
We know there are pedophiles in high places in the government. We have seen videos of our current president* fondling the budding breasts of little girls during public ceremonies, pulling their heads to his crotch, placing their hands on his crotch. We have recordings of him talking about encouraging children to stroke his legs and talking about when he learned to like bouncing little children on his lap. We know that some highly placed officials were guests at various Epstein properties, known for their sex trafficked underage victims. None of this can be denied, but it can be amplified to a degree so ridiculous the facts are lost in the silliness—-enter the claim about a sex ring in a pizza restaurant.
When I hear the organized and choreographed outrage about QANON what I see is, well, an organized and choreographed smear campaign, cleverly turning a few true and potentially damaging truths against those who tried to reveal them by swamping them in outrageous and bizarre exaggerations, to the point that the original truths are tainted and buried in the lies.
That has always been my perception of QANON—a brilliant example of political jui jitsu in which a strength is turned against an opponent. By careful application of selected exaggerations and lies, the underlying messages of Q have been effectively neutered.
And now we see this effective smear campaign developed into a weapon to try to discredit and even destroy political opponents, by associating them with an invented QANON that exists to a great extent only due to the contributions of those working to discredit it.
Here’s a video that explains what you are describing. You’ll have to scroll down a ways after you click on the link, and there is the video
https://steverotter.com/the-fall-of-the-cabal-video-a-janet-ossebaard-documentary-full-video/
I got to thinking more and more about it, and I think Qanon white hat hackers as they are known, are good for documenting recent history, and such, but I don’t think they can predict the way things will go down. For example, they said that the “military is going to take control, and high level arrests are going to go down. Including Biden, Pence, and whole bunch of others.” And unfortunately, Q has millions of followers who were depending on that being the truth, and when it didn’t happen it was very disappointing for a lot of people.
Anyway, that’s just it, you can’t put any faith in Qanon.
I was about 5% in hopes that what they were saying was true, and the other 95% doubtful. Well, the other 5% went when it turned out not to be true. They’re good for research because of their tech skills, and that’s all.
Another thing that came to mind, I mean it kept aggravating me, I kept thinking … why do we keep getting all these false promises? There’s gotta be something at play here, and the only logical conclusion that I could come up with, is that Q is holding patriots back with their false promises, while allowing communists to advance, and you two or three days later, I came across an article describing the similarities between Q and “Operation Trust” which was a Bolshevik psyop.
So that just kind of confirmed it for me.
This goes back a few years, and I don’t remember who said it, but it was good advice then and even better advice now:
“Don’t believe anything you read or hear and only about half of what you see.”
It’s like the lies are feeding on themselves and multiplying exponentially.
I agree 1000%.
Not sure on any of this because I skipped it the first go round until Mark wrote about it and when I went back to possibly learn more over half of the posts/articles have disappeared. I have a bigger problem with disappearing information than I do with any individual candidate.
Jeremiah, there are plots within plots tangled up in other plots, and somewhere among this intentional confusion might be a kernel of important truth.
Let’s say I have one of those important truths I want to get out to the people. So I post it: Let’s say it is “Multiple sources confirm documents proving Joe Biden is a paid agent of the Chinese Communist Party being paid to undermine American national security”. What is the best way to defuse this bombshell? Simply denying it won’t work. You can’t prove a negative so there is no way to prove that these documents don’t exist, and furthermore an investigation into them would only draw attention to them and what they mean to national security.
But what can be done is to employ a tested strategy, which is to amplify the original comment in a way that makes it appear to be part of a loony tunes paranoid fantasy. So in a case like this, different approaches would be employed, all with the same agenda of burying the kernel of important truth in a cascade of craziness. One element would be a flurry of posts claiming that these documents were found sealed in multiple layers of Baggies and hidden inside a large pumpkin left outside FBI headquarters in Boise. One would be other posts claiming that they originated from a UFO that has been circling the United States for decades, cloaked by extraterrestrial
technology so it could not be discovered. Another element would disagree with this, saying the UFO is really the mother ship for the civilization which planted an alien in our midst, Joe Biden, which is why he sometimes has trouble navigating our language and our thought processes.
Each of these themes would attract people, some of them real people and many of them paid trolls, who would then expound on the various theories, expanding them, adding to them and arguing about them. So there would be arguments about whether Alien Joe was planted here to help save Earth and its people or destroy them from within, leading to various religious theories and suppositions. There would be arguments about whether the Pumpkin Papers were stolen or hacked from a government server, even about the symbolism of using a pumpkin. There could be a whole subset of serious discussions about the historical symbolism of the pumpkin, or the gourd family in general, and the secret message inherent in using one to convey information. Why Boise? If the letters are rearranged do they send an ominous message? Within a very short period of time the original statement would be buried in a tangle of conflicting but generally crazy claims, theories and alleged plots, and would be discredited merely by being part of what is clearly a crazy conspiracy theory, or a messy pile of often conflicting conspiracy theories.
My point is that (1) I have a feeling the original intent of Q was to act as a whistleblower with real information, that (2) this was corrupted by a strategy to discredit this by burying it in an avalanche of crazy claims, and (3) that a lot of serious but probably unhinged people got sucked into this because it gave them a forum to express their fantasies and wishful thinking, all of which only added to the body of purposeful confusion.
So rather than being distracted by that huge pile of fantasies, wishful thinking, purposeful misdirection and so on, if you really want to examine QANON go to the original core post(s) and ignore absolutely everything that followed. Then make a determination of how seriously you should take the original information.
Because I avoid social media like the plague it is…
Wait, isn’t B4V a social media site? Or does it have to be a particular kind of social media site?
Did you see the word “all” in my comment?
Amazon: Did you see the word “all” in my comment?
No. Neither did I see the word “some”. You clearly don’t avoid this social media site.
bicker bicker bicker
So desperate for attention
I’m not going to defend QANON because I don’t know enough about it to do that even if I wanted to.
Why not? It’s never stopped you before.
Meow
New theory. Democrats can’t stand themselves. After months of “isolation” it appears that the left is losing its collective mind I have no problem living with myself and Kat. If kittens are kittens then kats are kats otherwise they would be cittens.
Nevertheless, this “quarantine” has driven the left bat-shit crazy (not to be confused with the Wuhan virus) because they need reaffirming echos from their bat-shit crazy friends. They are not content within themselves.
I am very content sitting on my porch (weather permitting) reading a book in the love of my God with the antics of my crazed feline (she might be liberal???) but most of the folks I know fall into one of two categories. Those that are at piece with themselves or those that require outward assurances.
Just a thought.
New theory. Democrats can’t stand themselves. After months of “isolation” it appears that the left is losing its collective mind I have no problem living with myself and Kat. If kittens are kittens then kats are kats otherwise they would be cittens.
I can’t argue with that logic. No wait, maybe you could. But I just don’t care. I did get a kick out of your playing with the spellings, especially in light of this one:
Those that are at piece with themselves…
Don’t worry, I assure you that I understood what you meant.
Defending Marjorie Taylor Greene is Self Defense
Well, that’s disturbing. I mean Ms. Greene is a loon. More to the point, many of the things she has said are bat sh*t crazy. Jewish space lasers? Really??? And your statement ties you to her. By any objective measure, that’s defending the indefensible.
Awww, now super-subjective rico is lecturing us on objectivity. After a whole year of Lefties defending rioters who were burning buildings, destroying businesses, terrifying innocent people, murdering police officers and marching to declare their goal of “burning down” the government of the United States, and being told that defending these actions and agendas did not imply agreement with the rioters, now all of a sudden defending the non-violent free speech of someone “ties” the defender to the spirit of what was said?
If that is the new criterion of the Left, that’s great, because it opens the door to “tying” all Georgia Democrats to the bat sh*t idea that Guam might tip over if too many people live there, etc. Hmmm. Now that I think of it, it would “tie” President Asterisk to incest and pedophilia, as his response to his daughter-in-law’s plea for his help regarding his son’s sexual predation on her daughter (Badfinger’s own granddaughter) was that the mother was the one who needed counseling. Actually, it would “tie” him to a plethora of various crimes and misdeeds, as he has routinely defended a man who has photographed himself engaging in sex with children, etc.
Cool. Let’s run with that.
In the meantime I await your definitive proof that there are no Jewish space lasers.
Wow, you really have drunk the koolaid. No wonder you defend MTG. But it turns out there’s another thing we agree on! I find it inconceivable that anyone could defend the threatening of human life and/or the destruction of property just to make a point. I don’t care if Lefties do it or Righties do it, or Ambidextries do it. It’s still wrong.
I don’t defend what MTG said, just her right to say it.
In the meantime I await your definitive proof that there are no Jewish space lasers.
Meanwhile, I await your definitive proof that there are. That would seem to be more essential, don’t you think? In fact, the latter is a tenet of science — that is to say that all scientific experiments (and even observations, as far as it goes) are designed to detect whether something occurred with a certain degree of confidence. They are not designed to detect whether nothing occurred with a certain degree of confidence. I.e., you can’t prove the negative. Thus, your challenge for me to prove the negative is absurd.
No, you are the one who sneered at the Jewish space laser comment, therefore it is up to you to prove that it does not exist. Nice tap dancing ending with one of your usual smug dismissals (“absurd”) but my point is simply that a bland assertion that something is false, as the foundation for an attack on who said it is not, does call for a foundation for the claim it is false.
Amazon: Nice tap dancing ending with one of your usual smug dismissals (“absurd”)…
I didn’t tap dance and I wasn’t smug. I stated a universally accepted scientific principle and guided you through the logic as to why your statement was absurd. I thought I was quite thorough. Now, whether you understood it or not is a different question. But I’m sure you’re capable of it if you tried.
Perhaps I shouldn’t say I’m sure.
Amazon: No, you are the one who sneered at the Jewish space laser comment,…
You’re right, perhaps I shouldn’t have sneered at Jew with space lasers burning up forests. Everybody knows Jews hate trees, so why not space lasers? That makes perfect sense. At least in your mind, I guess. How is that koolaid, by the way? Any good?
bicker bicker bicker
So desperate for attention