[bagster]

Haha. Yea. It's obvi not a right wing site. Funny that Jack would try to pass it off as one. He probably got bamboozled. It happens. He wouldn't try to pass off left wing propaganda as right wing commentary. Right? Right?

It's kinda funny though, that he posted the very article that was in a Q post just last night.

Shoddy work, I'd say.

C'mon, Jack.

Bagster

[Jack Black]

It's kinda funny though, that he posted the very article that was in a Q post just last night.

It was? Can you post the Q post? That's interesting.

I also posted another article that Q called out (after he did, and noted it) yesterday.

As I said in my intro: the link to the article was not an endorsement of the article or the site (I'm not a neo-reactionary who thinks we need a new king)..

I am noting the phenomena of Q breaking out of the Q-chans.

I will say that unlike the MSM that guy at Amerika (and, that is a pretty questionable site name, lets face it) did give Q a lot of credit for predicting things, so he's a step above the "they are insane conspiracy theorists" New York Magazine article's meme. ...

But even then, what percent of New York Magazine (it was the first of the MSM genre, published Dec. 19) readers do you think read that article and then did some Google searching on their own and found their way to something much more raw and interesting ... A lot I'd wager.

There can't be a Great Awakening without Q becoming widely known.

He's getting more coverage in the MSM... (but still tier 2 mostly. and all very negative).

He's getting more coverage on the Right (but mostly the dissident right, mostly positive.

But he's still not getting coverage in the major right leaning publications:
National Review, The Weekly Standard, The American Conservative, Human Events, The American Thinker, not to mention Breitbart, the Daily Caller or Fox News...
That's got to happen to get to the next level, in my opinion.