What's new
By:

Oprah Stole The Show

DutchJazzer said:
#sheKNEW
wfcWMJBTyPrjv_x8qhd0McIROcnpKa8CMUam7trUC8o.jpg
Click to expand...
Looks like we've found the perfect person to give us a lecture on this subject.
 
For some people the contrast between a Trump and an Winfrey is the contrast between someone who appeals to our baser instincts and someone who appeals to the higher angels of our nature. I speak only for myself, but I do know many agree with me, both from knowing such people personally, as well as what I read by those who are part of the resistance to Trump, when I suggest that one thing that turns people off about Trump is seeing him as one who clearly appeals to people's baser instincts. This was there from the start, in that he created scapegoats upon whom people could focus their fear of change in the face of the culture wars, and their anger at the status quo. Simply put, if one is not into political leaders who make such appeals, perceive it to be an approach that lends itself to authoritarian tendencies, etc., then you probably found yourself within the community of resistance to Trump.

Oprah, on the other hand, has always seemed to be someone who appeals to the higher angels of human nature. Personally, I've never watched her much, or really been a fan. But, in contrast to Trump, I can see that she comes across as appealing to the higher angels of human nature.

Therefore, given the degree that Trump repulses many Americans, it seems small wonder that a powerful female personality like Oprah would elevate herself in the eyes of many who want nothing more then to escape the reign of a man who seems to make cruelty a part of his MO. To the point where even a single impassioned speech can launch an "Oprah for President" movement.

It's as if everyone is responding on an emotional level, at least those that hop on the Oprah bandwagon, because they have all along been responding to Trump on an emotional level. Tired of listening to their President appeal to people's baser instincts, Oprah appears the polar opposite, and there may be an overreaction toward her as a result. Both are products of celebrity culture. Neither has political or governing experience. But, for those who perceive Trump as cruel, perceiving Oprah as kind can cause this explosion of attraction to her as an alternative. Whether people are responding rationally, or not.
 
Red said:
For some people the contrast between a Trump and an Winfrey is the contrast between someone who appeals to our baser instincts and someone who appeals to the higher angels of our nature. I speak only for myself, but I do know many agree with me, both from knowing such people personally, as well as what I read by those who are part of the resistance to Trump, when I suggest that one thing that turns people off about Trump is seeing him as one who clearly appeals to people's baser instincts. This was there from the start, in that he created scapegoats upon whom people could focus their fear of change in the face of the culture wars, and their anger at the status quo. Simply put, if one is not into political leaders who make such appeals, perceive it to be an approach that lends itself to authoritarian tendencies, etc., then you probably found yourself within the community of resistance to Trump.

Oprah, on the other hand, has always seemed to be someone who appeals to the higher angels of human nature. Personally, I've never watched her much, or really been a fan. But, in contrast to Trump, I can see that she comes across as appealing to the higher angels of human nature.

Therefore, given the degree that Trump repulses many Americans, it seems small wonder that a powerful female personality like Oprah would elevate herself in the eyes of many who want nothing more then to escape the reign of a man who seems to make cruelty a part of his MO. To the point where even a single impassioned speech can launch an "Oprah for President" movement.

It's as if everyone is responding on an emotional level, at least those that hop on the Oprah bandwagon, because they have all along been responding to Trump on an emotional level. Tired of listening to their President appeal to people's baser instincts, Oprah appears the polar opposite, and there may be an overreaction toward her as a result. Both are products of celebrity culture. Neither has political or governing experience. But, for those who perceive Trump as cruel, perceiving Oprah as kind can cause this explosion of attraction to her as an alternative. Whether people are responding rationally, or not.
Click to expand...
Helluva post
 
Red said:
For some people the contrast between a Trump and an Winfrey is the contrast between someone who appeals to our baser instincts and someone who appeals to the higher angels of our nature. I speak only for myself, but I do know many agree with me, both from knowing such people personally, as well as what I read by those who are part of the resistance to Trump, when I suggest that one thing that turns people off about Trump is seeing him as one who clearly appeals to people's baser instincts. This was there from the start, in that he created scapegoats upon whom people could focus their fear of change in the face of the culture wars, and their anger at the status quo. Simply put, if one is not into political leaders who make such appeals, perceive it to be an approach that lends itself to authoritarian tendencies, etc., then you probably found yourself within the community of resistance to Trump.

Oprah, on the other hand, has always seemed to be someone who appeals to the higher angels of human nature. Personally, I've never watched her much, or really been a fan. But, in contrast to Trump, I can see that she comes across as appealing to the higher angels of human nature.

Therefore, given the degree that Trump repulses many Americans, it seems small wonder that a powerful female personality like Oprah would elevate herself in the eyes of many who want nothing more then to escape the reign of a man who seems to make cruelty a part of his MO. To the point where even a single impassioned speech can launch an "Oprah for President" movement.

It's as if everyone is responding on an emotional level, at least those that hop on the Oprah bandwagon, because they have all along been responding to Trump on an emotional level. Tired of listening to their President appeal to people's baser instincts, Oprah appears the polar opposite, and there may be an overreaction toward her as a result. Both are products of celebrity culture. Neither has political or governing experience. But, for those who perceive Trump as cruel, perceiving Oprah as kind can cause this explosion of attraction to her as an alternative. Whether people are responding rationally, or not.
Click to expand...

I find them both about as appealing as cancer and as someone who is subject to the consequences of US foreign policy, the prospect of the next US President being either of these people is ****ing disturbing. The possibility that the current farcical regime, headed by it's ridiculous caricature of an 80's B grade action hero crossed with Patrick Bateman continuing for another 4 years or him being replaced by a woman who has made her career with motherhood statements and platitudes is ridiculous. There is 360 million of you bastards surely you can find someone half way qualified for the ****ing job.

It really shows the contempt you people have not only for your politics but your democracy and the place that America holds in the world, I would be embarrassed if either of these people represented my country. (I'm frequently embarrassed by the people that lead mine mind you.) A pair of ****ing lightweights! These shills holding the same office as FDR or Eisenhower or Lincoln, as a society you should be ashamed of yourselves.

I need a cigarette
 
Rubashov said:
I find them both about as appealing as cancer and as someone who is subject to the consequences of US foreign policy, the prospect of the next US President being either of these people is ****ing disturbing. The possibility that the current farcical regime, headed by it's ridiculous caricature of an 80's B grade action hero crossed with Patrick Bateman continuing for another 4 years or him being replaced by a woman who has made her career with motherhood statements and platitudes is ridiculous. There is 360 million of you bastards surely you can find someone half way qualified for the ****ing job.

It really shows the contempt you people have not only for your politics but your democracy and the place that America holds in the world, I would be embarrassed if either of these people represented my country. (I'm frequently embarrassed by the people that lead mine mind you.) A pair of ****ing lightweights! These shills holding the same office as FDR or Eisenhower or Lincoln, as a society you should be ashamed of yourselves.

I need a cigarette
Click to expand...

If many Americans would rather be attracted to a human being who appeals to their higher angels, and not to a human being who appeals to their baser instincts, that is not, in and of itself, a bad thing at all. Indeed, that says something good about the American character. Note that this does not address the issue of qualifications at all. But it does speak to the goodness of the American people in general. That may be an overly idealistic notion on my part, but I'll stand by what I suggest. Attraction to any potential leader who appeals to the higher angels of our nature is not a bad thing at all.
 
You know who really stole the show!!!!!!!!!!!!


TRUMP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

look at the footbal game, listen to those cheers.

where would you rather steal the show at some hopnop rich elite self promoting, fake award show.

or where common folk watch a football game
 
Stoked said:
How obvious is it when you are in the minority that thinks so?
Click to expand...
You're saying that you have no idea what subject Oprah has decided to lecture us on either? I'm not sure I will ever be able to believe that only a minority of people could figure that out.
 
I believe Oprah got 3 standing ovations during her speech. When that happens, I think it's often because a person is speaking from the heart, with eloquence, and directly to the heart of the audience.

Some people have a gift in being able to speak to reason. With logic, and precision, and reasoned presentation, they can convince people that their suggestions really are the most logical, the best way, to approach a problem or an issue. That is a gift. To use one's power with words and reason to turn the tide.

But there are other speakers who, by speaking from the heart, directly to the heart, can actually move people. IMHO, that is an even greater gift. Oratory. If a person is able to move their listeners' hearts, that is a powerful gift indeed. Such a person can go a long way in life.

I think Americans want to be so moved. Trump can speak to the hearts of his listeners. But never with actual eloquence. In terms of eloquence, he's a very poor speaker. And what, in his listener's hearts, does he seek to stir, to awaken? Anger, resentment, even hate. Given the choice, would you rather a person speak to your baser instincts, or would you rather the innate goodness in your own heart be moved by a speaker with the true gift of a silver tongue, able to touch your heart with theirs?

It may not be Oprah, but I do believe there are many Americans hoping for a leader who can speak to them in such a way. Too many of us are sick, and weakened really, by the litany of low brow, brow beating, ugly talk, emenating from our President. They know we can do better. They are looking for such a leader to speak from the heart and inspire.

The reaction to Oprah's speech is a reflection of that hope on the part of many Americans. Sure, many were her friends. Sure it was a moment in the modern women's movement. The civil rights era is ongoing in this nation, and has been for many generations now. It's only social evolution, after all, and we are witnessing a major chapter in the women's civil rights movement. And yes, it was a theater of Hollywood elite. But the response to Oprah across the entire country was just as notable, and was also a sign that America is looking for someone who is not Donald Trump, but rather someone who will appeal to the higher angels of our nature. We do have them, and acting on them is far better for our nation then acting on our baser instincts.

We need to show the world who we really are, and if someone like Oprah reminds us of that need, that is not a bad thing. The pendulum swings inevitably.
 
Red said:
If many Americans would rather be attracted to a human being who appeals to their higher angels, and not to a human being who appeals to their baser instincts, that is not, in and of itself, a bad thing at all. Indeed, that says something good about the American character. Note that this does not address the issue of qualifications at all. But it does speak to the goodness of the American people in general. That may be an overly idealistic notion on my part, but I'll stand by what I suggest. Attraction to any potential leader who appeals to the higher angels of our nature is not a bad thing at all.
Click to expand...

The last 50 years of American history does not exactly demonstrate much in the way of the 'goodness of the American people'. Asymmetrical wars against third world nations, support for terrorist groups and military coups against democratically elected governments, predatory trade policy, walking away from international environmental and aid commitments, the general indifference to international law, internally a war against minorities and your under class. Hell pretty much every President you've elected since Kennedy has been a criminal (Ford and Carter aside). I find it a hell of a lot easier to believe in the continued gullibility, selfishness, stupidity and cruelty of the American people. There is no hope for America, it is over, those of us who consider ourselves western liberals should look toward Germany for an example of what a modern forward thinking society should look like.
 
Last edited:
Rubashov said:
The last 50 years of American history does not exactly demonstrate much in the way of the 'goodness of the American people'. Asymmetrical wars against third world nations, support for terrorist groups and military coups against democratically elected governments, predatory trade policy, walking away from international environmental and aid commitments, the general indifference to international law, internally a war against minorities and your under class. Hell pretty much every President you've elected since Kennedy has been a criminal (Ford and Carter aside). I find it a hell of a lot easier to believe in the continued gullibility, selfishness, stupidity and cruelty of the American people. There is no hope for America, it is over, those of us who consider ourselves western liberals should look toward Germany for an example of what a modern forward thinking society should look like.
Click to expand...

I wish I could disagree with all of this, but I cannot. However, I still believe in the goodness of people because I see so much of it around me. And I cannot give up hope that our better natures will ultimately prevail.
 
JazzGal said:
I wish I could disagree with all of this, but I cannot. However, I still believe in the goodness of people because I see so much of it around me. And I cannot give up hope that our better natures will ultimately prevail.
Click to expand...

I feel much the same about my own country. I hold Rupert Murdoch responsible for a lot of it but i also think it is a consequence of neo-liberalism. Cuts to public education and Universities have reduced the commonalities capacity to think critically for itself. I work with educated people, technically educated people, a great many of them are frighteningly ignorant of things outside of their specific technical education (some of them are frighteningly ignorant of what they've been technically educated in too).
 
So I can guess at what Oprah lectured about, but I don't actually know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top