Well, I disagree with the Anon on almost all of these points ... but ... there ARE some benefits:
1) Breaking Chinese supply chains across many manufacturing industries.
2) Waking up a lot more people that China has UNACCEPTABLE control of many of our necessities, and is willing to USE it AGAINST US when we are most vulnerable.
3) Getting President Trump a tremendous amount of unedited face time on the MSM (while sucking all oxygen out of the RAT campaign).
4) Getting interest rates to an all-time low, so that possibly Trump and Mnuchin can roll over a substantial portion of the $22T national debt into 50-year and 100-year Bonds at lowest possible cost.
5) Making identity politics, radical (HOAX) environmentalism and “Open borders” seem even more ridiculous than usual, leaving RATs less than nothing to say.
The Anon points are here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3825813/posts?page=691#691
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Well, I disagree with the Anon on almost all of these points ... but ... there ARE some benefits:
1) Breaking Chinese supply chains across many manufacturing industries.
2) Waking up a lot more people that China has UNACCEPTABLE control of many of our necessities, and is willing to USE it AGAINST US when we are most vulnerable.
3) Getting President Trump a tremendous amount of unedited face time on the MSM (while sucking all oxygen out of the RAT campaign).
4) Getting interest rates to an all-time low, so that possibly Trump and Mnuchin can roll over a substantial portion of the $22T national debt into 50-year and 100-year Bonds at lowest possible cost.
5) Making identity politics, radical (HOAX) environmentalism and “Open borders” seem even more ridiculous than usual, leaving RATs less than nothing to say.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I absolutely do not think that Trump caused this in any way, shape or form, but it using this black swan in the best way possible. Exactly what the import of all this is, or what may be planned or going on behind the scenes, is way beyond my ken.
And people get to hear TRUMP firsthand BEFORE plagiarizing JOE and MSM distorts his words and steals his positions.
Well, I disagree with the Anon on almost all of these points ... but ... there ARE some benefits...
________________________________________
I see what you did there, Dis.
You took the Anon's post — which was encouraging us to TRUST THE PLAN regarding the coronavirus — and you flipped it around backwards, telling us that we SHOULDN'T Trust the Plan.
Specifically, you countered the Anon by implying that, if the virus panic helped POTUS in any way, it was only due to random chance, NOT planning.
This is consistent with many of your other posts.
For instance, you previously stated that anyone who Trusts the Plan regarding the coronavirus is "cult-like" and should be shunned as a "wacko."
You further suggested that such "wackos" (I'm correcting your spelling of "wacko") should be marked or blacklisted somehow on this board, to ensure that no one will listen to them, and you proposed that the term "W-J WARNING" (i.e. Wack-Job Warning) should be used to distinguish "cult-like" posts from those written by non-cult-like posters such as yourself, whom you described as, "those of us who value Q normally."
In other words, you proposed dividing the Q movement into two opposing factions, "normal" vs. "cult-like."
When I politely and reasonably suggested to you that "trusting the plan" is not necessarily "cult-like," you became uncharacteristically tongue-tied and declined to respond.
Which brings us right back where we started.
Now... about your screenname.
According to CollinsDictionary.com, a disestablishmentarian is: "A person who favors the separation of church and state, esp. the withdrawal of special rights, status, and support granted an established church by a state; an advocate of disestablishing a state church."
So is that your big issue, Dis? You think churches have too many "special rights" here in America? That their "special rights" need to be reduced or withdrawn?
The only "conservatives" I know who think that's a big issue are Ayn Rand libertarians, i.e. Objectivists.
But you told me you weren't an Objectivist.
Hmmmm.