Comedian Michelle Wolf sparks fury, debate with roast at correspondents' dinner

  • Thread starter Thread starter Luke6_37
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Interesting that even “The Hill” agrees with my assertion of the strong shift to ad hominems. From the below article
Finkelstein singled out the WHCA’s choice of comedienne Michelle Wolf as the reason. “The kind of jokes told by this year’s headliner, Michelle Wolf, were out of line for an event that’s supposed to be fun — and fair,” he wrote. “Based on what Americans witnessed on national television at Saturday night’s dinner, a once-fine evening celebrating the strong, free press the WHCA speaks of has turned into an angry display and ad-hominem attacks.”
Click to expand...
www.breitbart.com

Fallout: The Hill Drops Out of White House Correspondents' Dinner

James Finkelstein, chairman of the news outlet the Hill, announced in a letter to Steven Thomma, executive director of the White House Correspondents' Association, that the Hill will no longer participate in the annual White House Correspondents' Association (WHCA) dinner.
www.breitbart.com www.breitbart.com
 
Theo520 said:
I find the opposite, the liberal efforts to demonize Trump the person rather than discuss policy is what is degrading norms of behavior.
Click to expand...
What on earth are you talking about. Liberals have enormous policy differences with Trump. Who are these particular liberals that you are talking about and what have they said?
 
Theo520 said:
“Based on what Americans witnessed on national television at Saturday night’s dinner, a once-fine evening celebrating the strong, free press the WHCA speaks of has turned into an angry display and ad-hominem attacks.”
Click to expand...
How silly. It has been a roast. Jokes have for years been zingers.
This year was far cruder than anything I remember, and may have had more content, but the idea of “angry”? What is that all about?
 
dvdjs said:
How silly. It has been a roast. Jokes have for years been zingers.

This year was far cruder than anything I remember, and may have had more content, but the idea of “angry”? What is that all about?
Click to expand...
I have to agree with this. Ms. Wolf went a bit too far with her language, in my opinion. It was the wrong room, as I said above. She wasn’t performing in a nightclub, and I think she should have tailored her act to the room.

That said, it’s always been a roast. I’ve seen quite a few of the past WHCA dinners, and people, including presidents, took the jokes with good grace.

President Trump had every opportunity to appear at the dinner, and give as good as he got. He chose not to. I sort of understand why he didn’t want to do it – if you remember his performance at the Al Smith dinner a couple of years ago, he ended up being booed by a crowd that was his to lose, being mostly made up of rich Republicans.

This kind of thing isn’t his strong point. I don’t think he has a sense of humor about himself all all. This isn’t a criticism of him as president, just an observation about his personality.
 
Talk about wrong language for the room – if I used that language, I’d be flagged and possibly suspended.

Anyway, I think your estimate of how many people in the room hate Trump is a bit high. There were plenty of Republicans there, not to mention Fox.
 
Inisfallen said:
Talk about wrong language for the room – if I used that language, I’d be flagged and possibly suspended.

Anyway, I think your estimate of how many people in the room hate Trump is a bit high. There were plenty of Republicans there, not to mention Fox.
Click to expand...
I agree there is a vulgar use of that term, but I think it’s pretty out of vogue now. That was not my intention, which was to point out a “ganging up”, which happens now and then on here. I think you will agree that references to “gang bangers” refers to members of aggressive gangs.
 
Last edited:
Ridgerunner said:
I think you will agree that references to “gang bangers” refers to members of aggressive gangs.
Click to expand...
References to “gangbangers,” sure, the term is often used to describe gang members.

A “gang bang?” That’s another thing altogether.

Look, I don’t care. I’m not offended. I’m just kind of amused at what gets flagged and what doesn’t.
 
If it struck you, it will others. Guess I’ll need to come up with another term for it. I think I’ll need it.
 
Ridgerunner said:
Nobody enjoys a gang bang if he’s the bangee, and his appearance at this dinner would absolutely have been one. When probably 99 out of a hundred in an audience hate you with a passion and demonstrate it daily, that’s not a good audience to appear before.
Click to expand...
can you imagine the comedians who would have signed up to destroy Trump? i bet Jim Carrey, Robert De Niro, Alec Baldwin and Kathy Griffin would love to have been there. Not appearing 2 years in a row was very smart on President Trump’s part!
 
7_Sorrows said:
can you imagine the comedians who would have signed up to destroy Trump? i bet Jim Carrey, Robert De Niro, Alec Baldwin and Kathy Griffin would love to have been there. Not appearing 2 years in a row was very smart on President Trump’s part!
Click to expand...
If Trump had shown up, I think the crowd would have been so raucous I don’t think it could have continued, and I doubt the secret service could have allowed him to stay.
 
Annie said:
Just because most politicians dress their derogations up to make them more palatable to their constituency doesn’t make them any less insulting.
Click to expand...
That is something I totally disagree with. The ability to criticize without being uncivilized is a presidential quality that is lacking. The ability to lampoon politicians without engaging in personal attacks is the difference between comedians that have past performed at the WHCD and this year.
 
There are times when being flagged is a good thing, an educational thing. I take as a sign of character that you did not think of the more guttural meaning, even though flagging it and having it removed was appropriate. You surely have nothing to be ashamed of.
 
I agree with you that there are all types of humor, and I agree too that plain language does not have to be vulgar. I was responding to a poster who implied that no other politician or President had ever denigrated anyone.
 
pnewton said:
Lest we forget what this woman is about and who she serves:

“Mike Pence is also very anti-choice. He thinks abortion is murder, which, first of all, don’t knock it till you try it. And when you do try it, really knock it. You know, you got to get that baby out of there.

“And, yes, sure, you can groan all you want. I know a lot of you are very anti-abortion. You know, unless it’s the one you got for your secret mistress. It’s fun how values can waver. But good for you.”

“Mike Pence is a weirdo, though. He’s a weird little guy. He won’t meet with other women without his wife present.

Since when did we excuse such bullying? And yes, before you say, I know Trump does the same thing, but then he is also a bully by every definition of the word I know.
Click to expand...
As Dvdjs pointed out, you missed the point as most missed the point.
“And, yes, sure, you can groan all you want. I know a lot of you are very anti-abortion. You know, unless it’s the one you got for your secret mistress. It’s fun how values can waver. But good for you.”
Click to expand...
This was less of a joke and more of a straight of truth.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top