Jump to content

Real Time with Bill Maher


  • Please log in to reply

7216 replies to this topic

#6241

jenny1234

jenny1234

    Video Archivist

Posted Jan 27, 2013 @ 12:33 AM

Wow, Howard Dean, M.D. You need a show, buddy? Why have I always associated him with being really lame, like from his presidential run? He would have made a great Biden.


Howard Dean did mess himself up in his presidential run with his "Yeah!" after the first primary, but on a policy level I much prefer him to Biden who, despite a few positives, to me is just an another corporatist war-hawk.
  • 0

#6242

canaanite2

canaanite2

    Couch Potato

Posted Jan 27, 2013 @ 11:05 AM

Clinton-Dean '16? It rhymes, and that's gotta count for something!
  • 0

#6243

itsmejessica

itsmejessica

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 27, 2013 @ 2:48 PM

I love Howard Dean.I think the media made alot of that YEAH!thing it wasn't a big deal to me.The news shows just had to run it on a loop.That sucked for Dean it really was over after he was made into a joke.He has great ideas. And yes Clinton-Dean sounds great to me.
  • 2

#6244

ganesh

ganesh

    Stalker

Posted Jan 27, 2013 @ 4:56 PM

Good new rules and I got a good laugh out of Bill pointing out how football is kind of gay.

It is totally gay. I like football, but I don't own any jerseys or do anything like Bill was talking about. He's right though; regardless of what actually happened with Teo, my life is totally unaffected. However, it is kind of smear on Notre Dame in that they used the story knowing it was a hoax.

She hasn't gotten enough credit for how effective she was and I was happy that Bill brought up the disgraceful fact that she has never been on the cover of a mainstream magazine.

I didn't know this, and it is pretty shameful. Pelosi struck me as upbeat and optimistic. What's she going to say, really? "Well, these people suck and we're not going to get anything done this session." I thought it was interesting that the current Speaker seems to need her probably a little more than the way it usually is in the House. That was actually one of Bill's better interviewing jobs.

I liked Dean as well. He's really smart and outgoing. Part of the problem with some of the panelists is they come off as so crabby, even if they have something interesting to say, no one wants to be around them. I was curious as to why he said "life begins at delivery." I support Roe 100% and the majority opinion from the case is thorough and pretty definitive, imo on this issue. By the third trimester I think they say that the fetus is clearly a life.

I don't understand why "right wing" is considered a bad word. It seems like that guy just wanted to say something for the sake of saying something at that point. Even Bill was like WTF. Did he mean that "right wing" usually means that the person is an extremist? Why not just say that?

I get Bill's point in theory about the senators. There's an interesting article from a constitutional scholar about how it's outdated and we should just make reasonable laws because that's what a civil society does [very short version], but I think Bill harping on the senators is the wrong outlet for that argument. Bitching about the rules that gives the minority party more authority I can get, or the way the reps are apportioned in the house.

I just realized there was another episode from the 18th. It's probably too late to contribute anything too new, but what the hell, it's the internet.

I've said a ton of times here that I don't think a lot of these blowhards on the cable news shows don't really believe what they say, and Short pretty much said the same thing, so I thought that was neat.

Rula Jabreal has done some really strong journalism, but I don't think she's right for the panel...I thought she was a fucking prude...As for Jula, the Palestinean journalist, she really belonged in the opening segment where she could have a one on one and not have to deal with the panel'l silliness (though if she had seen the show, she should have known what she was in for).

If she honestly didn't know what she was getting into by being on the show, then she needs to have a talk with her management/agent. She's obviously smart, but Bill saying "out-fucking" is pretty run of the mill for this show. And I agree that the Teo issue pales in comparison to 99.9% of other issues in the world, but the discussion about the culture of social media, which she actually brought up, re: Arab spring, is a good one to have.

You can get a prescription for medical marijuana for things as mundane as "anxiety."

Also insomnia. The reasons are laughable enough that it's pretty much de facto legal. I don't smoke, but I honestly don't care if anyone does. It's such a non issue. Legalize it, tax the shit out of it, move on.

I felt like he was just saying, "Why bother? It won't help!", which I think is such an awful point of view like Short said, it is just a start.

I remember when people smoked on planes! How awful! I do think Bill was being devil's advocate to stimulate discussion. Anyone reasonable person knows that argument is the definition of a strawman.

Edited by ganesh, Jan 27, 2013 @ 6:58 PM.

  • 0

#6245

ThomasAAnderson

ThomasAAnderson

    Couch Potato

Posted Jan 27, 2013 @ 5:46 PM

I didn't think this week's show was that much of an improvement. While Howard Dean and Congressman Tester made good points most of the panel discussion didn't go anywhere.

Bill sounds more and more like an elitist, cranky old man in his diatribes. So the states with the most money should get more Senators?! How does that make sense? How about if we changed the rules so only people who own land or are in the highest tax bracket can vote? The founders did it this way to ensure all states, big and small have a voice--does he not understand that?

Also Bill (and all pot enthusiasts) should look into whether Kamala Harris, the US Attorney for CA, is asking the DEA to raid dispensaries or if the administration is driving this. When Harris ran she noted she was against legalization of marijuana.

Finally, I'm so glad his racist Chinese movie joke was a big FAIL--All Dogs Come with Noodles--really?!

Edited by ThomasAAnderson, Jan 27, 2013 @ 6:01 PM.

  • 0

#6246

vinyl

vinyl

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 27, 2013 @ 6:55 PM

That "right wing" is considered name calling or an insulting term was ridiculous to me. Now, using the term "right wing nutjobs" would be an insult, IMO, but simply "right wing"? That guy was truly grasping at straws. Idiocy.
  • 0

#6247

Pippin

Pippin

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 28, 2013 @ 2:24 AM

I, too was somewhat mystified at the idea that being called "right wing" was an insult, unless it is simply an indicator as to how far the right has fallen in the public's general esteem.

What I found disturbing and annoying was when Mr. Dean started to talk about the very real issue of Republican attempts to suppress the votes, the two Republicans immediately turned the conversation back to idiot conspiracy theories. Yeah, talk about imaginary conspiracies when there are real shenanigans taking place.

And Ms. Soltis misquoting Hillary Clinton frosted me as well. (She did it by omission, but nevertheless managed to make it a misquote.) Ms. Clinton didn't just say what does it matter now and leave it at that, as if she didn't care. She also said that they needed to find out what went wrong and make sure it never happens again. Selective memory, there!
  • 4

#6248

Hanahope

Hanahope

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 28, 2013 @ 10:00 AM

Agree that Bill needs to lay-off the senator thing. Its made that way so that all states get an equal voice in passing legislation and is supposed to be the real way that the minority can prevent an absolute control by the majority, not gerrymandering, which is the wrong way of allowing minority control. If Bill wants to have Congress be more "representative", argue about stopping gerrymandering. At least for this last election, it would have let the Democrats control Congress, as the majority of this year's voters wanted.

I like Bill's political comedy, but his interrupting of good discourse with his irrelevant comedic bits is getting annoying.
  • 1

#6249

braggtastic

braggtastic

    Stalker

Posted Jan 28, 2013 @ 3:45 PM

I was curious as to why he said "life begins at delivery." I support Roe 100% and the majority opinion from the case is thorough and pretty definitive, imo on this issue. By the third trimester I think they say that the fetus is clearly a life.

Dean is a medical doctor. I have to think he came to his life begins at delivery belief due to some real life decisions he's had to make/consult on.
  • 2

#6250

attica finch

attica finch

    Stalker

Posted Jan 28, 2013 @ 3:51 PM

Yeah, the need for late-term abortions isn't something women make up. I've read some harrowing accounts.

I thought HoDe was a decent counterweight to the two right-wingers (ooh, burn! not) on the panel. His rebuttals were pithy and direct.
  • 0

#6251

Hanahope

Hanahope

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 28, 2013 @ 4:51 PM

There's also some Bible verses that have suggested that life begins 'at the first breath'. Genesis 2:7 mentions God "breathing life into Adam and he became a living soul."
  • 0

#6252

ganesh

ganesh

    Stalker

Posted Jan 28, 2013 @ 6:54 PM

I have to think he came to his life begins at delivery belief due to some real life decisions he's had to make/consult on.

I would have just liked him to elaborate on that.
  • 0

#6253

braggtastic

braggtastic

    Stalker

Posted Jan 28, 2013 @ 8:50 PM

On Overtime he didn't talk about that, but he was talking about how important it is to help children aged 0-3, and Bill couldn't believe it. Bill was saying shit like '3? When I was 3 I was sitting in my own shit. What can you do with a 3 year old?' Dean talked about the importance of reading to them and reasoning with them so they have a decent vocabulary when they start school, and how middle class kids starting school have a 500 word vocabulary & poor kids have 100 words. It was like Bill had no idea at all. I guess it's not part of his world. I don't have kids of my own, but I certainly knew the importance of reading. Bill came off very uninformed.
  • 0

#6254

Pippin

Pippin

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 29, 2013 @ 12:03 AM

Bill obviously has never interacted with kids except squalling infants on airplanes.

I don't have kids, but I did the "nanny thang" while in college so I figure I helped raise about 5 kids all told. I was talking care of a very young child (pre-verbal; just learning to talk) and over the course of the summer she went from being spoon fed to feeding herself and cleaning up her toys (by dumping them all in the playpen) before nap time. It all depends on how you deal with them; a lot of praise, patience and making games out of things. Her older brother and I got along just fine as well. He was 5 and we made games out of eating (picky eater) and co-operating in cleaning up, etc. etc.

Not to appear too unseemly or immodest, but I myself was reading at age 5 and reading at about a grade 3 level. But I came from a house where books and magazines were always around and available. My father was not one for reading fiction; instead, he read history, science and so forth. Curious, I picked these up and would look through them. I remember reading bits and pieces of "Time" magazine when I was 6 or 7, and fully reading it and discussing Vietnam and Watergate with my dad when I was about 10.

It's all about being with kids, reading to them, and stimulating their wee brains. (I read somewhere that the rate of learning for the human animal is at its greatest during infancy and early childhood). Best argument for enriched childhood early learning yet. (And no, I don't mean running the poor kids ragged with flash cards, etc.) Much better than dropping kids in front of the idiot box for 7 hours. (When I was growing up, we had one channel -- CBC. Looking back, not such a bad thing. Look up, look way, way up...)

Sorry for the long post, but even though childless, education is something I feel very strongly about.
  • 3

#6255

canaanite2

canaanite2

    Couch Potato

Posted Jan 29, 2013 @ 10:22 AM

Dean talked about the importance of reading to them and reasoning with them so they have a decent vocabulary when they start school, and how middle class kids starting school have a 500 word vocabulary & poor kids have 100 words.


I hate this sort of bleeding-heart excuse making. Libraries are free. You can go once a week and gather enough books to read to your child 15-20 minutes a night. No parent is so busy that they don't have time to do this. And even if the excuse is that they don't have transportation to the library, there are still plenty of other places you can pick up some books and read to your kids -- thrift store, friends and family, book store. Statistics don't tell the whole story. Many parents make the choice not to read to their kids regardless of income. These numbers only show that some parents with a higher income can afford to provide their kids with a quality education at an earlier age, not that the higher income parents spend more time reading and reasoning with their kids. The point is to encourage a young child's natural thirst for knowledge, and it doesn't matter what a parent's income is when it comes to that. Bill apparently has no idea of the importance of kids wanting to learn and that that desire is quite strong at the age of 3. He's such a prick when it comes to his attitude towards kids. He's decided that he doesn't like them and, therefore, they aren't important. If you care about the future of your country you have to care about the children who will create that future. But he probably doesn't really care about the far off future, just the next 30-40 years he'll be living in.

Edited by canaanite2, Jan 29, 2013 @ 10:23 AM.

  • 0

#6256

braggtastic

braggtastic

    Stalker

Posted Jan 29, 2013 @ 11:15 AM

I don't think Dean meant to be making excuses. He was saying that poor families need to read to their kids, not saying that they couldn't because they were poor.
  • 0

#6257

canaanite2

canaanite2

    Couch Potato

Posted Jan 29, 2013 @ 4:56 PM

That's what I took from it based on the comparison with the middle class. I don't like it when the lower class is encouraged to see themselves as victims and tend to have a kneejerk reaction to anything suggesting that, but I haven't been able to see the quote in context since OT isn't on On Demand yet so I might have taken it the wrong way.

Edited by canaanite2, Jan 29, 2013 @ 4:57 PM.

  • 0

#6258

Scorpiosrule

Scorpiosrule

    Stalker

Posted Jan 29, 2013 @ 8:26 PM

canaanite2, Click on this link. It's Maher's blogspot, and you can catch last week's overtime.
  • 0

#6259

shabbieshok

shabbieshok

    Couch Potato

Posted Jan 29, 2013 @ 9:25 PM

I don't think Dean meant to be making excuses. He was saying that poor families need to read to their kids, not saying that they couldn't because they were poor.

That's what I took from it too. He also commented that it's not just the children that need education, the parents do too. He mentioned a 15 year old girl needing to be taught how to parent so that her child has the same advantages as other more fortunate children. It's such a vicious cycle that has to be broken. Too often the disadvantaged children become teenagers who have children who aren't going to have the same advantages as those from educated stable homes. Education is the key and reading is a vital component of starting to teach them early.
  • 0

#6260

ThomasAAnderson

ThomasAAnderson

    Couch Potato

Posted Feb 1, 2013 @ 10:49 PM

In the neighborhood in Brooklyn where I grew up there was often a guy with a gun. I never wished I had a gun Bill I wished the cops would come faster. Please just STFU.
  • 4

#6261

mmb8446

mmb8446

    Loyal Viewer

Posted Feb 2, 2013 @ 2:21 AM

I love Cory Booker! Good panel; minor but distracting point, what was up with Eva Longoria's shirt?
  • 0

#6262

AmSel

AmSel

    Loyal Viewer

Posted Feb 2, 2013 @ 2:41 AM

Fantastic final new rule on the conservative movement and their spokesmen in the media. It captures its essence nicely.

Panel was good. Sam Harris is a genius and so damn articulate, and I didn't even agree with everything he said on the gun issue.
  • 0

#6263

Imonrey

Imonrey

    Stalker

Posted Feb 2, 2013 @ 12:15 PM

I love Cory Booker, but I'm sick of hearing about Newark this and Newark that. "Look at what we've done in Newark." "Look what's happening in Newark." "Look what we've done in Newark." I get it, I get it, he's the mayor of Newark, but there are other places in the world, Cory. I don't think he's capable of making a point without referencing Newark. You can play the Newark drinking game whenever he's on the panel and get smashed inside of ten minutes.

That said, I loved him standing up to Sam Harris - and what in the holy hell was Harris trying to say? Did he actually say that if Adam Lanza had a handgun instead of an assault rifle it wouldn't have made any difference in Sandy Hook? What?!?!!? Of course it would have. Yeah you'd still have dead kids but not nearly as many of them. You can't mow down 20 kids at once with a handgun. Maybe five to ten kids would have been dead instead of twenty - still a tragedy but that's ten to fifteen children who would still be alive. And what was that nonsense about an AR-15 being the weapon of choice for women? They're easier to shoot? Whaaaatttt??!?!?!? You can't hide an AR-15 in your purse or in your nightstand. That's crazy. He was just as bad as Bill. "Well, both sides have good points." No they don't. It's seemingly reasonable people like Harris going on TV and saying shit like this that makes the gun control debate so crazy. I was so glad Cory was there (Newark mentions notwithstanding).

Eva Longoria is quite lovely but I have a hard time taking her seriously. She seems like she's trying to sound smart - it's called acting. She makes reasonable points but they're obvious ones. I had to laugh watching her sitting there nodding her head looking like she was listening oh-so intently when Cory was talking. She's a good actress - but I think that's about it.

Never heard of Jackie Kucinich but she didn't have much to contribute. I'm mostly thankful for that. And I don't really have any interest in watching Alex Gibney's priest movie but I guess HBO has to cross promote.

Excellent New Rules on Glen Beck and his ilk making a cash cow out of fear and feeding into peoples' belief they're under attack. Bill really laid that out perfectly. I also liked his opening monologue joke about Fox News ratings being down because old people keep losing the clicker.
  • 5

#6264

attica finch

attica finch

    Stalker

Posted Feb 2, 2013 @ 2:45 PM

Geez, just because we might not be able to stop every Adam Lanza, we can certainly reduce deaths by gun. Australia did it by nearly 50% with their new gun laws*. Not being able to reduce them to zero is no reason to do nothing.

*I do realize that Australia isn't exactly analogous to us, 2nd Amendment-wise. I'm just saying there's actual data to examine in terms of gun-control efficacy. Which is what Cory kept trying to say. And not in a 'my-data-beats-your-data' way, just plain ol' 'here's what they did, here's what happened afterwards'. Of course, the collecting of data is just one of the things the NRA opposes. Keeping us ignorant and afraid is good for sales!
  • 1

#6265

jenny1234

jenny1234

    Video Archivist

Posted Feb 2, 2013 @ 3:42 PM

Loved Sam Harris. I think Cory Booker completely misinterpreted what Harris was saying. Harris wasn't arguing against the gun laws that were being proposed, he was agreeing with them. He just said that he wanted to expand the type of guns being banned. I'm not big on Booker ever since he defended Bain Capital and said attacking Bain Capital was equivalent to attacking Reverend Wright. He's just another Corporatist hack.
  • 1

#6266

ThomasAAnderson

ThomasAAnderson

    Couch Potato

Posted Feb 2, 2013 @ 4:35 PM

I really must stop letting this show effect my blood pressure lol. Bill's so wrong on guns and gun control I can barely listen to anything else he says. He puts that stupid "If you were in the theater in Aurora" challenge out there completely forgetting people in urban environments deal with gun violence all the time and no one there is looking to get a gun they want more cops. He continues to come across as an elitist asshole i.e. does anyone really believe if Bill or the average person (gun owner) were in that theater they would have shot the gunman and not other patrons..gah shut up Bill

Cory Booker talked too much. However, since Newark is a microcosm of a lot of the issues discussed and I'm glad that he was there to give those practical examples just wish he knew when to stop talking.

I'm not big on Booker ever since he defended Bain Capital and said attacking Bain Capital was equivalent to attacking Reverend Wright. He's just another Corporatist hack.


THIS. I know corporate dollars helped get downtown Newark back on its feet but I wonder how many jobs they provided. He also wouldn't need to spend so much time being a superhero, if he'd stop laying off cops.

As far as New Rules I think Jon Stewart's segment on Beck was much stronger

Edited by ThomasAAnderson, Feb 2, 2013 @ 4:37 PM.

  • 0

#6267

itsmejessica

itsmejessica

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 2, 2013 @ 8:38 PM

Corey Booker is great. Love him. Eva should marry him and have wonderful brown babies. Who are smart and pretty to look at.

Edited by itsmejessica, Feb 2, 2013 @ 8:43 PM.

  • 0

#6268

ganesh

ganesh

    Stalker

Posted Feb 2, 2013 @ 8:45 PM

Geez, just because we might not be able to stop every Adam Lanza, we can certainly reduce deaths by gun.

Bill's so wrong on guns and gun control I can barely listen to anything else he says.

Booker was right when he replied to the "Sandy Hook is going to happen regardless" argument by calling it a strawman, but he was talking too fast. It's not a matter of eliminating the risk of gun violence completely, bringing it to zero, because that isn't going to happen. It's about *reducing* it in credible ways. It's awful to say it, but if the guy's mother didn't have a weapon that can mow down 100 people in 5 seconds and if she was required by law to make sure her legally obtained weapons were secure, then maybe only 5 kids get shot. Maybe she would face legal penalties too now. You want to own a gun? Then you are the only one who can legally operate it.

It seems to me that most people agree that the instances of these shootings is unacceptable. Therefore, "doing nothing" is not an option. Are "bad guys" always going to "get guns?" Yes, but *not all the time* if it's more difficult to obtain one. Reducing the risk doesn't mean it's not going to happen again, it means the chances are less.

The NRA guy said the same thing in congress. "Let's face it, background checks are going to work all the time." Hey, fuck you. Clearly some errors will be made, but they also don't point out that bad guys are also stupid and lazy. They make it sound like everyone who wants to go a mass shooting are these relentless Terminators. It was ridiculously easy for the movie theater guy in CO to get all his stuff. You mean to tell me some of these seemingly easy new measures wouldn't make any difference at all? Come on.

I have no idea what the hell Bill is trying to say with his stance on the gun issue. He sounds just as much in the bubble on this as the people he [rightly] makes fun of.

This is so weird. I don't think I've ever seen an issue with people's lives literally at risk where one side of the debate is "don't to anything at all ever". So far my voting requirement are, do you believe in evolution and do you acknowledge that climate change is a real problem. I think I have to add this to the list. If you support no changes ever to gun ownership, then you won't get my vote.
  • 2

#6269

Pippin

Pippin

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 4, 2013 @ 1:36 PM

As a Canadian, I must confess that I'm mystified by a lot of the arguments about gun control going on in the states right now.

From my point of view, Americans seem to have what I would characterize as almost a love affair with guns. Everyone always prefaces their arguments with a statement saying I love my gun, I enjoy hunting, I respect the 2nd amendment; we don't want to take everyone's guns away, etc. etc.

You generally don't hear sentiments like that in other countries (and yes, I know the 2nd amendment is unique to the USA).

And I think that until that part of the American psyche is dealt with, you guys will never be able to solve the gun issue. Of course, YMMV.

(Personally, I don't think that hunting is a sport. I also think that maybe it's time to take a good hard look at the 2nd amendment; the circumstances under which it was written have drastically changed and so a re-examination would not be out of order.)
  • 1

#6270

vinyl

vinyl

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 4, 2013 @ 1:42 PM

I agree with (many) Americans' love affair with guns. However, having lived in a big city for almost 20 years, I can say that NO ONE I knew had a gun, nor any interest in obtaining one. It seems to be a certain subset of the population, and I don't see them changing. I do think the 2nd amendment is being misinterpreted. the circumstances have certainly changed drastically since the Constitution was written.
  • 0