My uncle lives his life thinking Ninjas are after him; he also refuses to speak on Tuesdays because that's when the dog records his voice; he's not faking. He's fricking nuts. This movie is great.
This is the key to understanding the film. It gets a lot of flack for depicting people with mental illness as intense and loud which was the stereotype at the time but the inmates are faking their symptoms to mask the symptoms of their genuine illnesses. When Cutshaw explains why he really won't go to the moon he is calm and vulnerable. Kane is this through most of the film but he is faking it to cover his PTSD.
There, I differ. To me, (yes, his affect if very "flat) the whole outer persona is like an implacable sedation, and the face give away nothing, while his eyes do all the work of conveying all expression of observation, doubt, adjustment.. mysteries presenting, some sorting, with others replacing them, as much in apprehension as introspection. Where as Fell is where pain is clearly a pressure, and that for incomprehensible reasons, parts of very ordinary conversation seem to trigger surges . One of the aspects that make it a great movie is that it is worthwhile to see again, but when it is seen a second time, the movie and its experience become different. It is, then, a different movie (despite being the same one).Pathos and mystery have exchanged places. But if there was an Oscar for best performance in one scene, (hell they should create one just for this movie) it goes to Stacy Keach for just two minutes of supernaturally channeled dynamism of divine origin: th-cam.com/video/Orx6ou1OUKs/w-d-xo.htmlsi=Tk6-5pbVlSIYYhGf
One of the critical reasons for risking censure for “intellectual property” infringement was that the WHOLE of the scene with it’s preface (which is a scene in its own right, but is actually encapsulated within the the same larger scene which presents “The Hamlet Theory “ as the central focal point), was that it portrays contrasting (if not conflicting) attitudes and approaches toward how PEOPLE, who are so deeply conflicted by the hypocrisies of the social institutions (which they support for the betterment of “humanity,” or for “noble” purposes), when they weigh so heavily as to become obviously and unconscionably wrong, tearing apart most fundamental structures of “personal identity,” are regarded and should be treated. Ultimately, in the context of the characters, and the analogy, the behavior of “the world” (country, kingdom, “association,” etc.) has turned insanely against any sane purpose which would pertain to serve “the people,” or any “noble cause.” While it is oft said of people who are “psychotic,” that they are not aware of their psychosis, and can really only recognize the difference when broken away from it, to every extent which that holds true, it holds MORE SO to societies, kingdoms, nations, organizations, associations, and so forth. Unlike the image of the truly delusional psychotic, “The Men,” are on some level, to various degrees and intervals, aware that there is something which troubles them. They are “acting out” because they know something is “wrong with the world,” which is driving their own state of disturbance. There is no rational recourse for “The Men,” or Hamlet, which will enable them to unlock what has twisted their own fundamental character into an awkwardly distorted configuration, before “the world” (as it were) sobers or owns up to its own psychosis. The inference that it is Cutshaw who played the prank of sending the letters, immediately reveals that (if that is so) Cutshaw was very cognizant of what he was doing. He was even more so, in anticipating that Groper would respond inappropriately, by trying to take advantage of the women who became enamored by the overtures, drawing them to want to meet with their “secret admirer,” actually asking “the ones with the nice voices” to come by. He really only became irate over the discovery that what he imagined those women would be like, and LOOK like, contradicted the “reality” (of Groper’s perceptions and expectations), turning out to not fulfill an idealized image of the beautiful “hopeless romantic,” or “adventurously daring or dangerously impulsive femme fatale,” or any imaginary expectation that woman whose self-confidence would embolden them to daringly follow with a blind abandon toward romance, would be matched with a commensurate confidence in their own physical attractiveness. What Groper really is angered over is that his own illusions were shattered, by the fantasy which he pursued into confronting the “reality” of; “They were UGLY! Ugly as SIN!” And Groper wants for The Authority (Kane) to impose restrictions and punishments on someone ELSE? That his embarrassing situation was created by someone whom he was just as satisfied to pretend to be, as long as he could get something that he wanted. It is a pretty HARD SELL for Groper to get a concession of “perhaps” there should be a few restrictions (in the interests of preventing fiascos such as that one). The tact of the Hamlet Debate, was completely the inverse. Reno came in expressing a desire for help, in the form of an opinion, which was presented as being fit the purposes of resolving a dispute (between him and “Sir Lawrence”). Needless to say, the outcome of that encounter COMPLETELY REVERSES the direction of Kane’s “perhaps” concession to place a few restrictions [on “the men”], to an immediate initiative, undertaken entirely of his “own free will,” to [unreservedly] “INDULGE THE MEN.”
@@courtneygardner6334 Of course the initial replies were just lobbed from two different accounts, both owned by the same person. THIS one (for THAT matter) is a third, which has merely 'fallen in the weeds' to the furthest position possible towards the rear. ("I don't know, but it's been said, 'You do or don't, and then you're dead.' So climb I will, or crawl ...")* In 2015 it was started up for experimenting with Google + and a core "social media" feature called "Circles." Both of those just kind of ... died, while the gaming focus of interests (which was a completely different paradigm, never really represented within the "content" of the primary channel) had grown to become dominant within the Google + & Circles domain. That led to another branch (channel) being started for focusing only only on games & gaming related subject matter & content." , for the purposes of just letting it run and follow wherever those interests may lead. "Circles was a core feature of the Google+ Social Platform. It enabled users to organize people into groups or lists for sharing across various Google products and services. Organization of circles was done through a drag-and-drop interface until a site redesign in 2015 reduced it to a simple checkbox interface. Once a circle was created, a Google+ user could share specific private content to only that circle. For example, work-themed content could be shared with only colleagues, and one's friends and family could see more personal content and photos. The option to share Public or with Everyone was always available. Users were originally able to create Shared Circles, a one-time share to promote a circle of individuals, but the feature was removed. Another function of Circles was to control the content of one's Stream. If a user clicked on a Circle in the Circle Streams list, the Stream portion of the page (the center) would contain only posts shared by users in that Circle. For the unsegmented Stream (including content from all of a user's Circles), each Circle had a drop-down configuration item with four options: none, fewer, standard, and more. The none position required the user to select the Circle name explicitly to see content from users in that Circle. The remaining positions controlled the quantity of posts which appeared in one's main Stream, but the algorithm controlling what showed was never disclosed. On October 8, 2018, Google announced it would be ending the consumer version of Google+ by the end of August 2019, later changing that date to April 2, 2019. The company cited low user engagement and difficulties in 'creating and maintaining a successful Google+ that meets consumer's expectations', noting that 90% of user sessions on the service lasted less than five seconds." THIS channel, deprived of the services which had been the initial catalyst for its construction, as well as the framework for which it was to provide features, functionality and "content," merely fell off into the background, becoming (at best) just an old and obscure buried niche from Googles weird past of wild, grandiose, cool ideas ... that didn't work. ("So pardon me, I'm wrappin' up, If I was speakin out of class ..." th-cam.com/video/jPkfuLEPc50/w-d-xo.html )* Thus it also makes for an excellent position from which to be deliberately long-winded ... if I should find myself in the mood for it ... while leaving the other two channel/personae/accounts relatively quiet. * (Puscifer is a side project of Maynard James Keenan, known for his work with the bands Tool and A Perfect Circle... Keenan is the only permanent member and he considers the project to be his "creative subconscious" ...)
A Five Year Administration? (I'd say just 2020 was total, incomprehensible, delusion, in complete abandon of any concept about "administration," with a strong undercurrent of "smash and grab" riot psychology protected by authoritarian indemnity. So there is something reminiscent of it in the character of Groper, but even that character did not present as being devoid of any human sympathy, or of any human characteristics which can be sympathized with, unlike the "president" character of the 2020 administration.) But if there is a definite parallel, it's that nobody is there because they want to be. No one has anything to gain. Unlike nearly any other time in history, at the end of 2020, heading up an administrative effort to get an incomprehensible state of Disaster multiplied by FUBAR which had been steered - (by substituting the job of "administration" with "having a great time" playing on Twitter) - headlong into a Global Pandemic - (believed to be an easy fix by reformulating kitchen disinfectant into a pharmaceutical injection) - was a job that nobody really wanted, and nobody in their right mind would WANT to have. Extending the Hamlet analogy, in Hamlet, "the world" had really gone crazy. "Let us go in together, And still your fingers on your lips, I pray. The time is out of joint-O cursèd spite, That ever I was born to set it right! Nay, come, let's go together." Fortunately we have Horatio. "Alas, poor Yorick! I knew him, Horatio. A fellow of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy. He hath borne me on his back a thousand times. And now how abhorred in my imagination it is! My gorge rises at it. Here hung those lips that I have kiss'd I know not how oft. Where be your gibes now? your gambols? your songs? your flashes of merriment that were wont to set the table on a roar? Not one now, to mock your own grinning? Quite chap- fall'n? Now get you to my lady's chamber, and tell her, let her paint an inch thick, to this favour she must come. Make her laugh at that." The "meta" can even be considered that the story, as presented, comes from Horatio. (Not unlike Kane's last words to Cutshaw, to help the others, Hamlets were to Horatio) "If thou didst ever hold me in thy heart, Absent thee from felicity a while, And in this harsh world draw thy breath in pain To tell my story." And so ... "Of that I shall have also cause to speak, And from his mouth whose voice will draw on more. But let this same be presently perform'd, Even while men's minds are wild, lest more mischance On plots and errors happen." ___________________ So who was the parallel for Horatio in The 9th Configuration? It would SEEM that Blatty - (who's a freakin' genius, screenwriter for some of the greatet comedies ever, and my bet for the one person who would know for certain that Aristotle's "lost" book on "comedy," was actually never written) - had broken that up into cycles of transitional exchanges between Fell (Kane), Kane, and Cutshaw. But for the real punchline, it was William Peter Blatty. Well, yes he did write & direct it but he wasn't in ... no, wait ...he was ... Lieutenant Fromme, the one who believed he was a doctor. Doh! ___________________ (Hamlet, holding the skull of Yorik) "Alas, poor Yorick! I knew him, Horatio. A fellow of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy. He hath borne me on his back a thousand times. And now how abhorred in my imagination it is! (Years ago I knew a man He was my mother's biggest fan We used to walk beside the sea And he'd tell how my life would be When I grew up to be a man Years ago we used to play He used to laugh when I ran away But when I fell and hurt my knee He used to come and comfort me And the pain would go away) Quite chap- fall'n? Now get you to my lady's chamber, and tell her, let her paint an inch thick, to this favour she must come. Make her laugh at that." (Years ago I knew a boy He was his daddy's pride and joy But when the daddy went away It was such a rainy day That he brought out all his toys Now the momma did explain Trying to take away the pain He just couldn't understand That his father was not a man And it all was just a game) "If thou didst ever hold me in thy heart, Absent thee from felicity a while, And in this harsh world draw thy breath in pain To tell my story." "Of that I shall have also cause to speak, And from his mouth whose voice will draw on more. But let this same be presently perform'd, Even while men's minds are wild, lest more mischance On plots and errors happen." (Years have passed and so have I Making it hard to cry And if and when I have a son Let it all be said and done Let all that sadness pass him by) (Horatio) Monkeys (skull) HEAD (father - ghost) Daddy's Song th-cam.com/video/vA3MdXdpRA8/w-d-xo.htmlsi=5u7jOJt2rcYMNRzf Get it? (Well, it makes more sense than a five year presidential administration.)
"Did he buy it?...HELL, I bought it..." Brilliant, and I've felt that way many times.
Oh, but haven't we all...
...except me, of course.
(... just realizing ...
I have not thought about it ...
... in that way ... before ...
until now ...)
Alvan,
I think there's something wrong with US.
@@AxVxIOh Indeed!!
This reply is totally unexpected, and yet sublimely welcome!
My uncle lives his life thinking Ninjas are after him; he also refuses to speak on Tuesdays because that's when the dog records his voice; he's not faking. He's fricking nuts. This movie is great.
This is the key to understanding the film. It gets a lot of flack for depicting people with mental illness as intense and loud which was the stereotype at the time but the inmates are faking their symptoms to mask the symptoms of their genuine illnesses. When Cutshaw explains why he really won't go to the moon he is calm and vulnerable. Kane is this through most of the film but he is faking it to cover his PTSD.
Concreteowl...and the people who should really seek constructive help in a viable civilization are like Groper.
@@AngelCintiaRockgirl First time I watched this I thought Groper was one of the inmates just pretending to be a guard haha.
@@teejay1824 "Groper, get off the line!"
@@AngelCintiaRockgirl indeed
Poor Groper is a guinea pig and doesn't even know it. But when the poop hit the fan, he was right there backing them up!!
I wish this was a mini series, because I love all the characters and I really want to know what made them all go insane during Vietnam
Watching this scene on FilmStruck. Such a hidden gem
This is a great scene, but the most powerful one is where Cutshaw finally explains to Kane why he didn't want to go into space.
❤big hugs for stacy
Jason Miller is scary and funny and one of the best actors of all time.
I just want to add i think when kane 1st arrives he alrady looks sad and vulnerable stacy is a guid actor
There, I differ. To me, (yes, his affect if very "flat) the whole outer persona is like an implacable sedation, and the face give away nothing, while his eyes do all the work of conveying all expression of observation, doubt, adjustment.. mysteries presenting, some sorting, with others replacing them, as much in apprehension as introspection. Where as Fell is where pain is clearly a pressure, and that for incomprehensible reasons, parts of very ordinary conversation seem to trigger surges . One of the aspects that make it a great movie is that it is worthwhile to see again, but when it is seen a second time, the movie and its experience become different. It is, then, a different movie (despite being the same one).Pathos and mystery have exchanged places.
But if there was an Oscar for best performance in one scene, (hell they should create one just for this movie) it goes to Stacy Keach for just two minutes of supernaturally channeled dynamism of divine origin:
th-cam.com/video/Orx6ou1OUKs/w-d-xo.htmlsi=Tk6-5pbVlSIYYhGf
One of the critical reasons for risking censure for “intellectual property” infringement was that the WHOLE of the scene with it’s preface (which is a scene in its own right, but is actually encapsulated within the the same larger scene which presents “The Hamlet Theory “ as the central focal point), was that it portrays contrasting (if not conflicting) attitudes and approaches toward how PEOPLE, who are so deeply conflicted by the hypocrisies of the social institutions (which they support for the betterment of “humanity,” or for “noble” purposes), when they weigh so heavily as to become obviously and unconscionably wrong, tearing apart most fundamental structures of “personal identity,” are regarded and should be treated. Ultimately, in the context of the characters, and the analogy, the behavior of “the world” (country, kingdom, “association,” etc.) has turned insanely against any sane purpose which would pertain to serve “the people,” or any “noble cause.” While it is oft said of people who are “psychotic,” that they are not aware of their psychosis, and can really only recognize the difference when broken away from it, to every extent which that holds true, it holds MORE SO to societies, kingdoms, nations, organizations, associations, and so forth. Unlike the image of the truly delusional psychotic, “The Men,” are on some level, to various degrees and intervals, aware that there is something which troubles them. They are “acting out” because they know something is “wrong with the world,” which is driving their own state of disturbance. There is no rational recourse for “The Men,” or Hamlet, which will enable them to unlock what has twisted their own fundamental character into an awkwardly distorted configuration, before “the world” (as it were) sobers or owns up to its own psychosis. The inference that it is Cutshaw who played the prank of sending the letters, immediately reveals that (if that is so) Cutshaw was very cognizant of what he was doing. He was even more so, in anticipating that Groper would respond inappropriately, by trying to take advantage of the women who became enamored by the overtures, drawing them to want to meet with their “secret admirer,” actually asking “the ones with the nice voices” to come by. He really only became irate over the discovery that what he imagined those women would be like, and LOOK like, contradicted the “reality” (of Groper’s perceptions and expectations), turning out to not fulfill an idealized image of the beautiful “hopeless romantic,” or “adventurously daring or dangerously impulsive femme fatale,” or any imaginary expectation that woman whose self-confidence would embolden them to daringly follow with a blind abandon toward romance, would be matched with a commensurate confidence in their own physical attractiveness. What Groper really is angered over is that his own illusions were shattered, by the fantasy which he pursued into confronting the “reality” of; “They were UGLY! Ugly as SIN!” And Groper wants for The Authority (Kane) to impose restrictions and punishments on someone ELSE? That his embarrassing situation was created by someone whom he was just as satisfied to pretend to be, as long as he could get something that he wanted. It is a pretty HARD SELL for Groper to get a concession of “perhaps” there should be a few restrictions (in the interests of preventing fiascos such as that one). The tact of the Hamlet Debate, was completely the inverse. Reno came in expressing a desire for help, in the form of an opinion, which was presented as being fit the purposes of resolving a dispute (between him and “Sir Lawrence”). Needless to say, the outcome of that encounter COMPLETELY REVERSES the direction of Kane’s “perhaps” concession to place a few restrictions [on “the men”], to an immediate initiative, undertaken entirely of his “own free will,” to [unreservedly] “INDULGE THE MEN.”
@@courtneygardner6334 Whatever.
@@AxVxI Word
@@courtneygardner6334 Of course the initial replies were just lobbed from two different accounts, both owned by the same person.
THIS one (for THAT matter) is a third, which has merely 'fallen in the weeds' to the furthest position possible towards the rear.
("I don't know, but it's been said,
'You do or don't, and then you're dead.'
So climb I will, or crawl ...")*
In 2015 it was started up for experimenting with Google + and a core "social media" feature called "Circles." Both of those just kind of ... died, while the gaming focus of interests (which was a completely different paradigm, never really represented within the "content" of the primary channel) had grown to become dominant within the Google + & Circles domain. That led to another branch (channel) being started for focusing only only on games & gaming related subject matter & content." , for the purposes of just letting it run and follow wherever those interests may lead.
"Circles was a core feature of the Google+ Social Platform. It enabled users to organize people into groups or lists for sharing across various Google products and services. Organization of circles was done through a drag-and-drop interface until a site redesign in 2015 reduced it to a simple checkbox interface. Once a circle was created, a Google+ user could share specific private content to only that circle. For example, work-themed content could be shared with only colleagues, and one's friends and family could see more personal content and photos. The option to share Public or with Everyone was always available. Users were originally able to create Shared Circles, a one-time share to promote a circle of individuals, but the feature was removed.
Another function of Circles was to control the content of one's Stream. If a user clicked on a Circle in the Circle Streams list, the Stream portion of the page (the center) would contain only posts shared by users in that Circle. For the unsegmented Stream (including content from all of a user's Circles), each Circle had a drop-down configuration item with four options: none, fewer, standard, and more. The none position required the user to select the Circle name explicitly to see content from users in that Circle. The remaining positions controlled the quantity of posts which appeared in one's main Stream, but the algorithm controlling what showed was never disclosed.
On October 8, 2018, Google announced it would be ending the consumer version of Google+ by the end of August 2019, later changing that date to April 2, 2019. The company cited low user engagement and difficulties in 'creating and maintaining a successful Google+ that meets consumer's expectations', noting that 90% of user sessions on the service lasted less than five seconds."
THIS channel, deprived of the services which had been the initial catalyst for its construction, as well as the framework for which it was to provide features, functionality and "content," merely fell off into the background, becoming (at best) just an old and obscure buried niche from Googles weird past of wild, grandiose, cool ideas ... that didn't work.
("So pardon me, I'm wrappin' up,
If I was speakin out of class ..."
th-cam.com/video/jPkfuLEPc50/w-d-xo.html )*
Thus it also makes for an excellent position from which to be deliberately long-winded ... if I should find myself in the mood for it ... while leaving the other two channel/personae/accounts relatively quiet.
* (Puscifer is a side project of Maynard James Keenan, known for his work with the bands Tool and A Perfect Circle... Keenan is the only permanent member and he considers the project to be his "creative subconscious" ...)
To quote Jimmy Buffet, if we weren't all crazy, we'd all go insane.
“To occupant..” lol
Fun fact : ninth and the exorcist are in the same universe because of William Peter blatty writing both and the astronaut appears in both films
it would be neat if someone did a fan edit where they deep faked Scott Wilson's face over the actor who plays the astronaut in *The Exorcist.*
I wouldint mind being stuck in a lift with kane
I totally dig that.
(I would want to steer clear of being in a bar together though.)
th-cam.com/video/EYbQ6B4wsLo/w-d-xo.htmlsi=XRM1GDdp4lPaR577
I ❤ to watch stacy aye all the time
Road Games.
The perfect movie for getting to just cuddle with Stacy for the whole ride.
th-cam.com/video/txVhlNWj8QU/w-d-xo.htmlsi=WukBJxlqOsRX87wP
❤ this film i like stacy
A novel way to "combat" PTSD.
The White House Administration 2020-2024?
A Five Year Administration?
(I'd say just 2020 was total, incomprehensible, delusion, in complete abandon of any concept about "administration," with a strong undercurrent of "smash and grab" riot psychology protected by authoritarian indemnity.
So there is something reminiscent of it in the character of Groper, but even that character did not present as being devoid of any human sympathy, or of any human characteristics which can be sympathized with, unlike the "president" character of the 2020 administration.)
But if there is a definite parallel, it's that nobody is there because they want to be. No one has anything to gain.
Unlike nearly any other time in history, at the end of 2020, heading up an administrative effort to get an incomprehensible state of Disaster multiplied by FUBAR which had been steered -
(by substituting the job of "administration" with "having a great time" playing on Twitter)
- headlong into a Global Pandemic -
(believed to be an easy fix by reformulating kitchen disinfectant into a pharmaceutical injection)
- was a job that nobody really wanted, and nobody in their right mind would WANT to have.
Extending the Hamlet analogy,
in Hamlet, "the world" had really gone crazy.
"Let us go in together,
And still your fingers on your lips, I pray.
The time is out of joint-O cursèd spite,
That ever I was born to set it right!
Nay, come, let's go together."
Fortunately we have Horatio.
"Alas, poor Yorick!
I knew him, Horatio.
A fellow of infinite jest,
of most excellent fancy.
He hath borne me on his back a thousand times. And now how abhorred in my imagination it is!
My gorge rises at it.
Here hung those lips that I have kiss'd
I know not how oft.
Where be your gibes now?
your gambols?
your songs?
your flashes of merriment
that were wont to set the table on a roar?
Not one now, to mock your own grinning?
Quite chap- fall'n?
Now get you to my lady's chamber,
and tell her, let her paint an inch thick,
to this favour she must come.
Make her laugh at that."
The "meta" can even be considered that the story, as presented, comes from Horatio.
(Not unlike Kane's last words to Cutshaw, to help the others, Hamlets were to Horatio)
"If thou didst ever hold me in thy heart,
Absent thee from felicity a while,
And in this harsh world draw thy breath in pain
To tell my story."
And so ...
"Of that I shall have also cause to speak,
And from his mouth whose voice will draw on more.
But let this same be presently perform'd,
Even while men's minds are wild, lest more mischance
On plots and errors happen."
___________________
So who was the parallel for Horatio in The 9th Configuration?
It would SEEM that Blatty -
(who's a freakin' genius, screenwriter for some of the greatet comedies ever, and my bet for the one person who would know for certain that Aristotle's "lost" book on "comedy," was actually never written)
- had broken that up into cycles of transitional exchanges between Fell (Kane), Kane, and Cutshaw.
But for the real punchline, it was William Peter Blatty.
Well, yes he did write & direct it but he wasn't in ... no, wait ...he was ... Lieutenant Fromme, the one who believed he was a doctor.
Doh!
___________________
(Hamlet, holding the skull of Yorik)
"Alas, poor Yorick!
I knew him, Horatio.
A fellow of infinite jest,
of most excellent fancy.
He hath borne me on his back a thousand times. And now how abhorred in my imagination it is!
(Years ago I knew a man
He was my mother's biggest fan
We used to walk beside the sea
And he'd tell how my life would be
When I grew up to be a man
Years ago we used to play
He used to laugh when I ran away
But when I fell and hurt my knee
He used to come and comfort me
And the pain would go away)
Quite chap- fall'n?
Now get you to my lady's chamber,
and tell her, let her paint an inch thick,
to this favour she must come.
Make her laugh at that."
(Years ago I knew a boy
He was his daddy's pride and joy
But when the daddy went away
It was such a rainy day
That he brought out all his toys
Now the momma did explain
Trying to take away the pain
He just couldn't understand
That his father was not a man
And it all was just a game)
"If thou didst ever hold me in thy heart,
Absent thee from felicity a while,
And in this harsh world draw thy breath in pain
To tell my story."
"Of that I shall have also cause to speak,
And from his mouth whose voice will draw on more.
But let this same be presently perform'd,
Even while men's minds are wild, lest more mischance
On plots and errors happen."
(Years have passed and so have I
Making it hard to cry
And if and when I have a son
Let it all be said and done
Let all that sadness pass him by)
(Horatio) Monkeys
(skull) HEAD
(father - ghost) Daddy's Song
th-cam.com/video/vA3MdXdpRA8/w-d-xo.htmlsi=5u7jOJt2rcYMNRzf
Get it?
(Well, it makes more sense than a five year presidential administration.)