« Links With Your Coffee - Saturday | Main | Weight Watchers and Islam »

Bill Maher - New Rules

Real Time with Bill Maher
Get Bill Maher's Religulous



I particularly like white trash jokes, subconsciously reassuring himself that his own position on the social economic ladder is earned by his intellect, rather than by a fluke of birth.

I'm not sure what you're saying here but, in my world, white trash is not a descriptor of economic status. For example, I would call Paris Hilton white trash.

Jill, White Trash has a long history in literature as a "pejorative term referring to individual or groups of lower social class caucasians that the speaker considers to lack cultural capital."

In Britain they say "Chavs":

These terms tend only to be used in countries with extremely inequitable income distributions. They don't, for instance, have a similar term in Sweden my girlfriend tells me. No surprise there; rich people would feel guilty if they didn't somehow dehumanise the poor.

By the way the State of Texas has one of the most unequal distributions of income in the U.S.

Bill Maher could have a field day with Glenn Beck. He really hasn't done too much with him during new rules.

Hahahaha! Oh wait, making fun of G20 protesters just makes you an establishment hack...pathetic.

David Frum? JOE THE PLUMBER?!?

This was the WORST episode of Real Time I have seen. It is borderline irresponsible to give David "always wrong" Frum a forum, but to allow Joe The Plumber on his show is unforgivable. Maher is bending over backwards to show how "fair and balanced" he is by allowing know-nothing idiots on his show.

Also, I know the media comedians giggled about "Obama's Lame iPod gift™", when in fact, the Queen REQUESTED it. I expected Bill Maher to know the truth instead of pushing a false narrative.

It may sound like a small quibble, but things like this are how memes like "Al Gore said he invented the internet" get started, and then it takes years to set the record straight.

"It is borderline irresponsible to give David "always wrong" Frum a forum, but to allow Joe The Plumber on his show is unforgivable."

Yes, because it would be so much more interesting and enlightening to have a circle jerk for an hour among intellectual minds who collectively already agree with each other on EVERYTHING!

...Besides, Bill Maher is a comedian, and Joe the Plumber makes for great comedy. I'd love to see him get Sarah Palin on the show as well, that would be amusing.

If I'm understanding your position, you are saying that it's better to have on guests who give out bad, misleading or wrong information to the public because they are more "interesting"?

Then just have on Louis Farrakhan, Ann Coulter, and David Duke. That would be "interesting". Why not follow that with a satellite hook-up with Charles Manson to get his take on the financial crisis? Very "enlightening"!

I know that Maher's show is often filled with celebrities flapping their mouths about political issues they don't understand. But to bring on people who are supposed to be "experts" or are claiming to have political insight, when they are consistently wrong is bad for the viewing public.

BTW, I didn't laugh once during Joe The Plumber's segment, cause that guy's unqualified to speak on ANY political topic, and that just isn't funny anymore.

Also, you must know that not all liberal/Democrat/progressives agree on everything. Plus, I know that there are conservatives out there that could go on Maher's show who aren't always wrong. Chuck Hagel or Lincoln Chaffee are two examples.


You're assuming that all viewers are unintelligent sheep. It's not like people watching the show are like 'Hey Joe the Plumber is on TV, what he saying must be right!'

Conflict is interesting. And I would have loved to seen Maher put Joe in his place (I don't watch the full show so I don't know if he did.)

Lincoln Chafee isn't a conservative - in fact, it'd fair to say that he only remained a Republican because it was a family tradition. As for Joe "the Plumber", I tend to agree with you: Listen to what Maher says about McCain having elevated Joe the Plumber to the status of “everyman” here. He calls him the "rooter of all evil" the week after that. Joe is stupid, boring, and his fifteen minutes are long past over.

" must know that not all liberal/Democrat/progressives agree on everything."

Listen to your self. Don't you remember how mind numbingly boring the Democratic Debates were? Who wants to listen to a bunch of liberals bicker about semantics for an hour? At least the Republicans had Ron Paul to mix things up(whether you agree with him or not), he made their debates far more interesting by introducing a conflicting point of view.

"BTW, I didn't laugh once during Joe The Plumber's segment, cause that guy's unqualified to speak on ANY political topic, and that just isn't funny anymore."

I disagree, watching a car-wreck can be very amusing. ;)

I think the part of my comment that is being ignored is the part that I thought was most important:

Politics is supposed to be about doing WHAT IS RIGHT, not about entertaining people. A chimp riding a unicycle is entertaining, but doesn't do anything to enlighten us about our world problems.

PoliticJunky says above that the Democratic debates were "boring" because they were talking about "semantics".

This is the same thing that undid Al Gore. Gore spoke passionately and often about ACTUAL POLICY, but the dumb people in our media felt that he was too boring, and therefore branded him as an "intellectual" and one of those "Ivy League elite" who think they are so smart. But guess what? This country needs MORE smart people discussing smart things, not more "entertaining" but pointless arguments, even if that is sometimes boring.

As a nation, we've been eating nothing but candy for years, and now it's time for us to start eating some vegetables.

Who gets to decide WHAT IS RIGHT?

The voters. We are a democracy.

And if the voters disagree with you about WHAT IS RIGHT, then of course they are WRONG.



No we aren't. We are a constitutional republic.

You're right. We are not a direct democracy but a constitutional republic which is a representative democracy.

Yes, just like North Korea, which put the great Kim Jong-il in office again, giving him 99% of the vote.

It's not being ignored. The disagreement is over how best to conduct a show about things we care about, with out at the same time falling asleep at the wheel. You claim you would rather Bill Maher invite guests who are consistently right? I think Bill Maher's responsibility is to invite people who have different points of view, and who can conduct an interesting conversation. Who is right and wrong is for the audience to decide...hence the debate. If your accusing someone of being wrong, or only inviting people who you already think are right, then there is no debate is there? There is no reason to watch at all.

I love to see people defend ridiculous points of view. It should be expected of them. If Sarah Palin is going to run for V.P., on the claim that being able to see Russia is a qualification of foreign policy experience, then I would like to see her go on a show like Bill Maher's and try to defend that ridiculous point of view.

My only complaint is that Bill Maher let Joe the Plumber off the hook by not asking him any tough questions about some of the more absurd comments he's made about the war, or the mere fact that he's related to Charles Keating, and looks to be no more than a plant of the McCain Campaign.

no. I never said ANYTHING like that.

Where are you getting this idea?!?

I only was expressing the idea that our media is obsessed with entertainment over substance. I never said that I was the arbiter of what is right or wrong. No one person has that ability.

"It is borderline irresponsible to give David "always wrong" Frum a forum, but to allow Joe The Plumber on his show is unforgivable."

Did you write that?

Yes. because it's what I believe. so what?

These two have a record of being WRONG, and being wrong A LOT. People who give advice/opinion who are consistently wrong should be marginalized, until they can prove that they actually know something.

I understand.


I understand where you're coming from and what your concern is, but there are benefits to this type of format. It's actually useful for a democracy to see opposing voices engaged in a topic, but not because of some platitude that says diversity of opinion is good in and of itself.

Rather, the reason why contrasting viewpoints are important is:

1) It allows each party to respond to the arguments made by the other. Typically, when all parties are like-minded, you get the weakest side of an opposing argument aired to the public. It can devolve (note that I said the conditional "can") into a strawman session against the other side.

2) The person representing a position you disagree with has to put forward the best argument available to him or her. If you represent the other side, your political survival depends on that. However, that side can engage in deception, so, the onus is on the moderator (Maher) and the guests to keep the opposition honest. In that case, it's useful to have informed guests on the show.

3) Having someone like Frum or J the P on a show like that is of benefit to the public IF they are challenged. Again, the reason is simple: to show how it is they are wrong. I don't think you're giving the public enough credit, but I also think you're undervaluing the benefits of such a forum. The world is full of arguments - both good and bad - and it's a good exercise for the public to see those ideas aired in such a forum. It's a way of getting at the truth and revealing the bull-bleep that's out there.


Support this site

Google Ads

Powered by Movable Type Pro

Copyright © 2002-2017 Norman Jenson


Commenting Policy

note: non-authenticated comments are moderated, you can avoid the delay by registering.

Random Quotation

Individual Archives

Monthly Archives