bootsy

He should have interrupted O'Donnell shes a fucking airhead. As for that Politico guy, didn't really notice he interrupted him and if he did he probably deserved it too for throwing out that assumption that Barack and Clinton don't like each other and then offering no proof of it.

As for as Van Dan Heuvel she isn't even close to the most annoying when you have someone like O'Donnell on the set especially during that overtime. Can you imagine living with that and hearing all her idiotic/ignorant comments every day.

creekdipper

I stand corrected. I'm not sure that he ever called Palin whore; instead, he only called her a 'dumb twat' (which is far better than 'whore', of course).

I'm sure Maher didn't mean anything by it. Why, at family meals, he probably tells his mom or sister, "Pass the salt, you dumb twat".

For those wanting citations, don't be so lazy. Google "Bill Maher" followed by one of the vulgar expressions and you will find examples (and usually video) of Maher using the words listed above to refer to women (again, haven't found a 'whore' example but I'm fairly certain I've heard him use the term on tv being directed toward a specific woman). You may argue that the woman deserves the label, but you can't deny that he said it about specific women.

Unless you think the Youtube videos are faked.

creekdipper

But Maher hugged her (twice), called her an old colleague, made nice about the 'witch' comments, etc. And O'Donnell was being a good sport and even got in her own zinger about Maher's ego, which he took in good humor. He seemed to take it easy on her, at least in the primetime segment.

The point is that a poster a bit back in the thread took umbrage to the idea that Maher ever interrupts guests while they're trying to make their point and won't let them finish. Why even have someone on if you're just going to say 'I call bullshit' or "That's a false equivalency" before they can even finish their statement...and if your rebuttal is nothing more than, "That's not true" or "I don't believe that". The same poster denied that the audience is ever rude toward conservative guests by hooting (my word) at them while they're speaking, yet the audience jeered O'Donnell twice while she was speaking.

Regardless of whether you like Van Dan Heuvel's politics, her insistence on jumping in first on EVERY single point and insinuating herself into every line of conversation ("But Bill....) was not only egotistical, it was rude and dismissive of the host and the other guests. She seemed to think that her opinion was more valuable than anyone else's and NEEDED to be heard. That would be bad enough if all of her statements made sense, but so much of the time she wandered off into an ivory tower, fanciful discourse...like something out of a Billy Jack movie...at least, when she wasn't bashing Republicans (except on the military issues during which she bashed equally). I could tell David Simon was getting tired of it, and he successfully cut off her attempts to interrupt his turn a couple of times.

I actually enjoyed the rest of the show (and the segment showing the candidate's spouses trying to 'out-poor' each other was not only funny but even-handed...props to Maher's staff), but she needed to put a sock in it. I've been in meetings with people like her, and everyone just rolls their eyes whenever such a person monopolizes the conversation. I know she's the editor of The Nation, but she came across like a spoiled brat who wants to be the center of attention.

actionjackson29

Come of creekdipper are you a woman? Do you take birth control pills? I'm not saying I know all about it either. But I know that women go to doctor and get prescribed what the doctor thinks is best for the particular patient. You're making it seem like you go Walmart and pick it some $10 pills and that's it. And you truly are clueless if you think that the reason women are on birth control is because they are promiscus. People have sex that's a fact of life it's being responsible to use birth control.

creekdipper

What is Maher's obsession with Palin? 100 other speakers can say something about a current issue and Maher will disagree with each of them...yet he singles out Palin even when she's out of sight in the media.

The guy's got a bug up his butt for Palin. Right now, looks like he would stick to bashing Ryan since Palin's not on the ticket this year.

creekdipper

No, but my wife is not only a woman but also a registered nurse with years of experience in labor & delivery and working in an OB/GYN office. I trust her expertise far more than Maher's...or Fluke's, especially since she is an "reproductive rights" activist who is not an objective source of information.

I also know that, when people offered the low cost estimates of birth control for the VAST MAJORITY OF WOMEN...and that's not even counting free or subsidized birth control...that I didn't hear anyone refuting those lower estimates during the debate. Fluke's figures in her testimony were just reported at face value by the majority of the media...seemingly without any attempt to "fact-check" (the current media obsession).

Setting aside the definition of 'promiscuous'...the interpretation which will vary from person to person...the basic argument was over the NEED for the provisions to be included in insurance (Fluke was presenting it as a huge financial burden) and Limbaugh was refuting that. If Fluke's numbers are atypical, then her entire argument for the provisions falls apart, and her testimony is largely useless. Offering examples of exceptional cases...which could be prescribed as treatment anyway...does not give a rationale for forcing private institutions to offer insurance covering birth control to everyone.

And your statement that "people have sex...that's a fact of life" proves what? People drink beer, eat Twinkies, and go to the beach, too...but that's a matter of choice--JUST AS HAVING SEX IS. People require food, water, shelter, and sleep in order to survive. They do not require intercourse. If that were true, then no one who chooses to be celibate would live very long...yet many lifetime virgins live to a ripe old age (no pun intended).

Just because someone WANTS to do something, does that mean that insurers should be required to provide it? And that schools whose statements of belief go against such practices should be forced to offer that coverage?

BTW...When I went to the doctor and saw a nurse practitioner, I didn't say, "Whoa...you aren't a MAN. There's no way you could have an informed opinion of what MEN need." I trusted her training and objectivity, listened to her diagnosis, and followed her advice. Saying that only women should be able to offer an opinion on a "woman's issue" is a blatant attempt to stifle debate. Why, that's as bad as trying to suppress the vote!

Evan Meadow

Because he's got to remind people they were that close to once again electing a complete idiot to office. And how intelligence should always prevail over "That's someone I want to hang out with" when electing a president/vice-president.

Josh-da-man

Pregnancy isn't a medical condition?

Sounds like you think birth control should only be available to old people or married people or people who aren't students?

A vasectomy is the very definition of an elective surgery.

And the difference between birth control pills and condoms is you don't need a prescription to purchase condoms.

Josh-da-man

Are we operating under the assumption that Sarah Palin isn't a ****?

dhmac

Bill Maher did call Sarah Palin a MILF in his stand-up act. But he then defined MILF as standing for a "Moron I'd Like to Forget"

brayzie

Really? Because the full post has quotes, all from Rush Limbaugh, and I even typed, "^ all from Rush Limbaugh."

brayzie

So why should health insurance cover Viagra? You don't have to have sex after all.

brayzie

If that's your reasoning then it's okay to call someone a derogatory name based on their race, gender or sexuality, just because we think they're ignorant, manipulative, corrupt, criminal etc.

This reminds me of how people rationalize their racist language/beliefs and say, "there's Blacks and then there's n-----s."

creekdipper

At first glance, that would seem a valid point given my post about sex not being required for survival.

However, there is a difference in a healthy person choosing to have/not have sex and an impaired person not being able to make that choice.

An injured person can survive without being able to walk, but most insurance plans would cover rehab, prosthetics, etc. that could help a person regain their mobility.

On the other hand, most insurance plans would probably not pay for athletic shoes or leg weights for a mobile person who wants to lower their running times. That would be considered a choice.

Besides, as Jocelyn Elders taught the masses, intercourse is not the only source of achieving sexual pleasure. As I understand it, birth control is not required for a person to have a 'happy ending'...otherwise, many massage parlors would close overnight.

creekdipper

Turn on your sarcasm meter.

creekdipper

Then how did Biden get elected?

brayzie

I get your sarcasm but I find it annoying when people resort to cheap Democrat vs Republican jokes as a reply.

creekdipper

"So pregnancy isn't a medical condition?"

Of course it is. And I assume that most insurance plans include doctor's visits for prenatal care & associated health care for pregnant women.

However, the topic is birth control...which is used to PREVENT pregnancy. Some insurance plans offer coverage for preventive care, I believe, or offer discounted rates for healthy (healthful?) behavior such as not smoking, maintaining recommended weight, or participating in exercise programs. Others may not.

There are all sorts of things people can do to prevent 'medical conditions' (although some would find the idea of comparing a pregnancy to a heart attack or tumor to be a repugnant comparison), but that doesn't mean that insurance plans cover those actions. We can argue about whether that's good or bad policy (or even good economics for the insurers), but there does seem to be quite a distinction made between prevention and treatment.

creekdipper

Since we're discussing a comedian/commentator, I thought a little levity was appropriate. However, I do apologize for the bad material, which I blame entirely on my writers (some whom will be joining the ranks of the unemployed).

And I'll offer a preemptive apology for the Biden comment, which falls under the comments above. The rookie writers aren't any better than the other ones.

brayzie

Because purchasing condoms isn't the same as purchasing the pill or getting a depo shot. Those require going to a doctor and in the case of the latter, carry side effects and health risks.

brayzie

As you say, it's apples and oranges. If it's about an impaired person vs a healthy person why should health insurance companies cover vasectomies? The person getting the surgery is healthy but is making a choice not to have children. If a woman wants to get a prescription for the pill or get the depo-provera shot it's for the same purpose.

creekdipper

You've said that you don't like the cheap political jokes, but (in all seriousness), the quote above applies more to the liberal racists who say something akin to that when discussing the Republican "oreos" and "Toms" who don't qualify as being "black" because they hold different political views.

And I'm not talking about those who say conservative African-Americans aren't "black enough"...I mean those who insist that "they're not really black". Evidently you can't use a racial epithet but can get away with denigrating a person's ethnic background by saying they don't measure up. Imagine if someone said that the President isn't 'really white' because of his political views. Such sentiments would be roundly (and rightly) denounced.

I hear that idea being expressed quite often by callers to shows such as Washington Journal who don't hesitate to say such things publicly without realizing the overt racism they are verbalizing themselves.

brayzie

I didn't find the levity at this point in the discussion when my post was commenting on you and Limbaugh's assertion that the cost of birth control that Fluke was claiming would mean the person is living a promiscuous lifestyle.

creekdipper

Speaking of denigrating people, I didn't hear anyone on Maher's most recent show (after both conventions ended) mention the Democratic delegates/party chairmen who compared Republicans to Nazis (we know that's off-limits in this forum) or the party chairman who claimed that Christians want to kill all the Jews so that they can convert them (?)...which, besides being "hate speech", doesn't even make sense. Neither was Wasserman-Schutz's getting caught in taped lie, although I believe Ryan's fabrication about his marathon time was considered to be really important.

On the other hand, seem to recall that the two idiots at the RNC who tossed peanuts and racial slurs before getting the boot were mentioned the week before.

I know Maher isn't going to volunteer any ammunition that would balance the scales, but one would think that a guest would speak up in the interest of fairness.

creekdipper

Well, you didn't offer any information refuting the idea that Fluke's numbers seem to be grossly inflated ,which relegates her claims of financial hardship for students seeking birth control to be moot.

When one side keeps insisting on returning to a flawed argument, you shouldn't blame the opposing viewpoint for at least trying to interject a little humor. I find it pretty humorous that liberals keep trying to bash Limbaugh for pointing out facts and keep supporting Fluke for uttering lies. When a conversation takes a ridiculous turn, silly comments in kind ought to be expected.

Unless someone wants to keep the discussion 'serious' by citing actual numbers to bolster Fluke's claims. Otherwise, it's hard to argue that Limbaugh's assessment was not correct.