Trump humor


Recommended Posts

43 minutes ago, turkeyfoot said:

Wow, Michael, just what is the real story and what is to be believed?

Geoff,

Why, whatever the establishment says, obviously.

They've done such great work up to now.

We should believe every word they say...

:evil: 

At least they know how to run needless wars for profit really well. :) 

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously? Could it have been a urinalist finding source material?

V. TOTAL AMOUNT AWARDED 293. In light of the foregoing, the Tribunal awards Iran a total of U.S.$842,468.14 in these Cases. This sum includes U.S.$268,161.77, the total of the amounts found due and owing to Iran under this Award, and U.S.$574,306.37, the aggregate pre-judgment interest on those amounts. Further, the Tribunal awards Iran simple post-judgment interest on U.S.$842,468.14 at the successive prevailing prime bank lending rates in the United States for the period of non-payment of this Award.

http://www.iusct.net/General Documents/AWARD/1-A-AWARD NO. 602-A15 (IV)A24-FT-EN.pdf

Dont take my word for it. ) Thats at least twice $400M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, turkeyfoot said:

Dont take my word for it. ) Thats at least twice $400M.

Geoff,

One person on TV (I can't remember who) put it by analogy and I thought it was a very good analogy.

Suppose the US had made a debt with the Weimar Republic in Germany. Then after Hitler took over and was starting to invade other countries, he sent people over to the US collect the debt.

Do you think it would be wise to pay that debt? Some of the Weimar Republic politicians who helped make it were shot and/or imprisoned by Hitler.

That Iran debt that people on the left are squawking about, the one where $400 million was paid in cash (a deal that any drug lord would have loved) was made with the government system of the Shah of Iran. Did you see what the new regime did to that government and the people who worked for him (the people who helped make that deal)? They're dead and many had a little help getting that way. And now the new regime in Iran sponsors terrorism.

How far do we need to go in arming our enemy before common sense kicks in?

I think paying nothing would have been a lot cheaper... Safer, too...

And not nearly as dumbass as paying...

:) 

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

 

Do you think it would be wise to pay that debt? 

How far do we need to go in arming our enemy before common sense kicks in?

I think paying nothing would have been a lot cheaper... Safer, too...

And not nearly as dumbass as paying...

:) 

Michael

Itd be easier to say no to that.

But If I owed someone who began doing vile things I might just pay them before believing that a stop payment would affect what they had intended to do. What is lost is their money.

My understanding is we sold planes to our ally Iran, they paid and then we reneged on the deal when 52 hostages were taken. 

Whether that happened is not germane to whether it is fair to pose the situation as this: the keeping/taking of something that doesnt belong to you. Would it surprise anyone that it would increase the chance of hostility?

Its hard to deal with monsters but my integrity means I give them their money back first. Then kick them in the ass if my interests were involved, when theyre least expecting it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, turkeyfoot said:

Its hard to deal with monsters but my integrity means I give them their money back first.

Geoff,

I see acts of war in a different light.

I think it is stupid to pay an active enemy irrespective of the deal. You are giving him arms to harm you with.

Once the hostilities stop, then you can talk about who owes what. But not while he is fighting you or beefing up a war machine with all indications saying he intends to fight you while he is, in the background, killing innocent civilians in other countries.

What gives a party like that a right to the money? He has abdicated morality. Ayn Rand identified a principle that gives him the appearance of the right: sanction of the victim.

I refuse to give that sanction to someone intent on killing me, my loved ones, my good neighbors and my country-people.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice work! I'll be a monkeys uncle. That argument detailed an abstract idea with several concrete examples in a contextual hierarchy by adding moral clarity with Ayn Rands imprimatur cinched together with a word making it stick. All done in a polite manner. 

Not sure there is much there having to do with either Trump or humor. ;)

Thanks Michael, I really appreciate that explanation. I was in deep weeds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CpnmbKnUIAAoW3B.jpg

 

CpsnuYpXEAABY9W.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is cute. It's from The Onion (here).

Quote

Details Of Trump’s Economic Plan

Donald Trump unveiled his administration’s economic policy plan Monday at the Detroit Economic Club. Here are Trump’s main economic proposals:

Prevent American companies from outsourcing jobs to women or minorities

Lower the corporate tax rate for CEOs too stupid to find a loophole

Do whatever you’re supposed to do with interest rates

Larger numbers for everyone

Round up and deport nation’s manufacturing robots

Raise taxes on the ultra-foreign

Spur innovation by speeding up demise of habitable climate

Cap top income tax rate at 25 percent or 33 percent or 14 percent or something in that general vicinity, but it’s hard to tell where the chips will fall

America’s financial woes to be eased significantly by cash gifts from America’s father

:)

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bit of background to the Sassy Trump video. The voice-over artist is a British actor. Here's a paragraph from Uproxx and another example of comic genius. "People Can’t Seem To Get Enough Of Peter Serafinowicz’s ‘Sassy Trump’"

 

Quote

 

Peter Serafinowicz has been dropping ‘Trump Dubs’ online since around Christmas 2015, with a few variations thrown in for good measure. It started with a very sophisticated version of the Donald with an English accent, later adapted to a tough guy cockney accent that would make Guy Ritchie excited. But since then, a clear front runner in the voice over game has been declared and his name is Sassy Trump.

The key behind any of these Trump Dubs is that they are indeed Trump’s words, not some sort of Bad Lip Reading spin off that goes off the rails. 

This one is a scream. It re-litigates the vicious Attack of the Khans. 

 

Edited by william.scherk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/9/2016 at 10:06 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

And it's not just me. Scott Adams, the Dilbert guy, has almost made a career recently out of talking about this stuff (Adams says he is a trained hypnotist).

A couple of fun and funny peculiar Scott Adams notes. There is a revealing interview with him at The Ringer, "Is Dilbert Creator Scott Adams Now Affecting The Election?" (sub-hed Trump, Dilbert, Wizards, Fear, and Testosterone | Scott Adams is the presidential election’s weirdest, most provocative pundit. And it’s only gonna get weirder)

Q: In your Reddit AMA, you led with the fact that you’re a trained hypnotist. I’m wondering how that manifests itself in your everyday life.

A: So I took the course in hypnosis when I was in my 20s. And I was trying to learn, really, how the mind works. And I figured it would apply to everything I did.

-- and from the second-to-last  article at Adams' blog:

Quote

 

My best guess is that Trump is genuinely behind in the polls, and unless something big changes, he will lose the election.

But something big always happens. Probably several big things will happen between now and November. And it might include one or more of these things:

1. New Clinton health issue or revelation

2. New Wikileak that is more damaging than what we have seen.

3. New Clinton Foundation revelations worse than what we have seen.

4. Trump makes an uncharacteristically empathetic speech that shows he can take advice, is not irrational, and that he loves all Americans.

5. The Shy Trump Supporter is really a monster size.

6. Godzilla changes sides.

7. I take sides.

8. A major terror event.

9. Trump outperforms expectations in the debates (especially the first one).

Anything can happen. But I think there are more potential shocks on the Clinton side because any bad news about Trump’s character or business dealings are already baked into the cake. He is virtually shock-proof. Clinton is not.

I still predict a Trump landslide, based on the 3rd act movie formula. Trump is in his deepest hole right now. This is when the surprise happens (next two months) if it is going to happen. He’s had other deep holes, but none as deep as this. This is the big one because time is running out.

 


 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

William,

I get why you think Michele Bachmann is an object of humor due to her Christian culture that you disparage, but I don't get why her advising Trump on foreign policy is humorous. Bachmann sat on enough committee meetings in the House of Representatives that dealt with all kinds of foreign affairs (especially when she was on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence).

Bachmann has a lot of insider knowledge about what Congress has seen and Trump needed that kind of input. Granted, he doesn't need it so much anymore now that he is getting security briefings.

Your humorizing this would be like someone laughing at Hillary Clinton getting financial regulations advice from Barney Frank--with only that being the point of the humor. I know some people would think that funny because of his culture, his funny way of speaking, etc., but I doubt you would. I think you would wonder what the deal was given Frank's curriculum, maybe bigotry?

Jeez, neither of us are stereotypes...

:) 

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

William,

Dayamm, my post wasn't funny at all.

:) 

My point is if you want to mock Bachmann and Trump, why not add a little humor? Seeing how this is a humor thread and all...

Humor without a payoff is snark and nothing more.

Here's what I mean.

For example, you can do like you did and say Bachmann is advising Trump of foreign policy (including the tweet). But that's only the set-up, not the whole thing. You have to follow through by adding something like: including building the Mexican wall--and inject a meme to illustrate:

08.21.2016-16.54.png

She didn't say that, but it's a good example to illustrate my point.

Besides, it is funny even if it isn't accurate. :) 

Michael

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

William,

I get why you think Michele Bachmann is an object of humor

Maybe, maybe not.  You may have left your Trump Goggles on while doing your research on the lady.  

To put it politely, I believe Bachmann is a lightweight on matters of foreign policy. As a thinker, as a policy-maker or analyst, she is not top rank.  Because of that, I think she adds another hundred thirty pounds of  lead cargo to the old Steamship Trump.  But I expect she was self-aggrandizing. Does she communicate to Trump in writing, policy briefs, suggested reading? Does she call him up or vice versa?  

As for her privately-held religion, I couldn't care less. But. Evangelizing for her particular  faith to be represented in government policy is somewhat different.  Search up "Michelle Bachmann"  LGBT. Consider she believes gays can be 'fixed' in so-called reparative therapy. Consider her as a leading Family Research Council kind of politician. 

Consider her crude religiosity on matters that mean something to me, outside Trump Dome.

Quote

[...]t I don't get why her advising Trump on foreign policy is humorous. Bachmann sat on enough committee meetings in the House of Representatives that dealt with all kinds of foreign affairs (especially when she was on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence).

Bachmann has a lot of insider knowledge about what Congress has seen and Trump needed that kind of input. Granted, he doesn't need it so much anymore now that he is getting security briefings.

Ah. How about this -- because she has made a Trump connection, Objectivish people or objective-ish folks should be soberly appreciative, attach a halo of mastery to her head -- on matters of foreign policy?  Are we  able to make an independent examination of her record and her wisdom, bring up her mastery or unintelligence in some aspect of foreign policy?

While we do that, nobody laugh please. 

Quote

Your humorizing this would be like someone laughing at Hillary Clinton getting financial regulations advice from Barney Frank--with only that being the point of the humor. I know some people would think that funny because of his culture, his funny way of speaking, etc., but I doubt you would. I think you would wonder what the deal was given Frank's curriculum, maybe bigotry?\

You know what word you use sometimes -- gobs?  Gobs of people?  I will plainly state that gobs of people think the former House member is a lightweight. The analogous situation does not map.   Did Frank have a reputation as a hard-cored evangelical zealot on gay issues?  Did he have a reputation as a lightweight?  Did you want to make a Barney Frank joke and need some tips?  First idea ... contrast him, a married gay man, with Michelle Bachmann, married to a gay man (rimshot), advising Trump on LGBT issues in Foreign Policy. 

Michael, some people think Bachman is a joke and do not support her irrational beliefs on human sexuality. They laugh at her pretensions. It's OK to make allusions to that gob here, unless we need to pre-clear a message in this thread.

I kid you not.

Quote

Jeez, neither of us are stereotypes...

:) 

Michael

Yah.  But Bachman is, for better or worse, is an object of ridicule for her perceived stupidities to some sensibilities, a living stereotype of Dunning-Kruger effects.  To offer herself up as evidence of quality in the TrumpVerse 'advisor' room is risible, a giggle, a chortle -- for some.  If you don't get the joke, that is all right. Once a joke is explained, it is no longer funny.  Except for the gobs.

More seriously, you seem to be attempting to patrol a humour thread.  That could be funny in itself.   Goggles on. Goggles off.  

Just kidding about Snark Patrol. Thank you for recognizing why people tend to laugh at Michelle Bachmann's pretensions.  Glad to take your mind off the troubles on USS Trump.

1 hour ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

[Y]ou can do like you did and say Bachmann is advising Trump of foreign policy (including the tweet). But that's only the set-up 

I am going to contest this rule at Humour Court.   The set-up is Bachmann's pre-existing condition, her reputation as a nut, almost a kook, Boss. I'll try to do better next time. I don't want to be sent to The Lake.

Edited by william.scherk
Gobs. Gobs, I say.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, william.scherk said:
2 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Trump of foreign policy (including the tweet). But that's only the set-up 

I am going to contest this rule at Humour Court.

William,

It's not a rule.

It's a question of stylistic competence.

You are normally a lot more competent than snark at XXX as a stereotype... yuk yuk, yuk.

Here. Let me hit you right back on that angle from an angle where you might understand what I'm talking about.

Man, I let out a bellylaugh when I saw your post about Michele Bachmann saying she advised Trump on foreign policy. She's too stupid for that and thank you for pointing out that out. We both know she's a goddam woman! Who the hell does she think she is, anyway, a man?

:) 

See? That kind of humor doesn't take any brains... And it presumes you're just as bigoted as I am (if that were what I actually thought).

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, william.scherk said:

More seriously, you seem to be attempting to patrol a humour thread.

William,

If my comments above didn't resonate, carry on as usual. I can't (and won't) dictate taste.

Low-level mockery it is, I guess...

As the saying goes, you can't feed caviar to a pig. He won't eat it. He wants slop. :evil: 

I'm not patrolling anything (other than spam and stuff like that). 

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's an example of some fine low-level attempts at humor. It's not about Trump or Clinton, but it is about Roger Ailes, who is informally advising Trump.

After a lot of name-calling and hating on Fox fans for being haters, these guys say that Fox News is a perverted creation of Roger Ailes's perverted brain, which is perverted because he's fat, impotent and victimized women.

I wonder what their view of Bill Clinton's brain and its products are... 

:evil:  :) 

That's why I'm not a fan of bad-mouthing qua bad-mouthing. It's way too easy...

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I know what's bothering me.

It's humor based on hatred. I don't get any fun out of that. My intention when I started this thread was to have fun, not mock targets from hatred. And it's OK to hate at times, I guess. I just don't find it funny.

My humor comes from poking a person in the ribs, not spitting in his face and laughing at his expression as he wipes the spittle off his cheek and a drop drips from his chin to his shirt.

It's the emotion of hatred itself that bums the shit out of me. I don't like being around it. 

Even when I lampoon Hillary Clinton, who I think it corrupt to the gills and then some, it's not from a wish to dehumanize her, to categorize her at a subhuman level where I'm the superior one. It's to poke her in the ribs, and by extension, her supporters, most of whom I believe are good people. Some of my lampooning can get biting because she does some really bad shit, but I never intend a "wipe her out of existence because she does not deserve to exist among us" level. If she died, I would not feel pleasure.

Hatred drags me down. All hatred, especially my own.

Interlude over.

I'll try to get back to the funny stuff...

Michael

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now