Dream on Sleepers

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

While I have zero grounds to actually disagree with you on, being speculative and all, aren't you being part of the problem?

You have successfully emasculated American conservatives and taken them off your trail. They are happy now. They are joyous now. They are now blind to you as they dream the dreams you have fed them. Use them as you will.

I could argue that they have indoctrinated and militarized the Democrats.

The whole argument is foolish if what you claim to believe is true.

You could argue that and I would not argue against you. The Democrats HAVE become militarized. Where outwardly and to many of the older liberals they now seem to be lock step with the neo-cons. While at the same time conservatives now seem to be the only people, or at least until the Trump phenomena were the ones who wanted to go after the bankers. Apart from Bernie and his folks, the democrats seemed to fund themeselves at the bankers trough. That's not liberal to me.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

The terms as they were used in politics certainly have gone through some crazy definition changes.

Whatever it takes to fuel the divide I suppose.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

Eh, Obama and Bush had many of the same bank donors which ultimately ended up being some of their top donations.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

The terms as they were used in politics certainly have gone through some crazy definition changes.

Whatever it takes to fuel the divide I suppose.

Exactly, which is needed more now than ever. People are getting tired of the establishment, so there was Ross Perot, then Ron Paul, and then the big one(s) Bernie and Trump in one cycle representing both parties.

They will either control opposition by leading (owning the leader) it, or destroying it.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Yes they did. Bush, as I remember did not rail against the banks, though Obama did but still took donations.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Yes they did. Bush, as I remember did not rail against the banks, though Obama did but still took donations.

Both of them allowed the environment for the fall of the banks and subsequent bailout.

Any punishment for the bad practices? Nope, many higher ups even got to keep getting bonuses.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Perot and Paul. There was also Ralph Nader who was anti-establishment who ran twice on the Green Party and against Gore and Bush did well enough that the Democrats blamed their lose against Bush on Nader. Paul received at least two of my primary votes but none for Perot. Another was Barry Commoner way back in the late eighties or early ninties, I forget. He and others formed what they called the Citizens' Party. He ran on a political platform of one word and one word alone."Bull#" I voted for him too.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

I'm not going to lie, I'm only 27. Not familiar with a few of those even though I like to read history it's just different when you've lived through it.

I celebrated when the DNC got caught playing dirty with Trump and Bernie. I personally liked Bernie more than Trump even though as an independent I lean a little right on the scale. That was only because I trusted Bernie which is so rare in politics. That being said I'm glad they are getting sloppy and exposed for rigging, I'm sure it's happened for a while but now it looks like it's so desperate they are actually afraid of political revolution.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
One of their two 'chosen' offerings to us to continue our illusion of free democracy was a wimp who had to beg people clap for him even though he came from one of their elite families.

Who is this a reference to? Bernie?

originally posted by: DeadMoonJester

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
One of their two 'chosen' offerings to us to continue our illusion of free democracy was a wimp who had to beg people clap for him even though he came from one of their elite families.

Who is this a reference to? Bernie?

Kidding right?

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Nader's run in 00 was a real eye opener. Nader was running a strong 6% and attracting a lot of the more liberal crowd. He first got his fame by being a consumer protection advocate, calling out corporations for faulty and dangerous defects in products like cars and appliances.

When it came time for the first presidential debate between Gore and Bush, though polling well, he was not allowed on the stage to debate with them. Even Gore who should have been a good liberal and opened up the debates was happy to not have him there.

Nader was not even allowed to join the audience. He was prevented from even acting as a citizen at the debate. He did however get into one of the satellite rooms, the rooms that showed the debate on closed circuit but even though it was not in the presence of the two debaters, because it was in the same building, he was escorted by police and bussed to a location further away. They were mighty scared of Nader. Though he ran again in 04, the time had passed and the chance for a viable third party with the Greens seemed to have gone by the way.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

No, not at all..

Was this supposed to be a reference to Trump?

I'd probably describe Bernie as a wimp but Trump? Not really much of a wimp I think.

And Bernie didn't come from an elite family.. and neither did Trump as far as I know. His family has been rich for a little more than a hundred years, that's not old money and I don't think it qualifies as one of "their elite families" as those go right back to the ancient world.. not to the beginning of the 20th century.

But yeah.. I'm probably just being pedantic. I suppose he comes from an elite family, just not one of "theirs" I think.

a reply to: DeadMoonJester

No Dead. The two early on favorites of the establishment were Clinton and Jeb Bush. He came from a family of big time power brokers and had lots and lots of early on donations. And I called him a wimp because he was so wimpy. And there was that one speaking engagement that he gave where when he finished his speech, no on clapped so he said, on camera, something like you can clap if you want.

The only reason Trump could win that election is because TPTB have allowed it to happen. Or more likely, orchestrated it. All that has happened is that they may have altered their plans a bit, pulled in a little folding chair so he can sit in the corner of their meeting halls. That's all he ever really wanted in the first place, just to be allowed to sit amongst them.

Willingly(see the info) or not(inside job plan because they wanted him for ___ insert plans___):

WikiLeaks trolls Dems with Podesta memo pushing ‘Pied Piper’ Trump

The strategy was apparently designed to force more moderate Republican candidates into more conservative positions making them unpalatable to the majority of the electorate.

“This memo is intended to outline the strategy and goals a potential Hillary Clinton presidential campaign would have regarding the 2016 Republican presidential field,” an attachment on the email reads. The document says the goal is “to make whomever the Republicans nominate unpalatable to a majority of the electorate.”

Three strategies are outlined to attempt to do this:

1) Force all Republican candidates to lock themselves into extreme conservative positions that will hurt them in a general election;

2) Undermine any credibility/trust Republican presidential candidates have to make inroads to our coalition or independents;

3) Muddy the waters on any potential attack lodged against HRC.

Source

a reply to: TerryMcGuire
I think the majority of the people saw this for what it was, a "give us Barabbas" moment.

Outside of the small percentage of people that are truly obsessed with Hillary or Trump, the majority of Americans realize that the dice have been rolled, and the die is cast.

This is a time that should be used for preparation.

a reply to: dreamingawake

As far as that assessment goes it is not a surprise that the above tactics were part of the Clinton and Demorcrat plan.
Early on a number of people here and across the country held to this suggesting that he was a plant. The Republican field would be as those memos suggest, forced into more extreme positions and made to look like the card board tools they are. But the Clinton machine made several serious miscalculation.

However, my contention above. That contention was that IF there are these PTB that are as powerful as has been theorized that the Trump victory could not have been the victory over them that it is being deemed to be. That to hold to a theory of all powerful manipulators AND a belief that Trump has hurt their agenda is incongruous.

I do not see TPTB as lizard men from Mars or even an historical 'illuminati' or group of hidden Masons. Rather I see them as the hierarchy of our financial systems. And I see that their power rests not in in some magical power, instead that power exists and is maintained through the worlds devotion to the financial system of capitalism and the severe imbalances of wealth it both creates and sustains. None of the presidential candidates other than Sanders were a threat to that order at all. Including Trump.

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

Give us Barrabas. I had not made that mental connection but I do see it's relevance. You can count me in on being one who realizes that the dice have been rolled and we must now live and survive with the outcome.

Yet your your final sentence is ripe with poignancy. Prepare for WHAT. I'm not asking that rhetorically because that is exactly how I see it. Kind of like western civ has been through the different gears from first gear to second to third and forth and now we find ourselves shifting gears once more. And for what. Where are we headed.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

Give us Barrabas. I had not made that mental connection but I do see it's relevance. You can count me in on being one who realizes that the dice have been rolled and we must now live and survive with the outcome.

Yet your your final sentence is ripe with poignancy. Prepare for WHAT. I'm not asking that rhetorically because that is exactly how I see it. Kind of like western civ has been through the different gears from first gear to second to third and forth and now we find ourselves shifting gears once more. And for what. Where are we headed.

I am not sure of what is ahead but looking at what is going on around us, it looks like it is going to be interesting.

I am reminded of a roller coaster. Everyone is excited about the ride going up, but they clench their buttocks and scream the whole way down. Everything is being manipulated. They don't even try to hide it anymore because they don't have to. We are so busy fighting each other over things that make no sense, or things that don't directly impact a single one of us. In the meantime, they are having fun placing there bets, laughing at us, and pushing the roller coaster over the edge to the grand finale.

Hope for the best but prepare for the worst. I suggest building strong community ties and learning how to make stone soup.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: dreamingawake

As far as that assessment goes it is not a surprise that the above tactics were part of the Clinton and Demorcrat plan.
Early on a number of people here and across the country held to this suggesting that he was a plant. The Republican field would be as those memos suggest, forced into more extreme positions and made to look like the card board tools they are. But the Clinton machine made several serious miscalculation.

However, my contention above. That contention was that IF there are these PTB that are as powerful as has been theorized that the Trump victory could not have been the victory over them that it is being deemed to be. That to hold to a theory of all powerful manipulators AND a belief that Trump has hurt their agenda is incongruous.

I do not see TPTB as lizard men from Mars or even an historical 'illuminati' or group of hidden Masons. Rather I see them as the hierarchy of our financial systems. And I see that their power rests not in in some magical power, instead that power exists and is maintained through the worlds devotion to the financial system of capitalism and the severe imbalances of wealth it both creates and sustains. None of the presidential candidates other than Sanders were a threat to that order at all. Including Trump.

I do agree with you. TPTB isn't always aligning as there's more than one entity involved. Such as Koch vs Soros.

In the end the GOP and the DNC got what they deserved. Both sides shut out candidates during elections, and not just during this past one. Now the most extreme stepped in and they have to deal with it. That's to hopes for these parties dissolving as well. Though, it may inspire positives(more parties, more voters for them to take on the dying Two Party System) likely even more extremes of either side can grow from it.

a reply to: StratosFear
It gets harder to wake up when someone already thinks (or dreams) they've woken up, but in reality, haven't even touched the surface of what's really going on. Like this guy (who also thinks he's woken up but is now being influenced by Babylon the Great), at least he got one thing right:

The 2nd half of the playlist below explains the parts that the guy above hasn't woken up to yet:

Real science, knowledge about realities compared to philosophies and stories