The New Stealth Trolls—Faux-Conservatives!

Posted on The Patriot Update-By Ann-Marie Murrell-On April 29, 2011:

Being one of the mega-page Facebook types, I think I can justifiably say I’m an expert at detecting Trolls.  In case you’re not familiar with the term, it’s basically a word used for the instigator-types who sneak around Conservative websites trying to start fights.  They know exactly which buttons to push; they know what to say to spark a debate and then they sit back in their Evil Troll basements laughing maniacally at the chaos they’ve induced.  (At least that’s the way I picture them…)

The ‘old school’ Trolls were pretty straightforward and easy to spot.  It’s sort of like they spoke their own brand of Trollaneze, dropping in key liberal phrases like “evil capitalism” or “Bush lied, people died!” or “No war for oil, man!”   Everyone could tell who the Troll was, usually resulting in any number of people writing ‘Troll alert!” resulting in a mass Troll attack, ultimately causing the Troll to either suddenly disappear or and/or drop-kicked and blocked forever.  Their type is more annoying than dangerous—sort of like gnats.

But folks, times have changed.  The Left is getting desperate and they’re resorting to different measures.

I’ve discovered a brand new breed of Troll and they are much sneakier and much more dangerous to Conservatives.  I’ve even coined a new term for them:  Faux-ConTrolls—a Liberal blend of fake Conservative and Troll, resulting in that favorite Liberal word, ‘control’.  (Oh–and “faux” because it’s French.  Enough said.)

I’m not sure exactly when they switched over to this new stealth-mode of trolling.  It’s almost like they all got together and had a huge Liberal Troll meeting, probably someplace like San Francisco, and led by Troll leaders like George Soros and his Media Matters.  They realized they had to use another tactic than simply showing up in the middle of Conservative conversations and blatantly causing arguments; it was too easy to get kicked off sites that way.

No, they needed to find a way to infiltrate undetected; sneak in the back door, and find new ways to instigate and cause chaos.

It’s interesting that these Faux-ConTrolls are very much in line with Cass Sunstein’s book, “Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth and Happiness.” Basically, “Nudge” is a Liberal how-to about how to be sly and inconspicuous in getting your Liberal views across without alarming all of us easily-alarmed Conservatives.   So on Conservative websites, instead of the usual Troll MOA of shoving everyone into mayhem, they are now gently, subtly nudging.

I recently discovered a few ConTrolls-types on my own Facebook page.  They had been posting the same type of provocative statements–almost verbatim– on almost every link I posted.  Each time, they would instigate extremely negative discussions on my page, resulting in people beginning to cry ‘Troll alert’—yet they kept insisting they were ‘one of us.’  I checked out their Facebook pages and at first glance they seemed perfectly normal–had all the correct Conservative Pages and Groups ‘liked’, including key Conservative catchphrases like “Constitution” and “Fox News.”  But looking deeper, I knew immediately who they really were and what they were trying to do.  On their pages, I was able to see dozens and dozens of negative comments they’d been leaving on almost every Conservative site on Facebook (including my own).  It was as if they were cut-and-pasting the same statements all over Facebook—“He’s a RINO!” or “She’s too stupid to win!” or “He voted against (_______) so he’s a RINO!”  After following their trails and seeing the debates they were inciting all over the place, I knew I’d caught myself a few ConTrolls.

Don’t get me wrong; just because you’re passionately for or against a politician doesn’t mean you’re considered a ConTroll.  We all have gripes about almost every politician, myself included.  No politician is perfect nor has perfect voting records on every issue–and we can’t all like everyone equally.  But every Conservative I know has at least ONE politician they respect other than President Reagan; on the contrary, the ConTroll rarely if ever says anything good about any Conservative.  If asked straight-out, he will usually either try to divert attention away from the question or, if desperate not to blow his cover, will mention someone’s name with a back-handed swipe to undermine THAT person, too.  Remember:  the ConTroll hates all Conservatives so the last thing they want to do is elevate anyone on our side in any way.

What the ConTroll is ultimately looking for is cracks on our Conservative veneer through which they can squish their poison.  All they need to do is sprinkle a little seed of doubt here—a little piece of “concern” there—while subtly mentioning every negative side of every issue.  The ConTroll rarely talks badly about the Liberal side unless they feel they absolutely have to—but mostly, their job is to tear down OUR side, to make us feel doubt and concern about people on our side.  And all they have to do is jump into a conversation disguised as “one of us,” point out all those bad things and then disappear.  They want to take advantage of our concerns, exploit our fears, propagate our frustrations, deflate any ideas or solutions to problems and possibly even to incite violence.  Bottom line, they want to break us down from within—and they are counting on our side imploding.

And when you think about it, that’s really all they have to do to win in 2012, isn’t it?

The GREAT thing about ConTrolls (and all Liberals-in-general) is that they’re not very smart.  They remind me of a Simpson’s episode called “The Prisoner.” A female mad scientist tries to capture Homer by releasing a giant balloon (which Homer promptly pops).  Her partner asks, “Why did you think a big balloon would stop people?”  Her response, in typical Liberal form:  “Shut up, that’s why!”

Now, personally I understood her rationale (because of my irrational fear of balloons).  But the Simpson’s/ConTroll analogy totally explains their ultimate reasoning for almost everything they believe when cornered with actual facts, truth and light:  “Shut up, that’s why!”


Note The above article and/or blog post is included in my following blog post, along with numerous other articles and/or blog posts and videos that relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

Obamanites Get Violent in Support of the Agenda!

Note: If you have a problem viewing any of the listed blog posts, please copy the web site and paste on your browser.  Sure seems like any subject matter that may be considered controversial is being censored-what happened to free speech?

“Food For Thought”

“God Bless & Keep Our USA Safe”

Semper Fi!


Views: 13


You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center



Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

Political Cartoons by Chip BokThe cartoonist's homepage,


YIKES!!! Chelsea Clinton Emphatically States A Person With A Beard And A Penis Can ‘Absolutely’ Identify As A Woman

  • The one issue Hillary and Chelsea don’t appear to agree on entirely is transgender self-identification
  • In an interview with The Sunday Times, journalist Decca Aitkenhead asked the Clintons about transgender self-identification
  • Chelsea Clinton replied ‘yes’ emphatically when asked if someone with a beard and penis can ever be a woman
  • ‘It’s going to take a lot more time and effort to understand what it means to be defining yourself differently,’ Hillary said
  • Aitkenhead said Hillary became ‘uneasy’ when the question was asked while Chelsea shot a ‘furious stare’ at the journalist as her mother answered
  • Hillary added: ‘It’s a very big generational discussion, because this is not something I grew up with or ever saw’

(Daily Mail) – It may appear Hillary and Chelsea Clinton always see eye-to-eye, but in a recent interview one topic cracked the facade of the like-minded mother-daughter power duo.

The one issue Hillary and Chelsea don’t appear to agree on entirely is transgender self-identification.

In an interview with The Sunday Times, journalist Decca Aitkenhead asked the Clintons if someone with a beard and a penis can ever be a woman, to which Chelsea replied emphatically, ‘Yes.’

However, as Aitkenhead describes it, Hillary looked ‘uneasy’, and blamed generational gaps for being less accepting.

‘Errr. I’m just learning about this,’ Hillary responded. ‘It’s a very big generational discussion, because this is not something I grew up with or ever saw. It’s going to take a lot more time and effort to understand what it means to be defining yourself differently.’

The Clintons sat sown with Aitkenhead to promote the book they co-authored, The Book of Gutsy Women: Favorite Stories of Courage and Resilience.

The book features Danica Roem, the first trans woman elected to a U.S. state legislature.

According Aitkenhead’s account, she tells Hillary during the interview that many British feminists of Hillary’s generation have a problem with the idea that a ‘lesbian who doesn’t want to sleep with someone who has a penis is transphobic.’

Hillary nods in agreement, while Chelsea ‘stiffens and stares at me’, according to Aitkenhead.

The journalist then adds that many women of Hillary’s generation are uncomfortable with biological males sharing women’s bathrooms.

‘I would say that, absolutely,’ Hillary nods firmly. ‘Absolutely. Yes.’

That’s when Chelsea begins shooting a ‘furious stare’ at Aitkenhead, who points it out to her.

‘I’m a terrible actor’, Chelsea laughs.

Chelsea then says she is thrilled with the National Health Service’s decision to assign patients to single-sex wards according to the gender they identify as, instead of their biological make up.

‘How can you treat someone if you don’t recognize who they feel and know in their core they are?’ Chelsea says.

‘And I strongly support children being able to play on the sports teams that match their own gender identity,’ she adds. ‘I think we need to be doing everything we can to support kids in being whoever they know themselves to be and discovering who they are.’

At this point Hillary looks conflicted.

‘I think you’ve got to be sensitive to how difficult this is,’ Hillary says. ‘There are women who’d say [to a trans woman], ”You know what, you’ve never had the kind of life experiences that I’ve had. So I respect who you are, but don’t tell me you’re the same as me.” I hear that conversation all the time.’

Despite the clear tension in the room, the pair say they don’t argue about this topic.

But according to Aitkenhead, ‘I get the impression they don’t like to present anything less than a united front to the world.’


© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service