Ed Schultz is a huge douche. I agree with some of his opinions but he's like a left version of Rush.

I agree with 95% of his opinions, but I do agree. He is a douchebag.

Yeah, I'm not sure I've seen him before, but he was pretty annoying.

It just goes to show... douchebaggery is not limited to any point on the political spectrum. It's a shame Michael Steele wasn't on when there was a more civil panel. I really wanted to hear some of his explanations and/or justifications. Even if I disagree, I still want to hear it. For instance, I'd have loved to hear him explain how the Tea party isn't aligned with the Republican party because of the two black democrats who stumbled into a protest after a night of mushrooms.

I have to disagree, MikahC. Steele was given ample opportunity to defend Republican ideas and he did a piss-poor job at it. Between Steele and Schultz, this was the most worthless panel I can remember Maher having (Amy Walter seemed pretty useless too, but I'll give her the benefit of the doubt and assume she was just trying to stay out of the way of the idiots on either side of her).

I knew it was going to be a bad show the minute I saw the panel. Steele was extra-horrible, though and for those who pick on Maher (who is not my favorite person by any stretch), he actually protected Steele from the booing and the criticism of his absolutely stupid comments.

What's the point of having any debate show if someone from either side says something either clearly wrong and/or clearly stupid and you don't call them on it? Sometimes there is a right and sometimes there is wrong and not always an in the middle.

You don't have to scream and yell or call people names to stand your ground and just call a person out. A few times, with the stupid things Steele said, you really couldn't blame the audience for booing. Steele knows what kind of crowd Maher gets. He's there to promote himself and seems to always put his foot in his mouth. The guy spouts the same crazy stuff, even the Republican party hated, on shows like Rachel Maddow, so he doesn't need anyone holding his hand.

Seriously, I said "come on" out loud when he responded to the "What happens when the 15,000 runs out" with "We don't know."

I like Steele as a panelist but the thing is that you have to pair him with someone who won't come off as a douche like Schultz. And Amy Walters was awful.

It's not a matter of holding his hand. It's a matter of decorum. Is there really anything wrong with giiving someone reasonable space to express an idea and THEN rebutting it?

Speaking of which, is there any problem with actually rebutting what I say as opposed to things I'm not saying? Nowhere did I say erroneous statements shouldn't be challenged. My position is you should let the person finish the erroneous statement before yelling over/at him. "Loudest doesn't equal rightest."

Let me give you guys a scenario. It doesn't matter which side we play because it's the same for both. If I'm a liberal watching Bill's show and a conservative comes on to expose me to an alternative viewpoint, I have my laughs at his expense, and nothing changes. If I'm an independent and a conservative comes on, I see how rude he's treated and it does not endear me to the liberal side. If I'm a conservative and I see him come on, it energizes me even more to dig in because I see how badly the other side treats people like me.

I just don't see the point of being rude to people. Modern day Conservatives treating other people poorly is the main reason I don't identify myself as a conservative. Liberals are supposed to be more open minded and accepting. Can't liberals do that and shoot down ideas without being rude? For instance, if someone believes in trickle down theory of tax cuts for the rich, instead of saying, "You're stupid, that doesn't work?" can't we just say, "That didn't work for Reagan or Bush, so exactly what is your basis for saying it does work?" Maybe you learn something, and maybe you just refute a fallacious theory, but either way seems a better result than, "You're stupid!"

If you want the intelligent people from the other side to come on the show, you have to show you can treat them with respect. Nobody NEEDS to come on that show, and why should they come on just to be ridiculed and treated badly?

I agree with you that there should be less rudeness on TV. Sadly, I can't think of a single political talk show where there's not rudeness. The Daily Show, of all things, comes closest, but even there, the audience routinely boos conservative guests.

So, basically, you're saying no intelligent liberals have ever been on Fox.

When you run out of your $15,000, you need to be able to come up with a better answer than "we don't know" to what will happen to you.

Please, it's not like Maher EVER gets loud and angry like O'Reilly. Again, I'm no big fan of Maher, but, as Americans, I think we need to expect more from the people who SPEAK FOR US on both sides.

I think we NEED to boo when a liberal or conservative gives crappy, stupid, lazy, answers to the questions they're being asked. Decorum is fine. I don't think any of them should have shoes thrown at them (maybe Bachman), but I see the same people on most of these shows on Maher, on Fox, on CNN, on MSNBC, and I think we've been brainwashed to think they can't handle a serious question, so we need to sit there politely while they lie to us.

Again, I think conservatives just don't like Maher much. Stewart gets a lot of them and asks them some pretty tough questions, although most of it ends up on the web. But the audience is not a problem. It's not like The State of the Union or anything. ("You lie").

No, I didn't say that. I don't watch Fox, and that's one big reason why. I'm expressing my feelings about the kind of show I'm excited to watch. Telling me shows I don't watch don't live up to that is pointless. But I'd hazard a guess that Fox shows don't have 3-4 conservatives ganging up on 1 liberal with hundreds of conservatives in the audience all screaming at and ridiculing the lone liberal. I could be wrong because as I said, I don't watch, but this is not what I've seen when I've stumbled across O'Reilly's show.

Are we arguing this point? This is actually the one area of the conversation I liked because I did get to hear what he thinks. His thought is it's the beginning stages of the discussion and he truly doesn't know what the plan will be after that. My response (and the panel's and the audience's) is "Come back when you know." But again, at least let him get his response out. It was much better to let him speak and let independents hear that he had no viable response for the question asked. To clarify, the crux of my problem isn't with the audience booing. It's those situations when the dissenting opinion isn't even allowed to be heard. The moderator should address that.

Yes, he has. But again, that doesn't bother me as long as he lets the other side talk. One other thing... why does O'Reilly doing something make it acceptable? O'Reilly's bullying is why I don't watch HIS show. I tried, because I was interested in a lot of things he had to say.

Again, I have no problem with that statement. If you think I do, you're applying your own biases while reading my statements.

I don't do any such thing. It's why I stopped watching most of those shows. But on Bill's show, that was the place where if someone gave a stupid or vacuous answer, he'd challenge them on an intellectual basis. Sure he might throw something funny in as well, but at his core, Bill was a thinker. He had moments like that in this show -- like your aforementioned conversation about the $15k. That was some good Bill right there. The audience booed, but he just keep coming back to it until he got an answer.

It saddens me that this show is unwatchable these days. I used to look forward to this show because there is nothing on Friday nights, but Maher has turned into such an angry A-hole these days, the guy just isn't funny anymore, and the show is as bad as Hannity or Maddow these days with the stacked panels and one-sided audience.

Agreed 100%. I used to love this show, it was a weekly bit of bliss... Friday night, late night, nothing going on and nothing on TV all night, and I could expect some excellent political commentary, a review of the weeks events, and humour.

But a year ago, I stopped watching. When the show started up this year, I gave another four episodes a shot... Then I stopped watching again. Bill isn't the same old Bill. He's angry half the time, and the times he isn't, it is when he should be. Meaning about Obama. He seems to accept anything Obama does, even when he shouldn't, and the times where it's too infuriating to applause, he goes easy. The panels have gone downhill dramatically. Used to get some good conservatives, and they weren't ridiculed. Now, we have joke conservatives who just make their side look bad, and they are ridiculed beyond belief. Such a shame, I really, really, really used to enjoy this show.

To play devil's advocate, he used to regularly have Ann Coulter as a conservative guest. Is that really anyone's idea of a good conservative? On the flip side, his guest this week was the most recent chair of the Republican National Committee. If that's a guest who makes conservatives look bad, is that the fault of Maher or the fault of the Republican Party?

I felt bad for her. But Schultz did call Steele out on the carpet for some pretty ludicrous statements.

By the way, I'm shocked, shocked that conservatives are turned off by this show. There's always Red Eye.

And Maher never criticized Obama?

Maher hasn't talked to Coulter for about 10 years, since he was on ABC. Not sure why, but I know she has never appeared on the HBO show.

As for guests on Maher's show, he has always had the loons of each side (Michael Moore, Ann Coulter, etc.) that is expected, the problem is that he has maybe 1 or 2 shows a season where there are more republicans then dems on the panels, and sometimes he has 3 dems on the panel and no republicans!

I turned it on a few weeks ago, and it was 3 liberals, along with Bill, along with the audience, talking about how they hate the republicans. Sorry, but that is lame TV! Same goes for Hannity as he does that once in a while on his panels. I don't want to watch a bunch of people bitch about the other political party while there is zero people on the other side to argue with them!

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/cUY5I1QOC4g" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/2oVn65818w8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Superfro, thanks for correcting me. What year was that from? I just remember hearing from either Maher or Coulter, that they got into some fight years back, and she wouldn't come on the show anymore.

That first one was from the first episode on HBO...not sure the year off the top of my head..the other was much later at least. I know she's been on a handful of times, but yeah..it's probably been 5+ years at least since she's actually been on the panel. Which I'm more than ok with.

Looks like the 2nd one is from '04, so it has been about 7 years since she has been on. She used to be a regular on his show, especially on the ABC days. Wonder what happened between them that she wont come on anymore?

Well, it could be as simple as her becoming more and more extreme and not wanting to be face to face with anyone trying to make sense of her bullshit.

I totally agree with you that she is a loon, but she fits right in with the rest of the guests on Mahers show

The last time she was on was 2005. She's been on Real Time a total of 6 times.

Toward the end of the show, he mentioned playing 3 stand up shows in NC this week. The wife and I and some friends have tix to the one in Asheville. Can't wait!

As for the panelists, it doesn't really matter. Bill is going to take the show where he wants it to go. And usually, most conservative don't do well defending their arguments. Witness Andrew Sullivan last week who agreed with everything the liberal panelists said but still took the other side.