"Mitt Romney's coming to JAX at 2 pm. He'll be about 200 yards from our office. They are placing extra porta potties." "Must have a really weak bladder. One is more than enough for any normal person. That or he can do keggers like nobody's business."
I thought I was merely engaging in absurdism -- especially on a "hidden"portion that would be overwhelmingly missed by nonMormons -- but a response I received...
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Seems harmless enough to me.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
The idea that Mitt Romney has to engage in biological functions of any kind is a bit of a stretch.
Posted by Xavier (Member # 405) on :
To me its just an attempt to by funny. Its ignoring that there is going to be a crowd and just assuming that the extra port-o-potty is for Mitt.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: The idea that Mitt Romney has to engage in biological functions of any kind is a bit of a stretch.
See, but Tom took it to a whole new level of funny.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: The idea that Mitt Romney has to engage in biological functions of any kind is a bit of a stretch.
I thought it was funny. But I agree....Tom for the WIN!!!
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
wait so how seriously are people overreacting to the initial comment. and honestly what is the logic behind it.
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Only one person, with no one else giving endorsement, who quoted both "Mitt Romney's coming to JAX at 2 pm. He'll be about 200 yards from our office. They are placing extra porta potties." "Must have a really weak bladder. One is more than enough for any normal person. That or he can do keggers like nobody's business." - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - and a separate exchange with another person "You need to think for yourself, instead of someone spoon feeding you information. Figure out the world on your own and maybe you'll come to grips on reality. But as usual I expect you to just blow it off and move on like the rest." "An Apocalypse ain't no good excuse to be rude. Fight Ragnarok with Politeness. There's already way too many folk stirrin' the pot for Chaos." - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - before following them up with "...your comments are conflicting. You tell [second person] to fight ragnarok with politeness. However, your previous statements about a really weak bladder,is not normal,or can out do anyone with keggers is offensive to me. I, personally, have a weak bladder and don't go anywhere where there isn't a bathroom. You may need think about how others may feel before you state what you did. In a sense, you created chaos yourself with such statements. I was offended by your statements."
Posted by Xavier (Member # 405) on :
It was a joke, and while it wasn't especially funny I think it ridiculous to take offense to it.
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
Nah, it ain't anything vaguely like a "fight back for your right" kind of situation. Just wondering if I had gone beyond the intended stupid into the unintentionally truly offensive. Because my gut feeling upon first reading was that I'd accidently stepped on someones political sensitivities rather than on a medical condition.
[ May 18, 2012, 05:03 PM: Message edited by: aspectre ]
Posted by Xavier (Member # 405) on :
As an Obama supporter, I'd not take any offense to the joke if the comment was made about one of his visits. I might even have had a chuckle.
I do think the last sentence detracts from the funny a bit. The first two sentences work better without it.
I myself have a pretty weak bladder, and certainly wouldn't think to be offended over that side of it .
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
Mixing Presidential campaigning with porta potties with frat boy keggers with a Mormon*bishop was the absurdity that occurred to me. The idea of the Republican presidential contender using a porta potty (rather than a nearby restroom) naturally led to the question of why. The first line was to set up the phrasing of the second -- ie "one-to-one correspondence is normally enough", with 'extras' then meaning more-than-one extra -- to get to the punchline.
I guess they're right: If ya gotta explain it, it wasn't very funny.
* ie a no-doubt-about-it non-drinker
[ May 18, 2012, 09:54 PM: Message edited by: aspectre ]
Posted by Jake (Member # 206) on :
I think it'd be stronger without the last two sentences, anyway. The penultimate sentence is basically just explaining the joke, which always drains away The Funny.
Posted by Xavier (Member # 405) on :
Implying that a second bathroom must have been because Mitt has a weak bladder was somewhat funny to me. The absurdity of the non-drinker being good at keg stands is a few too many steps removed with the premise (needing to pee a lot), and so it didn't register any humor with me at all.
Posted by odouls268 (Member # 2145) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: The idea that Mitt Romney has to engage in biological functions of any kind is a bit of a stretch.
^this.
If I had Romney's money, I'd be paying people to pee FOR me.
And really, when you're campaigning for President, there's so many people lined up to take the piss out of you that there can't be much left.
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
SCORE!!! Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
From my timeline -- presidential campaigner + porta potties -> kegger -> non-drinker -- the "weak bladder" was a prequel added to the original thought-line.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
.
![[Party]](graemlins/party.gif)
SCORE!!!