Posted on 11/14/2017 10:14:46 PM PST by Bratch
CTH has attempted to stay away from talking about the Alabama ‘clown show‘, all of it, since we made our position clear long before the primary run-off race. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes etc.
My concern with the Alabama mess was a very simple MAGA issue: riding horses to polling stations does not establish a connection to the man or woman who hit the necessary alarm clock at 5:15am to pay the bills. Those are MAGA people. That’s the essence of the Trump coalition.
The MAGA coalition I know has never been predisposed to racism, sexism, nativism, or any other kind of “ism” or “ist”, because we’ve never been not busy. It takes time to give a rats-ass about bathroom police, social justice etc. Time and energy for that, who has it?
The current position of the epic fiasco was/is entirely predictable…. warnings, deaf ears, blah-blah-blah; water under the bridge. That said, the current race to the exits by all of the fly-by-nights (populist wallflowers) is embarrassing to see play out.
Factually, I feel sorry for Mr. and Mrs. Roy Moore… However, I don’t have a smidgen of sympathy for the noob-right financial opportunists: Steve Bannon, Laura Ingraham, Sebastian Gorka et al, or the political Roberts-The-Bruce: Ted Cruz, Mike Lee etc. Heck, I’m still waiting for the ‘Use El Chappo Money to Build The Wall‘ bill… I digress.
So why engage now? Well, today Rush Limbaugh weighs in in using the customary (passive aggressive/mamet principle) approach to frame the argument as: “The Roy Moore Soap Opera is Really About McConnell -vs- Bannon”. No, no it’s not.
I understand the frame of reference, why Limbaugh views it that way, but that’s not an accurate assessment.
The UniParty is against Roy Moore, not just simply Mitch McConnell and the professional political apparatus within the GOP elitist class. Things are not what they were in 2014.
In 2014 such a Limbaugh framework would be accurate (though the GOPe cat had his tongue back then). Indeed, during the 2014 Thad Cochran -vs- Chris McDaniel race the current perspective of Limbaugh would have been accurate. But that was then, this is now 2017.
In 2014 there were billions worth of personal and party indulgences at stake; in 2017 there are trillions of UniParty indulgences at stake.
In 2014 Mitch McConnell was trying to use Thad Cochran to defeat the Tea party. In 2017 the entire apparatus of the DC system is trying to use Alabama to defeat the existential risk that is Donald Trump.
If ‘political strategist’ Steve Bannon, or ‘political thinker’ Rush Limbaugh, were half as smart as they say they are, they’d chip in buy a vowel, get a clue and see that.
This is no longer small enough for individual personalities, this is a much bigger zero-sum outcome battle albeit with useful side-benefits in smacking Bannon’s ego down to size etc. Which, in all honesty, speaking as a person on the same side while watching the idiots on our team giving the enemy ammunition, would not be a bad thing – AT ALL.
Domestic DC battles are to billions what multinational UniParty battles are to trillions. Alabama is bigger than McConnell or Bannon. Alabama is now as much about NAFTA, China, renegotiated trade deals, geopolitical alliances and Saudi Arabia, and the trillions swirling around via multinational corporate interests.
The swamp is engaged, self-aware and the deep-state part is self actuated now. Instructions are no longer needed. Each cell can operate independently to protect itself from any confrontation. Thus the arguments are bigger; every angle is weighed as does it improve position, or does it weaken position… way-points are transparent. Globalists don’t need to give direction in feet or inches, the battle is much bigger, more broad – the decisions are about “generalized direction”.
Example: NAFTA Round #5 (Mexico) begins this week: “lest trade disputes create friction with NAFTA-supporting Republican lawmakers.”
Example: “Republicans” control all senate hearings:
For the first time in over 40 years - the Senate today examined a president's unchecked authority to launch a nuclear strike @NBCNightlyNews
— Andrea Mitchell (@mitchellreports) November 14, 2017
Example: Remember when the Senate voted unanimously to block President Trump from making recess appointments? That rule required “unanimity”, a single Republican senator could block the Senate from handcuffing President Trump. Not a single Republican broke ranks.
The professional political class in DC, the UniParty, is not confronting Steve Bannon though he’d probably like to make money off that outlook. The united political apparatus is confronting something far more consequential than the annoyance that Bannon represents; they are confronting the framework of ‘America First’.
That bigger dynamic is what’s adverse to their interests. Bannon is an annoying gnat.
When you accept that difference you are then prepared to ask yourself the question(s):
♦What would/will the professional apparatus do to protect their interests?
♦How far are they willing to go to oppose anything that appears adverse to those interests?
“Christmas Yearbooks”?
Written in two sets of handwriting?
Using two different inks?
Uh huh.
Go read about a republican operative named Harvey Leroy “Lee” Atwater, and how he trained a young protege’ named Karl Christian Rove in political warfare against other republicans.
Remember, from the Uniparty’s perspective they have nothing to lose in Alabama by getting caught making crap up. They were going to lose the race anyway…. so why not pull out the black arts. It’s simply how they roll.
ps. Friends in Alabama, you must fight like an insurgency.
The V comes from a movie or ?
Not really a big deal considering Honolulu has almost 10 times the population......
RL is a joke. When I used to listen to Mark Levin he would go on several day rants criticizing and demeaning Sundance - because Sundance had (rightly) identified Levin as a half-wit and Levin was pushing back. And the anonymous moniker he used, “Sundance”, seemed to support, in my mind, Levin’s criticism.<\p>
Then Levin went full NeverTrump, I ditched him, and gave Sundance a read. The guy is brilliant. Who is he?
“Noob right?” Bannon & Ingraham?
Methinks Sundance has a head enlargement problem.
(PS: He told me on Twitter five months ago-—he guaranteed!-—”Sessions will resign in 48 hours.” When he didn’t, Sundance’s “out” was, “Well, he resigned but Trump didn’t accept it. Also, this is the same guy saying Trump would turn out 73m voters.)
FWIW, I’m talking about the old TV miniseries, it’s sequel miniseries and subsequent TV series, done in the 1980s. I only watched 1 episode of the 2009 re-do, so I have no idea how closely it aligned with the old franchise.
I still have the same question too. To be clear, my question is: does there exist a photo that doesn’t appear to show two different ink colors. If so, where is it?
It’s an important question and I’ll explain why for anyone who hasn’t had their coffee yet: if one reads only the portion in black, then that Yearbook autograph could have been written by anyone named “Roy” from a classmate to whomever.
Something that strikes me though is, even if it’s all the same ink color, the fact that Moore allegedly signed “D.A.” by his name strikes me as a bit odd. I’m not a lawyer nor play one on the Internet but from what I know of the profession, lawyers don’t sign their names like that, naming their particular field as in “D.A.” or some such. It would be akin to a brain surgeon signing “brain surgeon” next to his name. They may sign “Chief of Neurology” or something like that but typically when medical doctors from whatever specialty sign their name they will simply write “M.D. (unless on some official letterhead where they may also write “Chief of Neurology”, but a yearbook? That’s not official letterhead).
Suffice to say a lawyer from any particular branch of the system will, if anything, write “Esq.” (for “Esquire”) when signing their name by hand. Not “D.A.”. At least from what I know of the profession. Which is again admittedly not much. So I welcome informed correction on this point if it’s called for.
Why would you write Christmas twice? This looks doctored.
The ink color can only be determined by allowing close examination of the yearbook by “independant” sources.
There are two sets of handwriting. ZERO doubt about that.
Is it just me, or does anyone else think the “message” supposedly written by Roy Moore doesn’t make sense? “To a sweeter more beautiful girl I could not say Merry Christmas”. What is that supposed to mean...”I could not say Merry Christmas?” Why couldn’t he say Merry Christmas? Why not just write...Merry Christmas!? Idk...its just a strange message to write in a year book.
Nothing now, but you never know what little details might mean at a later date. In an investigation, no stone should be unturned, even if it's the minutest details.
it doesn’t. All the accusations are BS. This is another salvo in the lawfare to outlaw human sexuality. Welcome to 1984.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3604795/posts?page=97#97
I didn’t say that it was a big deal - only that the local Lib radio proprietor got his 5 minutes of fame dumping Rush when that controversy took place.
...”The Conservative Treehouse”. Try it, you’ll like it.
Rush won’t talk about the New World Order.
Google is your friend.
You will find most shots of the autograph show uniformly colored black ink. The one that does not is an outlier.
You can also watch the presser. It deserves an Academy Award.
I am a daily listener of Kuhner as well.
Rush is controlled opposition—a really sneaky trick of the globalists. They give us just enough conservatism to keep us listening but they will not talk about the source of all of the problems which is globalism.
Sundance could give Machiavelli a run for his money.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.