As IF Times

Source: Brzezinski says Trump complains he cant watch porn in White House

Among the many accomplishments that Donald Trump has managed to achieve during his term in office thus far, one of the most under reported, but no less significant deed, is to have shone a light on mental illness in the country.  While many people manage to live among society with varying degrees of it under control,  certain segments tend to attract more then their share of those afflicted with some kind of disorder.  With the emergence of Trump, the extent of mental illness can now be seen.

It’s now clearly obvious that the entertainment and media businesses are safe places for such afflicted people.  The further we progress into the Trump presidency, the more the flimsy veneer of sanity falls away from these people.  There is no longer even the attempt at pretense of rationality.  Trump derangement syndrome is a real thing.  Are people like Brzezinski, Reid, Kimmel, Colbert and numerous other media pundits not invoking self immolation of their careers as Michael Richards did years ago in an intemperate nightclub outburst?  These people have as much credibility as Colonel Sanders at a chicken retreat.  Their rabid sputtering is so bad, you have sit further away from the TV to avoid the spittle and foam.

The Mean Girls attacks are so pervasive that they really have to jump the shark to think of new angles of attack.  The accusations of misogyny, racism and mental instability are getting kind of threadbare and seem as old as bell bottoms and shoulder pads.  Some have tried the angle of small  hands, the ridicule of bad hair of course, the junk food diet, tweeting at all hours, multiple ice cream scoops, and now the accusation of inaccess to porn.

For the record, I happen to think witty takedowns of political figures should be appreciated, but the articulate utterances of “F..k Trump!” by Bobby DeNiro falls a bit short of the mark and if anything, shows that he would do well to stick to reading lines made up by others  and not try to formulate his own. Polysyllabic epithets are clearly not his thing.

Oddly, the more naked the bleating by Trump haters, the more obvious their tenuous grip on reality.  Instead of galvanizing support for their views, these smug utterances clearly illuminates their flawed mental state and convinces rational people to align their views with the Trump camp.  Like someone mired in quicksand, the harder the Trump haters struggle, the deeper they sink.  The author Robert A Heinlein once wrote:

“…But there seems to have been an actual decline in rational thinking. The United States had become a place where entertainers and professional athletes were mistaken for people of importance. They were idolized and treated as leaders; their opinions were sought on everything and they took themselves just as seriously… after all, if an athlete is paid a million or more a year, he knows he is important … so his opinions of foreign affairs and domestic policies must be important, too, even though he proves himself to be both ignorant and subliterate every time he opens his mouth…”

Or maybe it’s just a mental disorder.

Source: Yanny or Laurel? Audio clip spurs social media debate | The Star

Every once in a while, a new internet craze manages to capture the interest of otherwise uninterested observers.   We’re not talking about the Tide pod challenge here; that involves a subset of stupid people.  The phenomenon I refer to concerns people’s perceptions of what should be a common observation. A while ago, there was the viral sensation of whether a depicted image showed a woman wearing a white and gold dress or a blue and gold dress.  Further back, we had the one with a woman pirouetting either left or right on the screen.   The most recent craze is a voice expressing either the word “Laurel” or the word “Yanni”.

That there should be a debate over which word is being expressed is truly quizzical.  People have fallen into both camps as to which word they hear.  How can this be possible?  The words are not even close to being similar.  They may as well be watermelon and constipation.  And yet, the internet is abuzz with people insisting that they hear one word over the other.

This is a moment of epiphany.  Eventually, some brilliant neuropsychologist will attribute the variance to some kind of internal wiring specific to individuals.  But it also gives a clue as to the perceptions of events viewed through a political or cultural lens. To people on either side of the political aisle, they cannot understand the positions taken by those on the opposite….no matter how “obvious” it may seem.  Certainly some of this is simply partisan intransigence and biases can be attributed to tribal loyalties.  The most recent example of this relates to the characterization of MS-13 gang members in the U.S;  Trump says “animals”, Pelosi says “god’s children”.  Obviously, not a perception problem.

When a constituency roots for Bernie Sanders, they must see “compassionate socialist” whereas the reality is “rich white guy pushing communism”.  Those that support Al Gore see ” selfless oracle saving the earth” when in reality, it’s ” know nothing charlatan getting rich off mass naivete”.  And of course, when you say, “savior of the people” people will insist either Hilary or Trump.

But for people with no political stake, this Yanni/Laurel pop culture experience may reveal that there truly are differences in the way that things and events are perceived.  Maybe there is no way to convince people to see things in a logical light.  This could explain lots of absurdities in pop culture:  Rap music, the Kardashians, Justin Bieber, the Royals, CNN. It explains girls dating musicians,  fat men wearing skinny jeans and affirmative action.

It means that there is no way to persuade people to accept that their perceptions aren’t valid if that’s what they clearly see with their own lyin’ eyes.   It explains the audience for media networks that push narratives that are laughably obtuse.  To their credit, they have created quite the business exploiting this human trait. Narratives are pushed that have no relation to verifiable fact but a ready audience exists for the product. It explains people willing to endorse government policies that are obviously not in their own self interests and in fact, likely to be suicidal.  Some people have figured out that there will always be an appetite for their brand of nonsense.  After all,  if you know there are monkeys out there, get in the banana business.