5 takeaways on Michelle Wolf's controversial speech #WHCD

Stephen Colbert.

He delivered a bruising take down. It was ... as Jon Stewart put it -- ballsalicious.

The RW, and even many in the war-loving media went bazerk.

 

For those with short memories...

"Colbert's performance received a variety of reactions from the media. In Washington, the response from both politicians and the press corps was negative—both groups having been targets of Colbert's satire.

The Washington press corps felt that Colbert had bombed.[7] The Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen found that Colbert's jokes were "lame and insulting"[64] and wrote that Colbert was "rude" and a "bully". Politician Steny Hoyer felt that Colbert had gone too far, telling the newspaper The Hill that "[Bush] is the President of the United States, and he deserves some respect".[65] Conservative pundit Mary Matalin called Colbert's performance a "predictable, Bush-bashing kind of humor".[51] Columnist Ana Marie Cox chastised those who praised Colbert as a hero: "I somehow doubt that Bush has never heard these criticisms before". She added, "Comedy can have a political point but it is not political action".[49]

On The Daily Show, Jon Stewart remarked, tongue in cheek, "apparently [Colbert] was under the impression that they'd hired him to do what he does every night on television".[42][43] While comics were expected to tell jokes about the administration, the 2006 dinner was held at a time when the relationship between the administration and the media was under great strain, and the administration was sensitive to criticism

Attorney and columnist Julie Hilden concluded that Colbert's "vituperative parody" might have been unfair under different circumstances, but noted that Bush's record of controlling bad press created a heightened justification for people to criticize him when they got the chance.[66] Media Matters and Editor & Publisher came to Colbert's defense, calling his detractors hypocrites. They contrasted the critical reaction to Colbert to the praise that many in the press had for a controversial routine that Bush performed at a similar media dinner in 2004, where Bush was shown looking for WMDs in the Oval Office and joking, "Those weapons of mass destruction must be somewhere!" and "Nope, no weapons over there!"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Colbert_at_the_2006_White_House_Correspondents'_Dinner

 

I remember the controversy. That's one of eight.

 

She can't be all bad or the the DP/MSM would not be dissing her.
Dropping a tree on Conway was fine, but this was not:

"You guys are obsessed with Trump. Did you used to date him? Because you pretend like you hate him, but I think you love him," Wolf said. "I think what no one in this room wants to admit is that Trump has helped all of you."

Refusing to attack print media, because "it's illegal to attack an endangered species," Wolf poked at Fox News for the network's ousting of hosts for sexual harassment allegations, CNN for "breaking news" and MSNBC hosts Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski for showing what it's like "when 'Me Too' works out."
POLITICO, Wolf routine stuns White House Correspondents' Dinner, By BRENT D. GRIFFITHS 04/28/2018 11:51 PM EDT Updated 04/29/2018 12:53 AM EDT.

She will not be forgiven.

 

Not forgiven by the media? Doubtful. Some whined about it, but she was closer to the truth than they want to admit.

 

yeah I agree. Hearing the left hate on trump and his staff during this fiasco was grating eh?

 

Hate is a common commodity these days. Sadly, our nation is full of spineless wimps and butthurt snowflakes. We need a big war or plague to weed them out and let the strong take over.

 

I agree. I love winning.

 

That is why she will not be forgiven.

 

The Hill Newspaper: Yeah, We're Done With the White House Correspondents Dinner

Next year it'll just be for CNN and their Deep State dates.

Washington-based publication The Hill has opted out of attendance at future White House Correspondents" Dinners. "In short, there's simply no reason for us to participate in something that casts our profession in a poor light."

Following Saturday night's controversial dinner, The Hill chairman James Finkelstein penned a letter to Steven Thomma, Executive Director of the White House Correspondents' Association explaining why.

Here's that letter:


Oliver Darcy

✔@oliverdarcy
12h
The Hill drops out of future White House Correspondents Dinners: “In short, there's simply no reason for us to participate in something that casts our profession in a poor light. Major changes are needed to the annual event.”


Oliver Darcy

✔@oliverdarcy
Here’s the full letter James Finkelstein, chairman of The Hill, sent to the WHCA pic.twitter.com/bCVrvAf5Fw

6:56 AM - May 1, 2018


My problem isn't with the "comedienne." She isn't funny. But of course she isn't funny. The WHCA knew she wasn't funny when they were hiring her. The Daily Show knew she wasn't funny when they hired her.

She isn't funny, but that's not her purpose. They were paying her to be nasty, to push their politics, to get vengeance on their critics, to get vengeance on half the country, and they wanted a woman doing the nasty stuff because of the Identity Politics rules that say women can't be criticized for the same behavior which is deemed pathological in men.

The media wants to lecture the nation about civility, yet it doesn't want to actually practice civility.

It wants to be praised for being all about truth and accountability -- but they propagate lies and conspire to embargo stories that paint them in a poor light.

It wants to be hailed as the Slayer of Conspiracy Theories -- but when Hillary Clinton herself pushes the wackobird Democrat conspiracy theory that the election -- the ballot boxes themselves -- was hacked.

We have a bunch of sissies who want credit for having run a marathon without having to do all that four-months-of-intense-training bother.

They're vapid, vicious children looking lost in their Big Boy Clothes. They are fools and liars and the nastiest partisan operators of the Democrat Party.

They are not journalists, they are only propagandists, and they deserve as little respect as you'd give to propagandists.

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/375059.php

 

I always liked her on the Daily Show. She was funny.

ROFLMAO. That's funny too!

 

While I agree with you in general, that the press has become a Jerry Springer Show, that the press lacks morality, character, and responsibility, and that that woman wasn't the least bit funny, I do have to take issue with the idea that comedians can't trash people and be funny at the same time. Bob Hope trashed eleven different presidents with class and style and was funny while doing it. Don Rickles made his whole career out of trashing people and being funny about it. The Dean Martin roasts were hilarious, for the most part, and were all about trashing people. I have watched and continue to watch a lot of stand-up comedy, and what I can tell you is that what makes comedy work is the unexpected twist, the payoff at the end. When there's no twist, no payoff, there's no comedy. That woman's not funny not because she insults people, but because there's no twist, no payoff. Check out the latest insult comedian, Jeff Ross. He can be offensive, but he can be damned funny, too.

 

There is a difference, which seems to not be recognized today. It's like a celebrity "roast', which is funny, and which most roasted celebrities attend and enjoy. It's usually a compliment. However, if you start thinking of Joan of Arc and call her demise a "roast", you are not at all funny. The difference is malice, the intent to do damage to person, reputation, career, etc.

Comedians lately have taken the juvenile approach. If it gets reaction, them use it, without regard to respect for anyone. Sometimes that's self-serving and indifferent to the damage, and that's not respectable. When it turns to intentional malice, it's far more offensive- and a miserable character statement of the person doing it. A smart comedian can play off celebrities and presidents (most all of them have) without becoming malicious. Malicious is not funny, except to other malicious people.

 

I still think you're confusing the intent with the delivery. While you are correct about the celebrity roasts, and about leftist comedians just being malicious, I don't think the two things are connected. A quick-witted but malicious person could skewer you with humor and get a laugh at your expense, while a slow-witted but innocuous person could hurt you unintentionally without being funny. Take Bill Maher as an example of the latter... I don't think he genuinely bears ill-will to anyone, he'd probably invite Satan himself to be on his show, but his attempts at humor almost always land flat. (Look at Religulous, which insults pretty much all people of faith but isn't funny.) Some of the modern roasts of celebrities have more than their fair share of maliciousness, but in some cases, they are still funny. Consider the following statements, all motivated by the same intent to be malicious: "You're fat and stupid!" "You're as fat and stupid as a potato!" "I had a 20 minute conversation with you the other day before I realized I was talking to a potato." The only difference is in the delivery, not the intent.

 

I would hope you are not claiming that Wolf's comments were just misunderstood. Of course people wishing to insult often set it up to be deniable when the circumstances pose that risk. When it's open season on someone, be it the president, a fallen celebrity or the nerd in high school- then it's safer to just slice and dice with your hostility obvious.
Delivery doesn't change malicious purpose- that can be just error.

Mistakes, yes. In my particular situation, I've had many feel insulted when I had no intent and was not trying to be funny or to insult. Part of that comes with high IQ; the downside is you are poor at many people skills and have to learn the hard way, and I'm not too sure the upside offsets that.

I have no sympathy for people trying to pass off insult as comedy- I see that as added insult, a sort of cowardice.

 

Many far RWers have taken offence at Wolf's comparison of Sarah Sanders to Ann Dowd's character "Aunt Lydia" on "The Handmaid's Tale". Ann Dowd is a very sweet woman and a great actress (she won an Emmy for her role as Aunt Lydia), but I haven't hear her opinion on being compared to Sarah Sanders.

OTOH, I did find this:

https://twitter.com/hodgman/status/990791012099481600
Ann Dowd is an incredibly talented actor who doesn't happen to look like a lot of women on TV. IF you think @michelleisawolf was comparing her face and body to Sarah Huckabee Sanders AND if you think that is AUTOMATICALLY an insult, you've got some work to do on being a human.

 

For those who are keep trying to spin Wolf's remarks about Sanders as "fat shaming", something to consider:

https://www.refinery29.com/2018/04/197716/michelle-wolf-aunt-lydia-joke-explained
Sarah Huckabee Sanders attended Saturday night's White House Correspondents' Dinner as a visibly annoyed representative of the Trump administration. The divisive press secretary looked uncomfortable as host and Daily Showcontributor Michelle Wolf went all in on her views of everyone from congressional Dems to Ivanka Trump and Stormy Daniels. But Wolf had special ire for Sanders, who she compared to Aunt Lydia, one of the darkest characters on contemporary television. Wolf joked that she loved Sanders as “Aunt Lydia in The Handmaid’s Tale. Mike Pence, if you haven’t seen it, you would love it.” She then directly attacked Sanders lack of truthfulness with the press.
While many applauded Wolf’s critiques, the takedown elicited boos from the crowds and others have taken to Twitter to defend Sanders. Former White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer wrote that the dinner was a “disgrace” and that comments about Sanders were “absolutely disgusting.” Others have weighed in that Wolf’s comments were an unkind joke about her looks.

Tonight’s #WHCD was a disgrace

— Sean Spicer (@seanspicer) April 29, 2018​

Though the Aunt Lydia joke was sharp, it was not a reference to Sander’s looks, unless you think Ann Dowd, who plays the character, is unattractive (she’s not). The Aunt Lydia jab was a direct reference to how Sanders is used as a tool by Trump and, arguably, the entire patriarchy to keep women down. In The Handmaid’s Tale, the Aunts are a class of women assigned to brainwash new Handmaids with the government’s beliefs and mores, and help the women accept their fates as birth vessels. Aunt Lydia uses torture, such as shocking Handmaids with cattle prods, whipping them, and partially blinding one divergent Handmaid in an effort to gain complete obedience. “I’m sorry, Aunt Lydia,” is one of the first phrases that a new Handmaid learns.
In season 2, which gets even more bleak (warning, spoilers ahead!), Aunt Lydia has the women rounded up and brought to an out of use sports field, where they are nearly hanged for not following her orders. Aunt Lydia is given a lot of power by the leaders of Gilead; as women who are beyond the childbearing age and sympathetic to the cause, Aunts control the destiny of enslaved women. They literally hold the lives of Handmaids in their grip. They actively strip away both the rights of other women and their control over their bodies, all while convincing them it is in their best interest.

 

Exactly.

Sanders was NOT "fat-shamed".

At worst, Wolf made a shady comment about Sanders' eye makeup choice.

That said, if Sanders is so worried about being "fat-shamed", I would suggest a strict diet regimen and joining a gym.

Always going in for that 3rd helping of Arkansas Fried Chicken can't be helping her battle with borderline obesity.

 

So you are saying Michelle Wolf is really a nice person you would be proud to take home to mother... Got it.
People usually don't realize it, but they are always showing you who they really are- including the identity they deny even to themselves,that hides in the closet of their minds and tells them to evil things.
All you have to do is read between the lines.

 

Great spin! Have you ever worked for the Clinton Foundation?

Agreed that people are revealed by their posts. When they provide facts, that says something. When they lie about others, either members or political figures, that says something. When they try to spin something completely different than what was posted, that says something.

I believe in the grace of God, but do not accept evil as a force. I believe it is only those who are without God: namely liars, haters and people who are divisive.

 

And few of those most involved in these various vices have the ability to look upon themselves honestly, Max.

There are fundamentals of conduct, standards we must set for ourselves that allow a person genuine self-respect- and that in turn gives them control over their own lives and insure they will not interfere with other peoples right to do the same. Those who fail to honor those values, no matter how much they proclaim them, are frauds. I respect any respectable person, anyone who lives by just values- as I do my best to do. Unfortunately, the world has a great many who don't.

 

That began when Obama race-agitated and race -baited for eight straight years as president; and leftists cheered.

 

Does she eat with the same mouth?

 

You mean by being a black man in the White House and freaking out the racists?

Oh...

 

She's a friggin comedian..

Ever BEEN to a comedy show?

Oh...and aren't you a fan of our "shithole" President?