The Trump Administration: A Zero On Rotten Tomatoes

"Trump Administration: The Movie" aspires to answer the question: What would happen if...

...a greedy, white-nationalist, sex-creep version of Dumbledore, 

....but with frontal dementia and mini-strokes, 

...found himself riding an All Terrain Armored Transport to Venezuela 

...in a desperate (yet possibly successful) attempt to escape the judgment of the Epstein Ring?  

 

The answer is: you don't care. Because by the time you make it to the end of this gaping sore of unending corruption, you'll begrudge George Lucas and J.K. Rowling and JRR Tolkien just for conceiving of worlds that could be so poorly re-imagined by the douches at Fox News and Newsmax.  (Also, CBS.)   And you won't thank the narrators, Jesse Watters, Stephen Miller, Laura Ingraham, and the rest of the prostitutes in this hellscape, for pouring their weak sauce over the whole shit sandwich.

You'll have run out of the theater before the final credits, so here's the fifty-cent tour:  

In a bizarre and failed attempt to bring in "comedy" revenue, Marco Rubio is cast as "the smart one."  And all the female leads look exactly the same. 

This is one mess of a story that really begs the question: why film it? Why watch it? Why? Stay away . . . and if you still decide to buy the ticket because, hey, freedom of expression and it's your country, too?  Fuck you, Bozo, your Fandango points go to Blue Cross/Blue Shield, Eli Lilly, and Meta!  

Fair warning, this movie is definitely not for kids. Unless you let your kids listen to you read explicit stories about pedophiles and enjoy extreme close-ups of lips damaged by gender-affirming injections. In which case, this is the movie for you . . . sicko!

h/t my archives

Could The New Yorker please put its entire letters section at the Thanksgiving table with Leslie Jones?

 

Returning to old skool blogging with as little fanfare as possible...

The holiday mail malaise meant that I received a copy of The New Yorker, one per day, every day last week.  

And one particular Letters Section ("The Mail," December 15, 2025) has me asking, 'Were the interns in charge of choosing these?'

______

Dylan M. of Brooklyn notes that yes, it's terrible that Trump has demolished Roosevelt's East Wing...

BUT...

The "original structure was built in part by enslaved people." 

SO...

______

Karin S-R of Santa Rosa, CA writes as "a feminist, a therapist, and a mother of twin teen-age boys" and notes that yes, there may be a "so-called crisis facing men..." 

BUT...

"if feminism does not expand its concern to include the well-being of men..."

"feminism cannot depend on the erasure of male identity." [?]

"if [emphasis mine] WE don't help to articulate new, healthier visions of masculinity..." 

[Karin, that sounds like more uncompensated work AND your boys are lucky to have you for a mom.] 

______

George of San Leandro, CA, notes that "nowadays, commentators frequently introduce Trump by describing him as a 'felon' or a 'convicted criminal.'"  

BUT...

"[T]here are about twenty-four million people who have been convicted of felony offenses. Not all of their convictions were the result of fair processes."

[You just KNOW where George is going with this...]

"Words like 'felon' and 'convict' are often used, as in reference to Trump, to signal that someone has inherently low moral worth.  This can contribute to the punishing of people who have already been subject to injustices..."

______

Could The New Yorker please put its entire letters section at the Thanksgiving table with Leslie Jones?