It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Obama booed at his own fund raiser
page: 2share:
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
So wait, you were being sarcastic when you asserted that the gold standard of most comics is boos rather than applause, or you're currently asserting that you were being sarcastic and it was misidentified as an assertion by me, rather than the sarcastic non-assertion you intended? So if your intent was, indeed, sarcasm, then you were essentially making the point that all comedians are after laughs... not boos. Unfortunately, that raises the question of what your issue was with my reply in the first place, as I was merely identifying a handfull of popular, contemporary comedians who seek the more gutteral reactions from crowds, including groans and even boos, something you never bothered to respond to when you instead went after the idea that I had claimed you made an assertion contrary to my own.
Is it your belief that Obama (or his writers) are cut from the same cloth as a Ricky Gervais?
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.
So wait, you were being sarcastic when you asserted that the gold standard of most comics is boos rather than applause, or you're currently asserting that you were being sarcastic and it was misidentified as an assertion by me, rather than the sarcastic non-assertion you intended? So if your intent was, indeed, sarcasm, then you were essentially making the point that all comedians are after laughs... not boos. Unfortunately, that raises the question of what your issue was with my reply in the first place, as I was merely identifying a handfull of popular, contemporary comedians who seek the more gutteral reactions from crowds, including groans and even boos, something you never bothered to respond to when you instead went after the idea that I had claimed you made an assertion contrary to my own.
Is it your belief that Obama (or his writers) are cut from the same cloth as a Ricky Gervais?
As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.
reply to post by burdman30ott6
So wait, your going to entrench yourself in your own disingenousness and straw man arguments? Lord only knows why you would want to embarrass yourself as you are, and I was taking it easy on you to begin with, but let's go back to your absurd assertion that comics today are more interested in shocking than they are in getting laughs. Given the nature of this thread, your implication is that Obama was going for shock and offense as a strategy. Even if Obama was going after "groans", is this how you want to characterize that man? Do you seriously want to entrench yourself in that completely non-presidential characterization of the President of the United States? Do you even bother to think before you post?
Now let's go back to your ill advised straw man. I was not being ironic and while irony is often conflated with sarcasm irony is not necessarily sarcasm, and what I was most obviously doing was ridiculing OutKast, and what may be less obvious but not hidden "so well that it (couldn't) easily (be) found in the first place" is that OutKast is my friend and I was teasing a friend for what I believe was a jumping of the shark remark.
This might come as a shock to you, but Presidents and comedians both tell bad jokes, and when they do, both of them do not think what they were doing was telling a bad joke, and only discovered it once they tried it out. It is the nature of comedy. Your amusing "identifying" of a "handful of popular, contemporary comedians who seek the more gutteral (sic) reactions from crowds" does Barack Obama no favors. As I stated earlier in this post, I didn't respond to your silliness out of compassion for you, but here you are insisting on picking a fight with me, so I will take my metaphorical hand and place it on top of your metaphorical head to hold you in place and out of harms way while you wildly and hopelessly swing at me, but what I will not do is beat you up on this, because I do not enjoy fighting the intellectually unarmed.
If you don't want to admit your error in presumption don't, but for God's sakes burdman let it go. There is a reason OutKast is my friend and a damn good reason why I admire that member, and in this thread, that member has represented the best of us all, only fighting as any true believer would but not above owning up to mistakes or generalizations. I am not asking you to own up to your mistakes, but failing that, then just let it go.
So wait, your going to entrench yourself in your own disingenousness and straw man arguments? Lord only knows why you would want to embarrass yourself as you are, and I was taking it easy on you to begin with, but let's go back to your absurd assertion that comics today are more interested in shocking than they are in getting laughs. Given the nature of this thread, your implication is that Obama was going for shock and offense as a strategy. Even if Obama was going after "groans", is this how you want to characterize that man? Do you seriously want to entrench yourself in that completely non-presidential characterization of the President of the United States? Do you even bother to think before you post?
Now let's go back to your ill advised straw man. I was not being ironic and while irony is often conflated with sarcasm irony is not necessarily sarcasm, and what I was most obviously doing was ridiculing OutKast, and what may be less obvious but not hidden "so well that it (couldn't) easily (be) found in the first place" is that OutKast is my friend and I was teasing a friend for what I believe was a jumping of the shark remark.
This might come as a shock to you, but Presidents and comedians both tell bad jokes, and when they do, both of them do not think what they were doing was telling a bad joke, and only discovered it once they tried it out. It is the nature of comedy. Your amusing "identifying" of a "handful of popular, contemporary comedians who seek the more gutteral (sic) reactions from crowds" does Barack Obama no favors. As I stated earlier in this post, I didn't respond to your silliness out of compassion for you, but here you are insisting on picking a fight with me, so I will take my metaphorical hand and place it on top of your metaphorical head to hold you in place and out of harms way while you wildly and hopelessly swing at me, but what I will not do is beat you up on this, because I do not enjoy fighting the intellectually unarmed.
If you don't want to admit your error in presumption don't, but for God's sakes burdman let it go. There is a reason OutKast is my friend and a damn good reason why I admire that member, and in this thread, that member has represented the best of us all, only fighting as any true believer would but not above owning up to mistakes or generalizations. I am not asking you to own up to your mistakes, but failing that, then just let it go.
edit on 28-6-2012 by Jean Paul Zodeaux because: (no reason given)
new topics
-
An Interesting Conversation with ChatGPT
Science & Technology: 9 hours ago