Real Time with Bill Maher (2012)

[whoopdido]

Originally Posted by throwing copper

whether obama is/was qualified or not doesn't make much difference.

wtf?

[Throwing Copper]

Originally Posted by whoopdido

Maher is an assclown. That is all.

wtf?

[whoopdido]

Originally Posted by Throwing Copper

wtf?

Yeah he's an assclown but do you really believe that it doesn't matter if Obama is/was qualified to be president? That's insane. So we should just roll any old black guy out there? Well...he's only half black. Does it matter if he can read or write? Do you feel the same way about a Hispanic president? Now bout an Asian president? Or a woman? Would you say it doesn't matter if Palin was qualified to be president just because many people would be happy that a woman was elected?

[dhmac]

Originally Posted by mcnabb

I will give an example of how Maher has become a democratic lacky since Obama has been elected:

I remember during the 2000 Democrat and Republican Conventions he railed that the poll numbers moved for both Gore and Bush after their speeches. I remember his exact words, "The sad thing is this shit actually works on people!" Which I totally agreed with him that Republican and Democrat Conventions are total infommercials and the sad thing is they actually sway people with their vote.

Fast Forward to 2008 on HBO and he was fawning over Obama's speech at the Dem 2008 Convention, to the point where he was smitten with his words sort of like Chris Matthews got a tingle up his leg when Obama spoke.

I wanted to say to Bill, "The sad thing is this shit actually works on people.....like you Bill!"

While it's true that Bill Maher thinks Obama is sometimes a great orator and will praise a speech by him at times, he has been anything but fawning over Obama ever since he took office. (You would know this if you actually watched his show.) Heck, Maher has even said that he now thinks Hillary Clinton would've been a better choice for president in hindsight. Not exactly something an Obama "rah rah cheerleader" would say, as you are basically claiming Bill Maher is.

About only thing that can be said now about Maher's support of Obama is that he still supports Obama primarily because he thinks the Republican side has taken a fast train to crazy town, as represented by the Tea Party and most of the current Republican presidential candidates.

[Bill Needle]

Originally Posted by dhmac

While it's true that Bill Maher thinks Obama is sometimes a great orator and will praise a speech by him at times, he has been anything but fawning over Obama ever since he took office. (You would know this if you actually watched his show.) Heck, Maher has even said that he now thinks Hillary Clinton would've been a better choice for president in hindsight. Not exactly something an Obama "rah rah cheerleader" would say, as you are basically claiming Bill Maher is.

Easy for him to say in hinsight now that it is hard to imagine how she could have done any worse. What he will never say, however, is that a republican would have been a better choice. That's what makes him a one note cheerleader.

[crazychris88]

He would never say that because that is the most ridiculous statement one could make.

[PopcornTreeCt]

Originally Posted by dhmac

About only thing that can be said now about Maher's support of Obama is that he still supports Obama primarily because he thinks the Republican side has taken a fast train to crazy town, as represented by the Tea Party and most of the current Republican presidential candidates.

This is a pretty good assessment.

Originally Posted by Bill Needle

Easy for him to say in hinsight now that it is hard to imagine how she could have done any worse. What he will never say, however, is that a republican would have been a better choice. That's what makes him a one note cheerleader.

Know any self-proclaimed Republicans that would say a Democratic candidate would've done better than Bush? Everyone has biases, that's a fact in life. It's much better for a person to tell them upfront instead of not saying anything and just spewing their own views on you.

[mcnabb]

Originally Posted by PopcornTreeCt

Know any self-proclaimed Republicans that would say a Democratic candidate would've done better than Bush? Everyone has biases, that's a fact in life. It's much better for a person to tell them upfront instead of not saying anything and just spewing their own views on you.

I am a republican (simply because I agree with them on economic issues and thats how I vote, but agree with democrats on social issues), but I think Bill Clinton was a much better President then George W Bush.

I think George W Bush will go down as one of our worst presidents, along with Jimmy Carter, and Obama is on his way to making that list too, as he has been terrible too.

Say what you want about Clinton's extracurricular activity in the Oval Office(which I never agreed with my fellow Republicans who were obsessed with impeaching him on anything) , the guy got things done with a republican congress after the 1994 elections (unlike this current President), and left office with a balance budget.

[whoopdido]

Originally Posted by mcnabb

I am a republican (simply because I agree with them on economic issues and thats how I vote, but agree with democrats on social issues), but I think Bill Clinton was a much better President then George W Bush.

I can't imagine any sane person would disagree with this. I'm a lifelong republican but I think Clinton was one of the best presidents we've ever had. W was not a good president but far from the worst in my opinion. Same with Obama.

[yoshimi]

Originally Posted by Bill Needle

Easy for him to say in hinsight now that it is hard to imagine how she could have done any worse. What he will never say, however, is that a republican would have been a better choice. That's what makes him a one note cheerleader.

This is the single dumbest thing ever posted on the internet since Al Gore created it.

[dhmac]

A few months ago on one of the Overtime segments of his show where Maher takes questions from the Internets, he was asked if someone put a gun to his head and he had to vote for one of the current crop of Republican presidential candidates, who would he vote for. After making some jokes about it, Bill Maher answered: Jon Huntsman.

(Yeah, Huntsman stands virtually no chance of winning, but why Maher picked him is because he is probably the most reasonable person running for the Republican side in this election.)

[dolphinboy]

Originally Posted by dhmac

A few months ago on one of the Overtime segments of his show where Maher takes questions from the Internets, he was asked if someone put a gun to his head and he had to vote for one of the current crop of Republican presidential candidates, who would he vote for. After making some jokes about it, Bill Maher answered: Jon Huntsman.

(Yeah, Huntsman stands virtually no chance of winning, but why Maher picked him is because he is probably the most reasonable person running for the Republican side in this election.)

Huntsman is EASILY the best Republican candidate out there, but it seems since Bush and later when Palin became a very rich star for doing basically nothing and having no real qualifications to be on the ticket, the Republican party is just a sideshow.

Obama is a disappointment, but it's funny that people still think any Republican could have fixed the mess Bush left by now. Hell, even in two terms. If anything, Obama has been too much like Bush. And you can't just ask would ANY Republican have done better, when the party only gave us McCain and Palin as alternatives. Many Republicans and right leaning independents weren't even happy with those two.

If Huntsman was leading, you'd all seize on all the magic underwear jokes Maher was making-the same one's made about Romney. He's a comedian. But I guarantee, after seeing Huntsman speak on Letterman, that if he were given the credit that he probably deserves, you'd hear a lot more reasonable discussion from people like Maher about the Republicans winning. Kind of how we felt, when in 2000, a much different McCain really seemed like a pretty good alternative to Gore.

The days of being able to have a good alternative seems gone now.

I don't care what Tebow says about G-d or what anyone tweets about it. I don't understand why people care that Maher likes to push the buttons of people who think there's a war on Christmas.

[Groucho]

Maher bags on Obama all the time, usually followed by boos and the recurring "he's not your boyfriend" joke.

[creekdipper]

Originally Posted by dino88

I don't know. Is Tim Tebow a grown man? @TimTebow

Yep. And it's still dumb for him or any other grown man to spend his time "tweeting".

Whoever came up with the name 'twitter' undoubtedly had a good sense of irony (and, besides being rich, has a good laugh at everybody who thinks the entire world wants to know every time they pass gas).

The comment wasn't just directed at Maher...it was meant for all twits. I would include in that group the other fad-lovers such as the people who brag about their 2-inch portable tv that requires a microscope for viewing.

[creekdipper]

Originally Posted by Groucho

Maher bags on Obama all the time, usually followed by boos and the recurring "he's not your boyfriend" joke.

Considering Maher's frequent use of the term, "bags" might be an unfortunate choice in this case.

[creekdipper]

Originally Posted by crazychris88

Well they do from me. As far as I am concerned they are doing the lord's work.

So, what are your sister's rates?

[creekdipper]

[quote=CRM114;11058324 That's because the delusion that he is winning (or losing) because of his devotion to Jesus Christ is equally absurd and comical. The punchline only works comedically when he loses. Surely you don't believe Tebow's success is divinely created?[/QUOTE]





While there are undoubtedly people who fall into the category, they're a tiny (but vocal) minority...no bigger than the militant atheists (such a as Maher) who are incensed any time a person experiencing success invokes religion publicly. The latter group's refusal to accept the possibility that a supernatural force could influence human actions is just as dogmatic as the groups they criticize.

And, yes, I do believe Tebow's success is divinely "created" (in the sense that a sovereign God providentially rules over all circumstances). Likewise, his four interceptions was "divinely created". Explanation below.

No, I don't think God pushed Marion Barber out of bounds, caused tacklers to miss Tebow, brought a divine gust of wind to lift Prater's kick 52 yards, etc. That doesn't mean that any of those things aren't possible and that God couldn't have done those things. It simply means that all circumstances are within God's control and nothing happens without his permission...even those things that we call evil, wicked, unjust, etc. That doesn't mean God is to be blamed or credited for each individual action we take (Hoorah! I just successfully got the mail and need to offer a prayer of thanksgiving!), but what Tebow does is to acknowledge that God has given him the opportunities to be where he is today. That doesn't mean that Tebow doesn't acknowledge his parents, coaches, teammates, friends, and other human beings who have influenced him & helped him.

Anyway, if I thought Maher was just poking fun at the extremists who want to use Tebow's wins as proof of direct divine intervention but disavow the negative efforts, I wouldn't have a problem. After viewing Maher over many years, I am absolutely convinced that Maher simply takes every opportunity to bash religion. I don't think he would ever consider bashing atheists or agnostics if their success was being attributed to their "unbelief" (as though they were being rewarded for their "logical" rejection of "superstition"...which is not an uncommon notion among nonbelievers. They simply substitute their own 'intellect' for a supernatural force when giving credit). Maher seems to be from a long line of haters who got their hands smacked with a ruler by a stern nun and who hasn't ever gotten over it. Maher comes from a mixed-religious background at home, but it seems that rather than increasing his tolerance for religion, it just increase his antagonism toward all religions (and his deliberate avoidance of mentioning any positive contributions of religion to society...you now, those evil things such as hospitals, charities, social justice movements, universities, etc.).

In other words, Maher can laud fellow popular atheists such as Hitchens, Carlin, etc. and wouldn't hesitate to attribute their success to their "rational" approach to life (including rejection of religion). However, Maher would never call their deaths or personal struggles a result of their unbelief...and would be highly offended if some religious extremist mocked atheists who were having problems.

And I still don't get why "comedians" get a pass for going out of their way to use offensive language and "push people's buttons". "That's their job" doesn't cut it. Aren't they still human beings? If your "job" depends upon your being deliberately offensive and provocative, what does that say about your chosen profession? The purpose of satire should be to get people to think or to be embarrassed by their position, etc. Maher doesn't appear to be interested in changing minds or improving situations. He loves to talk about "uncivil" speech in politics, but he doesn't hesitate to use the same tactics to "entertain"...

...which probably says more about the state of "comedy" or decent manners in today's culture than about Maher alone. Comedy used to be about amusing people by examining the human condition in a way that made us laugh at our own foibles. It didn't require being sledge-hammered over the head or 'shocked' (as in "I-can't-believe-he-actually-said-that") to be entertained.

Most of the best-known comedians (those who get their own HBO & Showtime specials, anyway) rely heavily on racist, misogynistic, scatological, graphically sexual "jokes" that appeal to the lowest type of intellect. Yes, Shakespeare often did the same...but it was sprinkled in sparingly amongst the philosophical gems. He didn't throw in the equivalent of fake vomit or dog poo every 30 seconds. It might be funny...at first...if Maher pulled down his pants and took a giant crap on stage. But is that really what most people want? If you like that sort of 'comedy', you ought to get a job at an insane asylum where you can hear constant swearing and witness frequent bowel movements. The class clowns could always count of the fake farts under the arms to get a laugh...but was that really original?

When I was young, I giggled at "dirty words" and my friends and I looked up "naughty words" in those old green school dictionaries during English class. I got over it when I grew up and moved on to more challenging fare.

I suppose if you consider Slim Jims to be gourmet food, then Maher is your cup of tea(bags). :wink:

[PopcornTreeCt]

Originally Posted by creekdipper

The latter group's refusal to accept the possibility that a supernatural force could influence human actions is just as dogmatic as the groups they criticize.

Riiight. It's exactly the same thing.

[creekdipper]

Originally Posted by PopcornTreeCt

Riiight. It's exactly the same thing.

Glad we agree. :wink:

The bigger question is: The Denver-KC Game or another episode of McLeod's Daughters?

Tebow just fumbled on KC's 11-yd. line, so Maher has another great opportunity to prove to all of his "followers" (some unintentional irony there) what a great comedian/humanitarian he is after he changes to a dry pair of drawers.

[dino88]

Originally Posted by creekdipper

Glad we agree. :wink:

The bigger question is: The Denver-KC Game or another episode of McLeod's Daughters?

Tebow just fumbled on KC's 11-yd. line, so Maher has another great opportunity to prove to all of his "followers" (some unintentional irony there) what a great comedian/humanitarian he is after he changes to a dry pair of drawers.

It sounds like you're more caught up in this Tebow thing than Bill Maher. Who would have thought that he could write one little line and make someone think about it for days on end? And it wasn't even an original joke.

[John Slider]

This creekdipper guy sure is adorable.

[JasonF]

All I know about Tebow is that his crappy performance screwed me out of winning my Fantasy Football league. Thanks for nothing, Tim.

[creekdipper]

Originally Posted by John Slider

This creekdipper guy sure is adorable.

Thanks, Newbie!

[creekdipper]

Originally Posted by dino88

It sounds like you're more caught up in this Tebow thing than Bill Maher. Who would have thought that he could write one little line and make someone think about it for days on end? And it wasn't even an original joke.

???? What line did Tebow write? ????

Re: Being "caught up"...if you watch Inside The NFL or read sports pages, you'd know that the KC-Denver game had several interesting stories going along with it. Besides the fact that a playoff spot was riding on the outcome if Denver won their game, there was the "Orton's revenge" factor and the "Tebow on the hot spot" factor.

Although hardly any of the above mattered in the end (Oakland lost, Orton didn't exactly set any records, and Tebow didn't provide any answers...if he hadn't fumbled on the 11 early in the game, Denver would have won), the 7-3 score was still more interesting than a blowout win. I had the game on in the background while on the computer, and glanced at it from time to time. I guess that means I was "caught up" in "this Tebow thing", so...guilty as charged.

I spent a lot more time reading about Rex Ryan's blubbering in the locker room after the Jets got bounced from the playoffs due to multiple team meltdowns, not the least was Santonio Holmes' apparent refusal to give any effort during the game which allegedly led to a couple of fights in the huddle & his benching during the game (notable due to his status as team captain and $45 million dollar contract). So I was actually "caught up" in the Jets thing and loved it. I always love it when blowhards "guarantee" Super Bowl wins & then don't even make the playoffs.

Re: Maher...don't know who thought about his 'tweet' for "days on end" unless it was bloggers who have to find something to write about. Maher's comment was entirely predictable: He loves to stick his nose (pun intended) into anything that will get him attention although he is predictably ignorant of the facts in most cases (i.e., when his research staff let him down). It's not Maher who irritates me so much as people who chortle uncontrollably at his inane comments which are slanted, biased, and often ignorant of the facts. Whenever Maher faces a real intellect in a neutral setting, they clean his clock and make him look like exactly what he is...a rather shallow, uneducated comic. George Will made him look like a stammering little boy with a few sly comments that directly challenged some outlandish untruths offered up as 'argumentation' by Maher...and Maher was immediately exposed for what he is.

My comments aren't for Maher...after all, he is simply what he is and will say/do whatever it takes to rake in the $...but for his fans who think he is anything other than a liberal version of Glen Beck or Limbaugh.

[dino88]

Originally Posted by creekdipper

???? What line did Tebow write? ????

Re: Maher...don't know who thought about his 'tweet' for "days on end" unless it was bloggers who have to find something to write about.

So you were just feigning confusion?