34 votes

I am getting sick of Jack Hunter

Jack posted another status swiping at 'conspiracy theorists'. Then, Austin Petersen (who I hear about once like 2 months) comes on in and then just insults posters. They are some real class acts. Then, I got to thinking, where was all of Jack's condemnation and scorn over Glenn Beck attacking Ron Paul? Where was Jack's snarky quips to be found when Mark Levin said that Ron Paul wasn't a conservative. Where? Then, I realized that Jack just hates Alex 'I have been supporting Ron Paul my entire professional career' Jones. He hates his success. He envies Jones. He hates that Jones has a dedicated following, something he thought he got when he became Ron Paul's official blogger. His ego must be massive. Alex worked for every single one of his listeners. Every single one! Jack, he just rides coat tails.

Alex Jones: Embarrassing when Alex confronted Piers.

Beck, Hannity, Levin, not a damn word to be heard from him. Who hurts the movement more?

Alex helped that night in huge ways. He was entertaining, trolling Piers. He brought facts. He even enforced the image that gun control is totalitarian (which it is). That is my 2 cents on it.

I had no where else to turn to other than here to let loose about this. What is going to happen to the Southern Avenger and the Austin Petersen types? When push comes to shove, are they going to support Levin over Tom Woods. I am betting on that situation to be honest.

I want the DP's thoughts though on that. I am just friends with him on FB and it has become very grating sometimes to see those status updates.



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Jack should

Go after Cass Susstein and his office, instead of beating up on RP supporters, and people suspicious of the " official story". He's definitely lost his luster as far as I'm concerned. He needs to re-prioritize.

"If this mischievous financial policy [greenbacks], which has its origin in North America, should become endurated down to a fixture, then that government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off its debts and be without debts. It will hav

I still like SA..

I just dont see much from him anymore. DP in 07/08 hung on every video that he posted.

I dont think he is selling out as much as he is growing up. Hate me for saying it, but the conspiracy stuff doesn't help our movement WIN. I see it and I'm sure Jack does too.

For you folks that weren't around in 07/08 (and to those that were there..) The truther and conspiracy people hung their beliefs around Ron Pauls neck. The media used it against us and simply silenced us.

Whether or not 9/11 was an inside job is irrelevant when you are running for political office. Especially as leader of the free world. It is such a cattle prod of a subject. When you are already the lone voice, it hurts you.

That might be painful to read, but its the truth. I want the truth to come out like anyone else, that path doesn't include winning a presidential seat at the same time.

Im gonna swing by his YT channel and watch a couple videos.

I hope this post didn't piss anyone off.

-edit

Here is the link to the video being bashed:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KcPbML6Clw

I agree with Jack. Id encourage anyone here at the DP to watch it.

'Peace is a powerful message.' Ron Paul

ytc's picture

Thanks for the youtube, P.Nicholson! I watched it. . .

and I STILL admire how concisely JackH laid his groundwork of this essay in the very first 19 seconds!

He clearly states that his aversion "has little to do with whether [conspiracy theories] are true." This essay was written NOT to discuss the validity of the theories themselves.

His admonition is against excessive reliance on such theories, when "no secret reasons are needed to attack obviously bad government". He finds it more urgent to further small-government conservative movement, which includes our libertarian wing, against neoconned Romney/R - Obama/D BIG-government status-quo.

*I totally agree with him.* We can pursue our individual interests in various conspiracy theories for the sake of getting out the truth, but we are also fortunate to have clear-minded political activists, who are doggedly focused on how to steer the government towards a constitutional limited one most effectively.

Thank you!!

What a great reply! I appreciate you taking the time to post it. I believe that some may be missing the point. What is our end goal? To win or to spread 'theories'?

I gotta give it to Ron Paul. He has huge balls to go on AJ's show the following day. The way Ron handled AJ was like a master also. AJ tried to use tactics on Ron to bring him to his side and Ron being the gentleman he is, was gracious to his host and (unlike Piers) was able to steer AJ into the correct path. Ron is such a good peacemaker.

The world could learn a few things from Ron Paul.. and lets hope they do!!!

'Peace is a powerful message.' Ron Paul

See...

I'm definitely a little bit tired of Jack Hunter, but I'll take Hunter over the Kokesh/Panzella/Ernie Hancock-types. Jack Hunter is clearly tied to Rand Paul Inc., and the mainline-types associated with C4L.

I dont know about many of you, but guys like Tom Woods and Jack Hunter are necessary to reach more mainstream conservatives who would be intimidated/turned off by anarchy signs. And Hunter has called out Glenn Beck by name, whereas I dont believe he has ever called out Alex Jones.

There's a place for everybody, I just dislike this meme that you are a statist if you're not a total anarchist. And I am an anarchist at heart- but if you came from a place of a more conventional political philosophy, then its important to remember how you were converted to liberty. It is much more effective to reach people by appealing to their understanding of the founders and the constitution- as Ron Paul has always done- than expecting people to comprehend and strive for a stateless society. I dont know, just my opinion

Visit https://soundcloud.com/politics-of-freedom for all recent Ron Paul interviews, speeches, debates, forums, panels, press conferences, news coverage, and Texas Straight Talk updates!

"Terrorism is the war of the poor, while war is the terrorism of

ytc's picture

I haven't read or watched Jack H's articles or videos lately.

I'm usually impressed with his concise and sober writing style. I guess I just have to google his latest and see if I get "sick" or not ;-)

I kind of

liked JH's voice, and his commentary for awhile. It got old. Then with his hopping on the Romney bandwagon, and the condemnation of truth seekers he's just the Southern Nemesis to me now.

When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign: that the dunces are all in confederacy against him. ~J. Swift

how can you trust the establishment so called facts???

I don't need any theories or conspiracies to see what is plainly right in front of my face. They are all a bunch of slimy, sneaky, shetweasel liars

Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point.
C. S. Lewis

It's very simple.

If you're sick of somebody - just don't listen to them.
Jack Hunter, as far as i know, doesn't force his opinions on anyone.

If you are sick...

of people explaining why they are not happy with Jack Hunter then just don't listen to them. Nobody is forcing you to read this forum post.

And nobody has suggested that you or anybody else should be forced to listen to our discussion on specific reasons we like or dislike Jack Hunter. And nobody has suggested that force should be used to prevent people from listening to Jack Hunter.

But, you do seem to be engaging in a verbal and psychological attempt to use shame and guilt to force people to stop sharing why they are unhappy with Jack Hunter.

"You should feel bad about disliking public commentators and daring to share the specific reasons. Shame on you."

Just sayin'... :)

.
~wobbles but doesn't fall down~

Just FYI:

I neither downvoted your comment, nor the entire post.
I CHOSE to read some of the discussion to educate myself, and
i CHOSE to share my opinion here because i just felt like it.

If my comment did any harm to you, or anyone else, i apologize, i didn't mean to offend anybody.

For me, it's really not about any form of psychological attempt to use any form of guilt against anybody, my concern was solely to clarify to people that, if they're in some way offended by Hunter, they're not in any form forced to learn about any of his opinions.

I've personally nothing against good sarcasm at all, but i just think that you completely misunderstood me-
if you feel guilty and ashamed about Jack Hunter, and want to discuss it, i can't, won't and don't want to hinder anybody at all in doing so. That's what this is all about, free discussion, right?
So, in fact if you wanna talk with me about the issue, feel free to do so, i'm always interested in a good discussion and won't hold anything against you.

Peace =)

Pegged Austin Petersen almost immediately

Not brag, just fact.

I have long been able to get a very accurate sense of people very quickly.

Likely due to being a life long student of human nature and that my work has required me to interact with thousands of people.

The above may seem humorous or mumbo-jumboish but the contention is supported by a long track record.

AP is no friend of LIBERTY but he is an excellent and devoted friend of AP.

"You are a den of vipers and thieves."

I mean to rout you out!

-Just because you are among us, does not make you with us

-The door is wide open, anything can slither in

I dislike Jack for entirely

I dislike Jack for entirely different reasons.

He used to a decent reporter and commentator. Recently, he has become a spokesperson for Rand and Ron Paul. He takes whatever they say completely accurately.

You can't do that with anyone, much less a politician. Even Ron Paul...and Rand has outright lied at certain times (his lies about Keagan's comments, his lies about taxes, etc.). Jack Hunter doesn't do his research, reports Rand's lies as truths, and we are less informed.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

Theres a big difference

Theres a big difference between nuts and theorists.

Conspiracy Nuts = Alex Jones, David Ike, etc. (Who Jack is pointing to)

Conspiracy Theorists = You and I

Theres a fine line between the two. Being a theorist is normal and encouraged. Being a nut is abnormal and not someone people want to be associated with. They ruin credibility.

ICKE

David Icke was 100 HUNDRED PERCENT RIGHT ABOUT JIMMY SAVILLE !!!

WHAT ELSE COULD HE BE RIGHT ABOUT ?

the queen worships the devil and slaughters babies for their blood ?

hmm where else have I heard of people torturing children for their blood ? hmmmm

"He's this eccentric Ghandi-Like figure that you cant touch with the normal bribes that people respond to."
the man Doug Wead on DR. RON PAUL

How can you compare Jones and Icke.

That's retarded.

Icke believes in multi-dimensional shape-shifting reptilians.

Jones has never spoken to anything he himself has not seen in research or in person with documented evidence.

Approach? Maybe a different story. But content, no comparison.

I think Alex...

...agrees with Icke as to there being a deeper component to the struggle we face, except that he views it from his Christian perspective of spiritual warfare rather than 'reptilians' per se. When you think about it, though, isn't it really a fine line between believing in angelic, extra-dimensional beings and reptilian, extra-terrestrial/dimensional beings? Just different terminology for a similar concept, which Alex and Icke see as having the same type of effect?

I agree

They are talking about the same things, forces, ideas, demons, or whatever you want to call it, but using different terms. I have noticed this in other places as well. Different people with different theories and different names, all describing the same phenomenon from a different perspective.

I am Ron Paul.

I've heard him say this...

...on his show, when he's had David Icke on.

Austin Peterson

I became FB friends with Austin when he came on to the scene because he was putting out these cool little comic cards. I did my research on him and was not surprised when he attacked alternative conspiracy types.

I started asking him on his posts why he would want to divide the movement like that and eventually he banned me from commenting on his posts. Then he deleted me after I messaged him asking for an explanation.

He never answered my questions about WHY he was saying what he said. He even admitted he covered the Bilderburg group, but denied they were discussing anything significant. I guess they were just playing bridge.

In my opinion, he is NOT part of the Liberty movement. HE'S MORE LIKE A PARASITIC LEECH!

Ron brought the Liberty movement together, Rand is expanding the crap out of it! :)

"he banned me from commenting on his posts."

He's good at deleting posts.

We've all watched plenty of his stuff and read through the comments. The usual haters are all there calling Ron Paul and Libertarians every foul name they can think of, but if the posts are in any way directed at HIM, they get deleted.

I've had posts deleted off his videos for even mentioning his faulty logic while the most vile posts attacking Ron Paul, and Ron Paul's supporters remain.

It's an interesting pattern. I don't think he likes anybody who's "off message", and attacking conspiracy theorists, Ron Paul and anybody that supports Ron Paul seems to be "on message" while he edits posts.

Michael Nystrom's picture

Hard to comment

without seeing the exact quote. And I'm not about to go scouring FB to try to find it. I don't play much over there. Then Austin Petersen insulting people how?

As for this: Then, I realized that Jack just hates Alex 'I have been supporting Ron Paul my entire professional career' Jones. He hates his success. He envies Jones. It is just conjecture. We can't get inside of his mind. Only watch the actions and speculate on the motives. You might be right, but I'm trying to get the bigger picture among the players.

Rand is definitely running for president. He's friends with Jack & Jesse Benton. If Rand is serious, coordination already has to be taking place (if he's smart). So one can only assume that this is a tactical ploy on the part of Hunter. What is he trying to achieve?

My guess is that Rand doesn't want the "conspiracy nuts" infesting, and hanging on his campaign. He's got to cover his political ass. The view is likely that the "conspiracy nuts" is 1) a small group, and 2) in the long run will hurt his campaign more than help.

Ergo, every once in a while we get a dose of "Conspiracy-theorists-B-gone." It is like a repellent. I can only assume that it is intentional - part of the larger strategy, that includes going to Israel, and eventually, down the line, will likely include Rand throwing his dad under the bus. He's got to prove himself to be loyal, after all.

The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. - Alan Watts

the problem I see with Rand getting to be President

is what I envision he will have to do to get there and what that will mean when he does get there. You point out some possible strategies which make perfect sense in the getting elected part. But once elected in this way, he will find himself surrounded by these people that don't believe in the things we may believe in, who won't want to go after those powers that be because they are the powers that be.

I am probably as clear as mud. But I think it will be hard for him to turn it around after elected is all I am saying. Time will tell.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?400656-Political...

Here is a link to a thread on the RPF about the same topic as the OP, where there are quotes from Petersen, Hunter and Borowski.

Support Rand, Amash & other liberty candidates? Check out: http://www.LibertyConservatives.com/

I think all three of them made compelling arguments

for their case that AJ hurt gun owners. Alex Jones doesn't know how to have a civil debate because in his worldview, he sees everything as being a concentration camp. His mentality while talking to Piers was "I've only got twenty minutes to get as much truth out to CNN's viewers as possible, so, I better spit out everything I know before the globalists make CNN pull the plug or shoot me during one of the commercial breaks."

I appreciate the fact that Alex has waken millions of people up to certain facets of government tyranny. But, we're a looooooooong ways away from the kind of tyranny he thinks we're living under.

Michael Nystrom's picture

I disagree

That we're a way looooong way off from that kind of tyranny. The hammer can come down pretty quickly when everything falls into place. In the early 30's, Germany was as modern and happening and liberal as the US. And it took a turn for the worse in a few short years.

I find it pointless to argue about whether Jones helped or hurt gun owners. It is an irrational argument. No one can know what is in others' minds, let alone be able to aggregate those opinions.

The truth is a mystery. The truth is we don't know. Therefore, the most rational thing to do is to pick out the positive and good parts about what happened, and focus and build on those. And in that way you are lifted higher.

To focus on only the negative points, that is irrational. It makes you feel bad. It makes you feel, "Golly gosh, what a wasted opportunity." Those are feelings of lack. It is impossible to build with that feeling of lack.

I personally liked his interview. I chose to like it. It happened, it can't be changed. It is illogical to dislike something in the past. And to say, "I can't help it," is to say, "I don't have control over myself," and if one says that, how is liberty ever possible?

Alex brought a lot of attention to the issue. It was highly entertaining. And it energized a lot of his followers.

The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. - Alan Watts

Have to completely agree with

Have to completely agree with you on all points. Besides AJ is an individual with his own opinions. When did this spokesman mentality about the freedom movement come about? Why do people think we have an image to tarnish? One of the coolest things about our movement has been the individuality, the spontaneity, the decentralization of everything and everyone in it. That is what has made it such a powerful force. So what if AJ spouts off his opinions and gets some airtime on national news about issues most people have never heard of? What if there were suddently 20 and then 100 people out there doing similar and different things that brought attention to important matters. It would all be good and because we are a decentralized movement, how can our reputation be tarnished or associated with any one individual? Lets not be slowed down and divided by such worries. Just keep on talking about freedom and the danger of tyranny so others can hear about it and investigate. The reason advertising works is spaced repetition. If people hear about these topics a few times from various sources they might look into them.

Michael Nystrom's picture

Excellent points

When did this spokesman mentality about the freedom movement come about?

Why do people think we have an image to tarnish?

The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. - Alan Watts
Michael Nystrom's picture

Thanks for the links.

The line between news, entertainment and propaganda has not just been blurred, it has been obliterated.

Everyone's got an opinion. Some people are trying to be "opinion leaders." It generates traffic, sells books and gets more donations.

The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. - Alan Watts

I've always thought Jack Hunter was a phony

Never could stand him and none of his musings are memorable. Blah and bland is the man.