Trump's organ
“I have broken more Elton John records, he seems to have a lot of records. And I, by the way, I don’t have a musical instrument. I don’t have a guitar or an organ. No organ. Elton has an organ. And lots of other people helping. No, we’ve broken a lot of records. We’ve broken virtually every record. Because you know, look I only need this space. They need much more room. For basketball, for hockey and all of the sports, they need a lot of room. We don’t need it. We have people in that space. So we break all of these records. Really we do it without like, the musical instruments. This is the only musical: the mouth. And hopefully, the brain attached to the mouth. Right? The brain, more important than the mouth, is the brain. The brain is much more important.”
What are we to make of this?
Comments (92)
Yes, brain good.
Have Elton make a song of it?
Let's all remember that Donald Trump speaks like the majority of Americans, according to his followers.
Let's also remember that through linguistic analysis it's thought that Trump has early stage dementia. Supposedly...
That he is capable of communicating so effectively that he's been able to have secured the most competitive political position in the world, and you lack the comprehension to comprehend him or those who comprehend him.
As Dylan said, "Don't criticize what you can't understand."
Lol. "linguistic analysis". That's a really professional way to say he sounds like an idiot. :yum:
I'm not sure if there's anything to understand here. Ok, you like the fact that he speaks American? Whoopty-doo, so do many other Americans.
No no no. You simply lack the comprehension to comprehend Trump or those who comprehend their comprehension of Trump.
Comprende?
Ohh, then that settles it. Comprende, Senior Akanthinos.
Fear of castration - "No organ."
Penis envy - "Elton has an organ"
Infantile rage - "we’ve broken a lot of records."[
Orality - "This is the only musical: the mouth.".
He's obviously afraid of his father, and afraid of becoming a woman - almost certainly a repressed homosexual.
That you have no idea what the context is, and you cannot make a difference between written speech and spoken speech. Watch it here:
It's a horribly incoherent infantile mess. It's only that when you see it spoken in context, and you understand he is referencing the crowd, it doesn't look like he is actually insane. That's a pathetically low bar. Anyone who has ever experienced an accomplished speech would recognize that this is the ramblings of a man-child. We should be standing up for quality not lauding this kind of rubbish. There was a time when oratory was appreciated. This is utterly retrograde, a descent into verbal faeces, and should be called out for that lest we lose sight of the actual potential of the spoken word to evince the higher emotions, intuitions and rational faculties. But yes, journalists are very bad, #MeToo sucks and Elizabeth Warren is Pocahontas. :vomit: :vomit: :vomit:
His speeches make much more sense if you are drunk.
He is also capable of shooting laser beams from his eyes and eating an entire cheeseburger in a single bite.
What's not to like?
Being trolled by a die hard fan?
The fact that without visual clues it needs to be translated into English to be properly understood, that any random imbecile can babble on like that and similarly doesn't deserve a huge audience in front of which to do so, that it's narcissistic, empty, and lacking all rhetorical flourish and skill, that it encourages similar stupidities of speech, that it motivates an utterly vacuous and partisan defence along the delusional lines that such a lack of style and content indicates an anti-elite everyman mindset (though Trump clearly considers himself the elite of the elite), that nobody gives a flying fuck about Elton John any more (it's not the eighties, Don), that it's simply an utterly shit example of public speech. And so on. (I could go on).
Once or twice a day? :chin:
https://realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html
Why is a poisonously unhealthy beverage like Coca Cola the most popular soft drink in the world?
That's likely to continue until he's either impeached or undergoes the services of a professional taxidermist and is put on display in the Smithsonian.
Because 95%+ of people are idiots. But if I say that, you'll call me an anti-social elitist!
Falling for marketing/PR doesn't make you an "idiot" and Trump voters, Trump supporters and Coca Cola drinkers are not idiots just because of those preferences. Some of them do need to aim for higher standards with regard to their gustatory and auditory intake though.
Yes, and just to make it clear, I'm not objecting to anything political in this. It's a purely aesthetic aversion, a rhetorical allergy, if you will, to these linguistic torments.
But trying to find something, anything, redeeming here.
Maybe a twisted resonance of Beckett?
[quote=Trump]This is the only musical: the mouth. And hopefully, the brain attached to the mouth. Right? The brain, more important than the mouth, is the brain. The brain is much more important.[/quote]
[quote=Beckett - (Not I) ]reflex they call it ... no feeling of any kind ... but the lids ... even best of times ... who feels them? ... opening ... shutting ... all that moisture ... but the brain still ... still sufficiently ... oh very much so! ... at this stage ... in control ... under control ... to question even this ...[/quote]
http://www.ricorso.net/rx/library/authors/classic/Beckett_S/Not_I.htm
May the gods of literature have mercy on my soul.
True, your mother and I owe more than you know to Coke.
[Edit: Apologies to all for mistaking this for the Lounge and not yet mastering the art of talking about Trump before descending into absurd, sexual and/or scatological references.]
A dead beaver on your organ.
Early stage?
Don't expect any improvement. Donald is an old duck with lots of oil in his feathers and criticism just beads up and rolls off. Nothing sticks.
Quoting Baden
Other than a sizable dose of sugar, [about the same as orange juice] what is poisonous in a can of Coca Cola? What's not to like about it? Did you see the Australian movie, "The Coca Cola Kid?" Coca Cola will be preserved as an American Heritage Beverage after the Revolution. If you don't like it now, you will like it after the Revolution. A properly done hamburger, fries, and a coke has a eucharistic quality to it.
This is a timeless joke. Very good. Baden probably doesn't like it. Too sexist.
The meal combination you mentioned is indeed a tasty treat. Emphasis on the word “treat”. Unfortunately, a can of Coke or Pepsi can deliver a sizable percentage of RDA of empty-calorie carbs in about 5 seconds flat, the way most kids drink it. With the tooth-rotting power of the phosphoric acid, combined with the jolt of sugar and caffeine, in my opinion it’s practically meth lite in a can. Former cola and mountain dew addict speaking. Much happier and healthier without it. Just my two cents. Back to the discussion of the leader of the fast food world... :point:
Would that make it somewhat better or somewhat worse?
"Dead" would be a tad more perverse I think.
Maybe, but then it depends on what is meant by "dead". Literally or metaphorically dead.
At least one of his organs is sub-par.
:chin:
You know, like lifeless, as in "it was a lifeless performance".
Listen to this speech, and tell me you disagree:
This speech was a political earthquake, you cannot find one like it in recent history.
Just taking this point, that's part of the charm. The fact that he's not a "smooth-talking liberal" hep to the lastest popular music trends, is part of why he's loved. (Compare and contrast Hillary desperately trying to ally herself with popular celebrities.)
You just don't understand how much everything from "politics as usual" to the cult of political correctness is hated and loathed by ordinary people. The feeling in the country among the working classes and lower middle classes (and around the world, with the general populist revolts) is one of extreme dislike of university-indoctrinated, free riding elites, and what they've been doing to the world, comparable to the hate for rentier aristocrats during the French revolution.
Trump went to an Ivy League university and inherited a $200 million ($800 million adjusted for inflation) business from his father.
Kim Kardashian can read lies off a teleprompter too. This is one that he didn't write. That's obvious because it's coherent if ironic. It's a run of the mill populist speech written probably by Bannon or Miller. More a loud fart than an earthquake.
Anyway, looking at the main points :
Reducing the power of special interests? I agree of course. Unfortunately and predictably, there are more than ever. It was gullible of you to believe him on that point.
"The numbers compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan organization that tracks money in American politics, might not seem surprising. The amount spent on lobbying during the first nine months of Donald Trump’s presidency, it found, was higher than in any corresponding period since 2012."
"President Donald Trump and his appointees have stocked federal agencies with ex-lobbyists and corporate lawyers who now help regulate the very industries from which they previously collected paychecks, despite promising as a candidate to drain the swamp in Washington."
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/01/21/opinion/lobbyists-washington-trump.html
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/lobbyists-get-ethics-waivers-to-work-for-trump-despite-executive-order/
(If you don't like these sources there are hundreds more demonstrating that this is one of the most corrupt administrations in modern history.)
Protectionism. The jobs he talks about protecting are gone and not coming back. His trade war is an infantile exercise in futility. Ask any economist.
Political correctness: So, POTUS gets to call his rivals "Pocahontas" and laugh at abused women and you call that progress? Sorry, but how is the President licensing this kind of childish vulgarity desirable? Would you want your kids talking like him?
Like the EPA.
First there was Pruitt, who as attorney general for Oklahoma dissolved the Environmental Protection Unit and raised campaign contributions from the energy industry, including $300,000 from the oil and gas industry. He'd also sued the EPA 13 times.
Now there's Andrew Wheeler, a former coal industry lobbyist.
http://www.newsweek.com/ryan-zinke-spent-139k-doors-here-are-all-trump-officials-caught-misspending-838047
It's outrageous no doubt, but you've not drawn a link back from the door repair man to Zinke. It's possible that the person who hired the door fixer man was hooking a friend up, getting a kick-back, or paid so little attention to things that people ran amok. It's possible Zinke orchestrated the whole thing, but also possible he didn't know. We can speculate, be cynical, be naïve, be supportive, be critical, be whatever. All I can say is that if I had it to do all over again and could rethink my vote, I'd vote for Trump again.
Trump would literally have to defecate in your MAGA cap for you to change your vote, so unless I can get him to do that, I'm not expecting a different answer from you, or any Trump voter. Maybe I can get him to do that. I'll work on it.
Apologies @Banno, I'm using the nauseous gases emitted by Trump and his merry band of reverse Robin Hoods to fuel an OP that may have more on its original flight path that I've missed. Where to next?
I second that vote. :up:
You can't go back and change it so who cares?
Trump is too classy to take a hat shit.
You don't know what I can do.
You don't know what I know.
It's worse than futility. It's counterproductive. He is cutting off his nose to spite his face. @Agustino, read what [i]The Economist[/I] has to say about it.
The prize for your loyalty will be an end to Roe v Wade, an extra two trillion in debt you pass on to the next generation, and a debasement of political discourse including the legitimization of sexism, racism and anti-semitism that will stain your country for years to come. Not to mention Trump's trolling laughter when he walks away from the mess he has created into a huge TV deal.
When I was telling you it's gonna happen, you didn't believe me :wink:
Well that's the great debate. They shouldn't have this right because a) the Constitution gives women the right to end their pregnancy, and so the states don't have the legal right to restrict it or b) women have the natural right to end their pregnancy, and so states shouldn't have the legal right to restrict it.
I don't think this is a "natural" right at all.
Quoting Michael
Then the Constitution is wrong, how about we change it?
Hence the great debate. Some say it is, others say it isn't. Some say people have the natural right to use firearms in self-defence, others say they don't.
Quoting Agustino
That's what the Amendment process is for.
There are some matters which don't concern merely the person in question. The life of a child, for example, doesn't concern just the mother. It concerns the rest of society as well. An abortion isn't something the mother does herself, it's something that we, the rest of us, have to do for her. She shouldn't be able to force us to do it for her.
She isn't. There are plenty of doctors who are willing. What Roe vs Wade ensured is that no state can make it illegal to have an abortion. That's not the same as ensuring that no doctor can refuse to perform it.
Yes, but the community should be able to control its own standards of decency. If liberal Cali's want to have abortion after abortion, that's their problem. But maybe Texans want no abortions in their communities. So that's precisely the problem, that Roe v Wade is controlling how communities are organised. One cannot organise a community where abortions are prohibited.
Then it sucks to be them. Because a woman's right to have an abortion (performed by a willing doctor) is more important than other people's desire not to have abortions performed in their community.
Just as I'm sure others will say that a person's right to possess a firearm for self-defence is more important than other people's desire not to have firearms in their community.
I disagree on that.
Quoting Michael
I disagree. There needs to be a point when the desires of the collective trump the desires of the individual.
My political predictions haven't been much better than my footballing ones. :sad:
As much as I personally dislike the idea of abortion, I don't think the govt should get involved in this issue, or should legislate morality more generally outside of those issues which clearly impact others in the community in adverse ways.
In my naivety I think people should be led to do what's right and honorable and noble through free choice rather than through government or other forms of external compulsion. And I say that as someone who identifies as a social conservative in many ways.
Best to work at shifting public opinion at the grassroots level.
I agree, long term that is the adequate strategy. At the same time... is everyone capable of it?
Why? And this isn't just about desires but also about rights. Rights, presumably, are more important than desires. If the woman has a right to end her pregnancy and the community only has the desire not to have abortions performed in their community, then the individual right trumps the collective desire.
Depends on the specific act and what type of impact is has on others. I tend in the direction of preserving individual freedom over the desires of the collective - especially on issues related to sex - even though I think that genuine freedom involves much more than license, and would include the factoring in of the affect of one's actions on the wider community.
CNN talking points which is really speculation, no?
CNN are not the ones aiming to take away your abortion rights by repealing Roe v Wade, Tiff, that's Trump's stated aim. It's on the record. Look it up. He may fail, but if he does it will be despite your help and support and misguided loyalty.
"Ending Roe v Wade" which is what you stated is the same talking point of CNN and NBC, who are all reporting how the new justice will vote on the case that may never see the light of day for change.
It is all speculation, nothing more. IF more comes of it, we will handle it then.
However "an extra two trillion in debt you pass on to the next generation, and a debasement of political discourse including the legitimization of sexism, racism and anti-semitism that will stain your country for years to come" are your words and opinions not the words of our present administration.
Unless you can provide citation of who said that WE as a nation are going to legalize sexism, racism and anti-Semitism, it is all speculation.
If you don't even know what Trump supports or what he said, you are in no position to argue. What I said is straight from Trump not the CNN/NBC bogeyman.
Wallace: What I am asking you is do you want to see the court overturn Roe v Wade?
Trump: If we put two or three justices on...that will happen, and that will happen automatically because I am putting pro-life justices on the court.
I quoted Trump so if you want to argue, argue with him.
Quoting ArguingWAristotleTiff
You need to look up the word "legitimization" in a dictionary, Tiff.
I understand what Trump said but I also know that CNN and NBC are pushing the point that Roe v Wade will be overturned, as if abortion rights are the only subject that SCOTUS will rule on. If Roe v Wade is overturned, the rights to abortion will return to states rights and that is one step closer to what the people of that state want.
Quoting Baden
I intentionally bolded "legitimization" when I quoted you and I responded withlegalization.
A LOT of ideas are lent legitimization simply by being held by a leader such as the President but that doesn't make it legitimate. President Bush believes in creationism but do you think that because of that perspective, that the USA citizen who believed in evolution up until he took office now believes in creationism as well?
Come on Baden, give the "WE" who make up the USA a little more credit than that.
My point has nothing to do with CNN though. I don't have much time to watch CNN talk about it, and I don't care what they say. I quoted Trump pretty much directly. His opinion is what matters here as well as that of the judge he appoints.
Quoting ArguingWAristotleTiff
? You want it overturned then? What people? About 70% of Americans according to polls want it to stay.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/01/03/about-seven-in-ten-americans-oppose-overturning-roe-v-wade/
Quoting ArguingWAristotleTiff
It affects the public discourse negatively, Tiff, that's the stain I'm talking about. I don't think it's going to make everyone racist etc. Obviously it's not. But many people who have a racist streak in them feel emboldened more to express it now. They say that themselves in alt-right publications.