Awash in a sea of anomalous snippets

If you look at the sea of voting normies out there, so easily gulled with the MSM as their main source, with various forms of entertainment as distractions, their welcome relief, let alone the simple worry in the face of a govt looking for any pretext at all to tax or steal them to oblivion … in any western country …

... good normies whose idea of cutting edge political “discussion” is BBCQT or C4 … then I’m not trying in any way to be a smarta**e because I’ve been messing up big time myself in the field of ladies … but perhaps I’m just one of a growing band of observers.

And as observers on soc-med, we get to know … we get to work out the good ones such as Charlotte Gill or Brian Cates now and then. So we see snippets, the topic of this post, moreso than a journo-prepared pap piece (the way we're meant to think embedded in the subtext).

In short, we are seeing anomalies whoosh past us on our timelines and there’s just too much of it to handle in one go.

Take, for example, Mike Lindell, of pillow fame … great supporter of the Donald pre-election … one of the good guys, no?

That’s as it should be … in a functioning society. But we’re not in a functioning society … we’re under a bunch of paid, psycho clowns who obey the money.

Was your first question, “Who’s Mike Lindell?” And why would that be your first question? Is it because you’re focussed almost entirely on Brit news or World Cup or food shopping or your workplace or light relief?

So somewhere along the line, we start picking up on snippets, often random, esp. on X, the premier platform in 2026, hence the govt wants it banned from the country. Along comes Natalie Fleet who’s just resigned … (heard of her ? look her up) … her job being to restrict what you can view.

Whoops, a snippet flew by … Viktor Orban starting a Magyar resistance against this Peter Magyar, the Hungarian version of controlled opposition like Farage who has everyone gulled on this “don’t split the vote” pap … welcome Burnham, all blame Lowe.

And that’s where we are. Long ago, I was often quoting Perry Mason from one of those books, speaking to a Sgt Holcombe on the stand. Mason asked what happens when you sometimes see pieces of evidence which don’t accord with the general trend of the “evidence”? Awkward snippets in other words.

And Holcombe said: “You ignore em.”

How many of people come to dissident soc-med, only to bring their MSM habits with them? That is … find a comfortable show which seems to say all the right things, e.g. Mike Graham … and get one’s reality from that limited look?

Instead of actually investigating and building up impossible vaults of snippets, then losing them over time?

Let’s face it … we here do the best we can on these blogs to get issues to readers … multi-author is better … but the very best require a news organisation with a fleet of reporters which none of us can afford in either time or money … either energy or inclination. How many of us are, essentially, lazy bstds, easily jaded or bored?

Have a wunnerful Thursday, good readers all.