If the Heritage Foundation sounds familiar, they are the folks behind Project 2025. The Foundation has stated that Edwards had nothing to do with the writing of the document, but it is still interesting.
What else does the Heritage Foundation do besides make fake documents to smear >Trump? If they wrote a book about "Project 2025" it would become a best seller.
Wait, so now we've gone from "Project 2025 wasn't written by Trump or Vance but has a lot of good stuff in it" to "it is fake and written to smear Trump"?
So, where'd the "good stuff" go? What is the next leap?
What else does the Heritage Foundation do besides make fake documents to >Trump? If they wrote a book about "Project 2025" it would become a best >seller.
Wait, so now we've gone from "Project 2025 wasn't written by Trump or Vance but has a lot of good stuff in it" to "it is fake and written to smear Trump"?
Wait, so now we've gone from "Project 2025 wasn't written by Trump or Vance but has a lot of good stuff in it" to "it is fake and written to smear Trump"?
So, where'd the "good stuff" go? What is the next leap?
Project 2025 was not written by the Trump team and has nothing to do with Trum
et. al.
Project 2025 was written by the Heritage Foundation and ALL the contributors are cited.. ALL...
Wait, so now we've gone from "Project 2025 wasn't written by Trump or Vance but has a lot of good stuff in it" to "it is fake and written to smear Trump"?
I still stand by both of those statements. It had some good stuff in it, some bad stuff too, but it was only made to smear Trump, and the evidence is in the
fact that it wasn't written by Trump nor Vance, and also in that one of the members of the organization that credits itself for writing it is donating millions of dollars to Kamala.
I still stand by both of those statements. It had some good stuff in it, bad stuff too, but it was only made to smear Trump, and the evidence is the
fact that it wasn't written by Trump nor Vance, and also in that one of members of the organization that credits itself for writing it is donati millions of dollars to Kamala.
The Heritage Foundation has stated that the individual in question had nothing to do with writing Project 2025.
It is difficult to keep up with whatever today's version of "the Truth" is.
fact that it wasn't written by Trump nor Vance, and also in that one of
members of the organization that credits itself for writing it is donat
millions of dollars to Kamala.
The Heritage Foundation has stated that the individual in question had nothing to do with writing Project 2025.
I never heard of the Heritage Foundation until the Project 2025 nonsense. Are we supposed to believe that it's s legitimate foundation and that it makes sense for it to have millions to give to Kamala? My point is that they serve n
other purpose other than their misinformation.
It is difficult to keep up with whatever today's version of "the Truth" is.
This is why we have fidonet
Aaron Thomas wrote to Mike Powell <=-
I never heard of the Heritage Foundation until the Project 2025
nonsense. Are we supposed to believe that it's s legitimate foundation
and that it makes sense for it to have millions to give to Kamala? My point is that they serve no other purpose other than their
misinformation.
I never heard of the Heritage Foundation until the Project 2025 nonsense we supposed to believe that it's s legitimate foundation and that it mak sense for it to have millions to give to Kamala? My point is that they s n
other purpose other than their misinformation.
The fondation didn't have money for Kamala. One of their members
(possibly a founding one) did.
I never heard of the Heritage Foundation until the Project 2025 nonsense. Are we supposed to believe that it's s legitimate foundatio and that it makes sense for it to have millions to give to Kamala? My point is that they serve no other purpose other than their misinformation.
"Controlled opposition refers to a tactic where an individual, organization, or movement is covertly controlled or influenced by a
third party, and their true purpose differs from their publicly stated goals. This strategy is used for mass deception, surveillance, and political/social manipulation."
So the idea behind Project 2025 has been around for a long time.
This is why we have fidonet
I would put fidonet above, but just barely, the sewer of misinformation known as "social media."
Aaron Thomas wrote to Dr. What <=-
So the idea behind Project 2025 has been around for a long time.
Misinformation might not have have been the original intention of the Heritage Foundation,
but the Democrats/globalists have taken the
opportunity to corrupt nearly every industry and every institution in existence, which may easily include the Heritage Foundation,
Doing a quick search for Heritage Foundation, it was established in
1973. That was after the big plan was put in place in the 1960's. So
it could have been established for controlled opposition, or it could
have been corrupted.
But I'm also seeing many other "Heritage Foundations" out there too.
The fondation didn't have money for Kamala. One of their members (possibly a founding one) did.
That's ok, but notice the timing of the donation and the writing of Project 2025. They are happening at the same time. I read that they have an annual budget of $38 million dollars, so if electing Kamala was their ultimate goal, then they could do better than $7 million.
This is why we have fidonet
I would put fidonet above, but just barely, the sewer of misinformation known as "social media."
That's because you're here to set the bar high, Mike. :)
include the Heritage Foundation, which may or may not explain why one of their
employees is spending $7 million from their $28 million dollar annual budget ton Harris' campaign.
That's ok, but notice the timing of the donation and the writing of Proj 2025. They are happening at the same time. I read that they have an annu budget of $38 million dollars, so if electing Kamala was their ultimate then they could do better than $7 million.
There again, that was from a member. To my knowledge, none of the foundation's $38 million went to her.
This is why we have fidonet
I would put fidonet above, but just barely, the sewer of misinformation known as "social media."
Aaron Thomas wrote to Dr. What <=-
The media (and Democrats) always try to normalize idiotic things.
They're goal here is to make sheeple think that The Heritage Foundation
is relevant while none of us have ever heard of it.
We've been talking about politics in this echo for decades already and we've never talked about The Hertiage Foundation before.
Other newer
topics include: climate change, AI, segregated communities, women and gulls, etc. They're catchy phrases that linger inside vacant minds.
We've been talking about politics in this echo for decades already an we've never talked about The Hertiage Foundation before.
That's why things like "Project 2025" and such raise red flags when the Propaganda Mininstry uses them.
I don't know if it's just me or not, but when the Propaganda Ministry trots out some "expert" group that I've never heard before, I discount everything they say. I'm sure that they'd use other groups that aren't
so new, but those groups lost all credibility over the years.
There again, that was from a member. To my knowledge, none of the foundation's $38 million went to her.
I assume a lot, but I assume that the member got their money from being one of
those "hard-working Heritage Foundation workers" that we always hear about.
This is why we have fidonet
I would put fidonet above, but just barely, the sewer of misinformation known as "social media."
You sound like Hillary Clinton.
Aaron Thomas wrote to Dr. What <=-
I'm like that too, but I'll go as far as to say that there's no such
thing as an "expert" because that's not even a real title. "Groups" and "experts" are not parts of our political system. "The Heritage
Foundation" and "Project 2025" are just more synthetic stimulants that cause an intended reaction in idiots.
thing as an "expert" because that's not even a real title. "Groups" a "experts" are not parts of our political system. "The Heritage Foundation" and "Project 2025" are just more synthetic stimulants tha cause an intended reaction in idiots.
The problem with experts is that too many of them talk outside of their field of knowledge and the Elitists try to elevate them.
Noam Chomsky is a great example. He's a linguist. In his field, he's considered an expert (I don't know if he actually is, since I've never been interested in linguistics). But when he pontificates on things
like Foreign Policy, the Elitists elevate him because he's an "expert" (just not in anything other than linguistics) and because he says what they want.
Saying the right words seems very important to the elitists. They know that they are being observed, and saying the right words on camera probably gets them the recognition they need from higher-level elitists.
Saying the right words seems very important to the elitists. They know t they are being observed, and saying the right words on camera probably g them the recognition they need from higher-level elitists.
It is very important to MAGA Republicans, too. Say the wrong words and you are a RINO.
The problem with experts is that too many of them talk outside of their field of knowledge and the Elitists try to elevate them.
Noam Chomsky is a great example. He's a linguist. In his field, he's considered an expert (I don't know if he actually is, since I've never been interested in linguistics). But when he pontificates on things
like Foreign Policy, the Elitists elevate him because he's an "expert" (just not in anything other than linguistics) and because he says what they want.
Aaron Thomas wrote to Dr. What <=-
Saying the right words seems very important to the elitists. They know that they are being observed, and saying the right words on camera probably gets them the recognition they need from higher-level
elitists.
That reminds me of Yuval Noah Harari, the author and senior member of
the WEF, who one day creepily appeared on the Stephen Colbert Show. Now he's an author, historian, philosopher, AI engineer, and WEF senior member. With titles like those, anything that spews from his mouth is enough to convince the ultra-ignorant.
Randall Schad wrote to Dr. What <=-
I keep seeing this "Elitists" word (capitalized). What's the definition
of an Elitist? I can't get enough from context, and am left with some ambiguous form of ad hominem.
As for the remainder of his "contributions" to other fields (economics, politics, foreign policy, etc),
I would argue that someone who has
spent more than 50 years studying and writing (in the public eye,
subject to peer review and criticism) on those topics as core
components of his framework could easily be considered an expert.
It is very important to MAGA Republicans, too. Say the wrong words and you are a RINO.
When I was at the Indiana, PA Trump rally, I was a front-row Joe, and we were all chatting about politics openly. I accidentally said "Obama wasn't even thi
bad."
A lady said "What do you mean by that?"
Oops! I had to quickly correct myself by saying "I mean, Obama wasn't openly trashing our country like Joe and Kamala are!"
(Saved myself)
Oops! I had to quickly correct myself by saying "I mean, Obama wasn't op trashing our country like Joe and Kamala are!"
(Saved myself)
Yep, you set off her RINO radar big time! Quick thinking is probably
what saved you head from being stuffed and mounted over her fireplace.
Randall Schad wrote to Dr. What <=-
I keep seeing this "Elitists" word (capitalized). What's the definiti of an Elitist? I can't get enough from context, and am left with some ambiguous form of ad hominem.
That's because you are one of them. And people like you have no self-awareness.
As for the remainder of his "contributions" to other fields (economic politics, foreign policy, etc),
He's constributed nothing because he knows nothing in those other fields.
I would argue that someone who has
spent more than 50 years studying and writing (in the public eye, subject to peer review and criticism) on those topics as core components of his framework could easily be considered an expert.
And more proof of your Ignorant Elitist status.
Who are the people that you consider experts, or who at least know enough about
something to have their opinions considered worth consideration?
Who are the people that you consider experts, or who at least know enough >about something to have their opinions considered worth consideration?
In this echo, best as I can tell...
Expert = someone "qualified" who agrees with you and validates your opinions.
Not an Expert = someone, who might or might not be "qualified," who does not agree with your point of view.
| Sysop: | deepend |
|---|---|
| Location: | Calgary, Alberta |
| Users: | 253 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 14:29:11 |
| Calls: | 1,646 |
| Files: | 3,994 |
| Messages: | 387,903 |