I would take issue with Maher's claim that liberals "boo" him over Obama jokes.

Just because you don't automatically fall into riotous laughter doesn't mean you are booing someone. Sometimes your initial reaction to a joke is, "Ooooh, I can't believe he said that...", but that doesn't mean you don't think it's funny.

Although Maher does have a habit of blaming ALL of his failed jokes on the audience. Sometimes people don't laugh at jokes not because of sensitivity, but because the joke wasn't funny!

With all that said, I am a big Maher fan and love that he's willing to say unpopular things and go against common political posturing.

I agree that his audience is liberal-stupid, but not in the sense that they don't laugh at his super-smart jokes, but in the sense they behave during the show, booing anyone with a different opinion and cheering wildly when any idiot with a liberal slant says anything that should be so obvious ("gays should be able to get married, yay!") that it shouldn't even merit applause, it should be a given.

Did Kurtz really say Jon Stewart doesn't skewer Obama? Guess he hasn't watched Stewart's show in the past two years.

Letterman's Obama jokes.

"The message of TV is that you should watch more TV."

I'm going to use that one a lot.

I had to shut this one off when Maher started talking about the swine flu. It's almost as bad as when he's talking about toxins and all the other alternative medical nonsense he believes in. He's clueless, and shamelessly flaunts it.

Maher obviously hasn't figured that there's a difference between a potential pandemic flu and a regular seasonal flu. The regular flu kills thousands of elderly and weak people each year, most of which would have died anyway. A pandemic flu (such as the Spanish flu a century ago) can kill tens of millions of otherwise healthy people. It's easy to be a smartass and say "I told you so" each time a potential pandemic does not become an actual pandemic. But those who do so fail to understand the potential threat of these diseases and why it's reasonable to take the risk seriously (without panicing, of course).

Kurtz is sort of a dope that sees things in black and white. Bill gives an interview where he says he doesn't get along with liberals and doesn't consider himself a democrat, yet kurtz introduces the piece as though he was a liberal democratic tool.

He does the same thing to Jon Stewart. We have a 2 part system but not a 2 party society. Kurtz thinks being a media critic means finding a nice safe label for everyone's bias and then ignoring any evidence that doesn't fit in their box.

Maher is funny and I love his show, but he seems to think Shocking = funny and it doesn't. Sometimes it does, but many times someone makes a racial joke or an off color remark and laughter isn't the natural reaction. All these years and you would think he would get that the occasional shocking remark will result in a shocked audience.