Metabunk 11/19

[quote="qed, post: 76260, member: 2370"]Trained by an actor or an actor like Reagan?[/quote]

I had a few paragraphs of a ramble on that.  The basic idea being that it probably would actually be best if the handlers and producers of the Presidential Show by which some aspects of America are being governed (depending on the ratings for each episode) would simply find an actual actor to play the part of the president again.  Put Rove Inc. on the job, etc.? 

Supposedly there were reports of Obama wanting to "go Bulworth" in order to try to begin acting authentic too, a few months ago.  So the idea that he's an actor or has been groomed and trained as an actor can't be debunked, as even Obama realizes the nature of the business he's involved in.  It would be interesting to have better investigative reporting than Jonestown with respect to what the technical details of the process of becoming the entertainer in chief are.  But when the corporate media is busy with asking Obama what his favorite color is and so forth, well...  there you go.  You're left with Jones. 

Ironic that Obama would cite an actor in a movie with respect to going Bulworth or "acting authentic" based on the usual political bull.  The whole concept of "acting more authentic" = oxymoron.  Most people will never get it, especially the fatherless like Obama or the pseudo-fatherless like Reagan.  They have to put acting aside in order to actually BE authentic.  Because with respect to the question of to be or not to be, the answer for actors is to act and not to be.      

Meanwhile, in the background... it doesn't really matter which actor you pick on many of the most significant issues having to do with when it's time for "dude looks like a" Lady Liberty to shake her spear again due to the nature of American ponzi, geopolitics and banksterism.  But political actors are beginning to be a lagging indicator with respect to people getting tired of the theatrical production of more episodes of: "Watch out, there may be WMDs in their underpants!"  The ratings are getting so low at this point that apparently over 90% aren't even willing to enter another theater of war for the show to begin.  Maybe more are finally beginning to see what the price of admission has been in the past. 

We're usually left with entertainment, all the way around.  I would often include Alex Jones and "loose change" aspects of 911 truth and the memes that grow in the cultural petri dish of conspiracy theory culture in that.  Because for all his ranting and raving and acting like a WWF wrestler straight out of the theatrical production of the "NWO" or "conspiracy theories" with Jesse Ventura... he can't actually attempt to deal with the truth based on "It's on record." facts in many instances.  911 being one of those instances.  (I don't even watch or listen to Jones much.  But with the way everything is becoming connected he and/or his perspective winds up showing up in newsfeeds and so forth, it's inescapable.  Now here he is taking up space on Metabunk, instead of focusing on more serious minded "conspiracy theorists"/whistle blowers like Sibel Edmonds or serious minded theorists like Ry Dawson and others.  I wish the alternative media and their investigative journalism was better.  But it isn't, yet... due in no small part to Jonestown and his sloppiness.)  

Sorry for the ramble.  At least no one on this thread seems to be denying that the president is, in fact, an actor.