Real Time With Bill Maher: 'Monologue: Sweet Home Alabama'

Source:Real Time With Bill Maher- "Monologue: Sweet Home Room Alabama

"Bill reacts to the latest sexual assault allegations against Judge Roy Moore and others in his Real Time monologue."

From Real Time With Bill Maher

I'm not from Alabama and have never even actually spent a day in Alabama, but I get two things out of this story. One, that this behavior (assuming Roy Moore is guilty) is actually normal and if Roy Moore wasn't running for the U.S. Senate, maybe it wouldn't have become news. I mean, you had Republican leaders in that state saying what Moore is accused of are gifts from Good and natural acts. I'm paraphrasing, but thats pretty close.

That if Moore wasn't the Republican nominee for U.S. Senate that this story would have never come out. The women wouldn't have come out because no one in Alabama including the media there, would have taken them seriously, let alone bothered to look into the allegations. Once Roy Moore not just declared his candidacy for the U.S. Senate and then won the GOP nomination, is when this story became a national story.

The Senate is part of Congress obviously and a Federal institution and not many people more powerful in the country than a U.S. Senator. And not many institutions covered more closely than Congress, because of how important it is. Which is why you had a Washington Post reporter covering a Alabama Senate race in Alabama and the women going to The Post to talk about their allegations. Now, if Roy Moore was running for State Senate in Alabama representing Gadsden, Alabama, then this story wouldn't be a big deal. Again, we wouldn't have heard from the women because they wouldn't have been taken seriously. And again, to go back to Alabama as a state, this behavior seems to at least be acceptable to the Christian-Right there. Which is more of a religious cult than anything else.

The other thing that I get from the Roy Moore story is that this is Alabama. Anyone left to wonder the Alabama is seen as a backwards redneck neanderthal state that was in a statewide coma during most of the 20th Century and would only come out of their coma to prevent African-Americans from exercising their constitutional rights as American citizens. So of course a lot of Alabama is not aware of what has been going on in America in the last ten years or so, let alone the 20th Century, because they still believe America is in a pre-civil war area. And that women should be nothing more than servants to men. So why not teenage girls being servants to men and their sexual needs. At least this is the perception of Alabama and not just for Washington, or New York, or San Francisco, but Atlanta and a lot of the state of Georgia which is a neighbor of Alabama. 

You can also see this post at The Daily View, on WordPress.

The American Spectator: Jeffrey Lord- 'My Real Time With Bill Maher'

Source:Entertainment Weekly- Jeff Lord & Bill Maher.

"Bill Maher is no conservative. He can’t abide Donald Trump. He can’t abide even more the reality of President Donald Trump.

And safe to say, director Rob Reiner is there in spades. Christina Bellantoni? She’s the Assistant Managing Editor for Politics at the decidedly left-leaning and Trump-unfriendly Los Angeles Times.

Add MSNBC military analyst Colonel Jack Jacobs and Atlantic correspondent Graeme Wood — and me — to that mix and what do you get? But of course! A TV show!"

From The American Spectator 

"Bill Maher asks Trump surrogate Jeffrey Lord to defend the President's refusal to release his tax returns and his ties - and apparent affection for - Russian President Vladimir Putin." 

Source:Real Time With Bill Maher- Oh Lord, I mean Jeffrey Lord on Real Time With Bill Maher. (Slip of the tongue)

From Real Time With Bill Maher

I don't know what Donald Trump is paying Jeffrey Lord and even if he was paying Lord, he actually wouldn't be paying him and instead of raise the money from other people and use that to pay Lord or just ask one of bis friends to pay Lord, but whatever President Trump might be paying Mr. Lord is simply not enough. 

Lord who has go more than way out of his way to defend Trump, going out-of-his way to defend Trump is a huge understatement. It would be like saying America had a civil war because the South didn't want a bearded President: not just false, but doesn't make any sense.

Jeff Lord has risked his personal and perhaps professional reputation to defend a man who has made a career of screwing people for his own benefit. (Not just in bed) Who apparently can't be left alone with women who don't know him well because of what he might do to them. 

Donald Trump is a man who pre-2010 was a Democrat and a Liberal Democrat at that. A man who is a proud New Yorker and didn't consider himself very religious at all until he became the leader of the Birther Nationalist Tea Party movement in 2011, is now the darling of the Tea Party Nationalists in America.

Tea Party Nationalists can't believe anything that is negative that is reported about their cult leader (Donald Trump) even if its reported by the conservative Wall Street Journal or even propaganda agency of the Trump Administration. (Better known as Fox News) Who can't believe Barack Obama is not only an American citizen, but actually born in America, even though he has a Hawaii birth certificate. 9/'11 was an inside job, the Russian investigation is a hoax even though every single U.S. national security and intelligence agency believes that Russia interfered into our elections in 2016. Including every single national security and intelligence official that President Trump appointed himself.

In other words: the Trump movement or Tea Party Nationalists, (as I prefer to call them) or how about the Trumpian Cult or the Cult of Trump, can't believe or won't acknowledge (at leas in public) facts that are right front of their own eyes or ears, if it is negative about Donald Trump. 

Donald Trump is the man that Jeff Lord who once worked in the Reagan White House as a speechwriter and pre-2016 or so had a great reputation as an intelligent, honest, very friendly man and part of the Center-Right in the Republican Party, now represents and speaks for. Oh Lord (as I call Jeff Lord) worked for CNN as a political analyst even though several CNN anchors had a hard time with him because they weren't sure if Lord actually believed what he was saying with some of his defenses for Donald Trump.

Jeff Lord has gone from being a Bill Buckley or Bill Kristol of right-wing political analysts, someone who is respected on both sides and by most people in the country who follow politics and current affairs, because they're honest, intelligent, make their arguments based on this old fashion word called facts and don't defend people just because they're on their side of the isle, to being an Alex Jones/Pat Robertson type conspiracy theorist. Who blame 9/11 on homosexuality, or blame lesbianism for feminism: "Russia didn't interfere into our elections! It was China because they wanted radical feminist Hillary Clinton to be President. Or it was an inside job inside the Democratic Party."

And my only question is for what: why would an intelligent man risk his reputation as a serious political analyst to do that. He doesn't even work for Donald Trump officially and has been part of the Trump Organization in any capacity.

Real Time With Bill Maher: 'New Rule: 'Liberal States Rights'

Source:Real Time With Bill Maher- The Real Bill Maher. 

"Bill takes a stand against the "outside agitators" who wants to interfere with California's progressive agenda."

From Real Time With Bill Maher

Bill Maher is right about at least one thing that people on the Right including Conservatives, but people who are much further right than that and people who I call Neo-Confederates who believe that the wrong side won the American Civil War, who are Southern Nationalists, back in the day argued for what they call states rights. Which essentially means that the Southeast or Bible Belt knows what's best for them and dem damn Yankees in Washington need to but the hell out and mind their own damn business.

Back in the day the Democratic Party controlled most of the power in the country. The thing was those the Democratic Party wasn't really a progressive or conservative party.

They had a Far-Left people who would be called Socialists today the Henry Wallace wing of the party.

They had a progressive Center-Left with that Robert Kennedy represented.

They had a Center-Right that people like Lloyd Bentsen represented, who served in the Congress for a long time and was Mike Dukakis's vice presidential nominee in 1988.

But the Democratic Party also had a Far-Right. Neo-Confederate Southern Nationalists, who again believe the wrong side won the American Civil War and that if European-Americans especially Anglo-Protestants can't treat African-Americans like slaves, they should at least be able to treat them like second-class citizens under law and not have to give them full-citizenship. Which is why we had a civil rights movement in the 1950s and 1960s.

I'm a what I at least call a liberal-federalist and as a true Liberal I'm not comfortable with large centralized authorities and establishments. One of the basic liberal values is decentralization of authority and spreading the power out and not comfortable with top-down management styles including from government. And that the basic role of the Federal Government is to protect the country from foreign invaders, as well as terrorists and criminals who operate in multiple states. As well as enforcing the U.S. Constitution.

That the states should be able to manage their own affairs as long as they are within the Constitution. Which means not having different laws, access and justice for different Americans. Which is why we have Federal civil rights laws. And most importantly that the power be with the people themselves so they can manage their own affairs as long as they aren't hurting innocent people.

So if California wants strict environmental laws even if those laws give them high energy prices, those laws are their business. If Texas wants private school choice and use taxpayer dollars to subsidize secular private schools, thats their business. Just as long as California, Texas, and every other state in the union are within the Constitution. That they don't pass laws that benefit one race, ethnicity, gender, or religion, over another. Or try to create their own military, currency, foreign policy, etc, anything else that would succeed their authority that should be handled by the Federal Government.

What Bill Maher was getting at with his impression of a Dixiecrat from back in the day,  (Dixiecrat-right wing Southern Democrat) was sort of what I was talking about earlier that the Federal Government dem damn Yankees (as right wing Southerners would call people up North) should stay the hell out of the business of the Bible Belt states and let those states run their own affairs as they see fit. Even if that means having separate and unequal laws and access for European and African-Americans.

Now go up fifty years with the Republican Party which is now has a large faction for former Dixiecrats now Dixie Republicans and now has most of the governmental power in the country with the White House, complete control of Congress, 34 governorships and as solid majority of state legislatures. The Tea Party Nationalist wing of the Republican Party is no longer talking so much about federalism and states rights.

The Far-Right of the Republican Party with all of this power with controlling both the House, Senate, Justice Department, Supreme Court, now believe they can force every state and locality in the nation to govern like them. And force their political and cultural values on the rest of the country. States rights and federalism now to the Dixie wing of the Republican Party, means you can govern yourselves anyway you want, just as long as they approve of what you're doing.

If California wants strict environmental laws, the Trump Administration will challenge those laws in court and saying California doesn't have the authority to do this and environmental laws are for the Federal Government to decide. If Colorado wants legalize marijuana which they passed a few years ago, the Trump Administration will challenge that law in court and argue that marijuana is a Federal issue and not for the states to decide.

Sort of like someone arguing on the Right who is a Religious-Conservative who says they believe in individual freedom. But what they really believe in is that people should have the freedom to live the way that Religious Conservatives approve of. But not necessarily have the freedom to make their own decisions. Or someone on the Far-Left who claims to be Pro-Choice. But what they really believe in is that people should have the right to make choices that the Far-Left approves of.

Federalism or states rights, is exactly that. What good is freedom if you can't make your own decisions? Just because the Federal Government doesn't believe in environmental laws, private school choice, marijuana legalization, and I could go down the line and if I didn't have a life maybe I would, but you get the idea, but just because the Feds might not believe in these things why should they be able to force their values on every other state in the nation.

The whole point of a Federal Republic is that when you have large diverse country which is what America certainly is what might work in one part of the country, might not be approved of or work in another part of the country. Which is why you have a Federal Government there to handle the national issues and leave the states and localities to deal with their state and local issues. Again, as long as all three levels of government are within their authority under the U.S. Constitution. Instead of Big Uncle Sammy getting to decide what everyone should think, how everyone should live, how everyone should govern, as if they're some big over-paternalistic Communist or something. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

You can also see this post at The Daily View, on WordPress.

Real Time With Bill Maher: 'J Edgar Hoover, Chelsea Manning & PC Colleges'

Source:Real Time With Bill Maher- Bill Maher, Tim Gunn & Bret Stephens.

"Bill and his guests – Bret Stephens, Fran Lebowitz, Salman Rushdie, and Tim Gunn – answer viewer questions after the show."

From Real Time With Bill Maher

As far as J Edgar Hoover, I don’t know how I can talk about him without being accused of being a homophobe by the Far-Left, or some liberal elitist to the Christian-Right, because they still can’t live with the fact that Edgar Hoover was gay and are still living in denial about it. So I might as well just jump into the discussion about talk about Edgar Hoover and his homosexuality.

To me, Hoover represents to what would be faux heroes in America and people who live with bipolar political personalities. In public, Hoover was a hard-core cultural warrior Nationalist who stood up for everything that the nationalist-tribalist-Right stood for in America. Anglo-Saxon-Protestant-Christianity, with this fundamentalist religious view of the world as far as who the real Americans are and tried to route out people that the Far-Right sees as the Un-Americans.

First it was Hoover, then it was Joe McCarthy, later Richard Nixon voters, followed by people would be identified as the Christian-Right in America by the late 1970s. Who are Far-Right religious voters who vote based on their religious beliefs and base their politics on their religious beliefs. Even if that interferes with a little sometimes annoying document called the U.S. Constitution. This is the political faction that Sarah Palin represents that voted for and overwhelmingly supports Donald Trump today. So this would be the public Edgar Hoover.

The private Hoover was the King of Queens. (Or is that the Queen of Queens) This openly, homosexual, man, who you would think was the President of the Castro District in San Francisco. Who not only crossdressed but who would treat his boyfriends like they were his girlfriends. And would be treated like a girlfriend by his boyfriends. Crossdressed, spoke with a high feminine voice in private. (Not that there’s anything wrong with that, to quote Jerry Seinfeld) The public Edgar Hoover was everything that the Far-Right loves. The private Hoover was someone who they believe represents almost everything they hate about America.

As far as Chelea Manning: If we can have openly sexist and homophobic speakers who talk about Latino immigration as the browning of America (to quote Ann Coulter) who speaks at universities on a regular basis, I don’t see why we can’t have a transgender ex-Marine who fought for their country in Chelsea Manning’s case speak at Harvard. Political correctness and fascism on campus and in America is put down a lot as it should and this blog has contributed to that.

But generally that comes from the Far-Left as far as people who hate anything that offends the Far-Left to the point they feel the need to not just shut up anything and anyone that offends them. But in some cases like with this so-called ANTIFA movement, they’ll physically attack people who offend them. Trying to shut up Chelsea Manning because she was convicted and served time in prison for releasing classified information and of course for being transgender, is political correctness and fascism from the Far-Right in America. The Sarah Palin/Donald Trump movement.

I just covered political correctness but I did it from the Far-Right. As the panel was saying college is not supposed to be a safe space, at least a safe space when it comes to ideas and politics. But a place to learn and grow, develop, hear things that you haven’t heard before even if they offend you.

If you want to be at a place where everyone looks, talks, and thinks like you, college is not the place for you. And instead perhaps just spend all of your time at coffee houses drinking lattes all day and learn about the world from your laptop and i-phone. Where people in their 30s might seem like old dinosaurs to you.

I was going to let that Fran Lebowitz comment go about the only real city in America in her view is New York and Chicago. But I don’t think I should, since Hillary Clinton is the news a lot recently and represents that elitist thinking that everything that is great in America is in New York. And the rest of of us are uneducated fools who don’t know how the real world works. That kind of thinking is why Hillary Clinton wrote a book about why she lost the 2016 presidential election. Instead of being too busy to write a book other than maybe her daily diary, because she has an administration to run as President of the United States.

Those blue-collar Democrats who voted for Donald Trump in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin, voted for Barack Obama overwhelmingly in 2012 and 2008. Because Barack Obama even with his wine and cheese, yuppie Democrat personality, could connect to average Joe and Jane voters in America. And didn’t expect people to vote for him because of his last name and that he was a Democrat. Or they wanted to vote for the first African-American President of the United States. Hillary expected even blue-collar Democrats to vote for her, because she’s Hillary Clinton and she wanted to be the first female President of the United States. 

You can also see this post at The New Democrat, on WordPress.

You can also see this post at The Daily View, on WordPress.

Real Time With Bill Maher: 'New Rule: What if Barack Obama Said It?'

Source:Real Time With Bill Maher- Bill Maher, imaging what the Republican Party would look like, under a President Barack Obama. LOL

"Bill imagines how Republicans would react if Barack Obama exhibited the same crude behavior as Donald Trump – with a little help from Obama impersonator Reggie Brown."

From Real Time With Bill Maher

Just too at least sound serious for a minute: The reasons why the Republican Party are holding Donald Trump to a lower standard and perhaps low standard is not the right term and no standard at all would be more accurate, is because they weren't expecting Donald Trump to be President.

The GOP wasn't expecting to have to deal with President Trump's narcissism, inexperience, immaturity, irresponsibility, lack of intelligence (at least when it comes to public affairs) , etc, and I could go on but it's Saturday and I don't want to spend my whole day on this. But having to deal with all of Donald Trump's personal weaknesses like they were producers of a so-called reality TV show having to deal with an inexperienced, irresponsible cast that believes the whole world revolves around them and they are now the latest hot pop culture celebrity.

The GOP was expecting to Hillary Clinton to not only be the next President right now, but for her to defeat Donald Trump going away not just in the popular vote, but in the Electoral College as well. And that the GOP would hold the House, but perhaps Democrats would win back the Senate. And that the GOP would be spending the next two years trying to obstruct and investigate the Clinton Administration, but not having to actually govern themselves.

The other reason except for the Russia investigation where there's a consensus both in the House and Senate with both parties, that this is a real investigation and that Congress and Special Counsel Robert Mueller should be investigating this and that President Trump shouldn't be able to fire Bob Mueller simply simply because he might be investigating not just the 2016 Trump Campaign but the White House as well, is because they're now in bed with Donald Trump and his administration politically. I realize the Washington GOP and Donald Trump are not natural bedmates. Sort of like a top model trying to sleep with a serial killer with hair all over his back and chest who belches as a form of communication.

But for the Republican Party to accomplish anything politically and on policy in 2017-18 before the Congressional mid-terms, they're going to need a functioning Trump White House and administration to accomplish those things. That is at least popular enough for them pass their agenda. Both the GOP Congress and the Trump Administration, have similar policy agendas and are close enough to work together. For the GOP to at least hold the House and have no real risk of losing the Senate next year, they're going to have to govern and govern successfully. And they're going to have to work with the Trump White House to do that.

I mean if the House GOP and the Senate GOP abandons President Donald Trump and says they can't work with the White House for laundry's list worth of reasons and I've already mentioned several of them and being a potential puppet that was bought by President Vladimir Putin and Russia, would be another one and instead tries to work with House Democrats and Senate Democrats on issues like health care, infrastructure, tax reform, and tells the White House if President Donald Trump that if he vetoes their legislation they'll just override his vetoes with help of House Democrats and Senate Democrats, because now the House and Senate have these huge majorities on their legislation, because everything they're doing now has bipartisan support, what incentive would Trump voters and the Tea Party have to vote for Congressional Republican and candidates next year? Republicans would be labeled as RINOS. (Republicans in name only)

The Republican Party is now in a damned if they do, damned if they don't situation. They're damned if they stick with Trump (sounds like a campaign sticker) because if he goes down and has no popularity that he can use to govern and Americans aren't listening to him, Republicans won't be able to pass anything meaningful out of Congress, at least on their own. And as a result will depress their base and ignite the Democratic base and at the very least lose the House next year and might lose north of 40 seats as well. And perhaps lose the Senate as well.

If the GOP sticks with Trump and his popularity continues to slides or even holds between 33-38%, but because of his bad behavior and what comes out of the Russian investigation, that the Republican Congress is also divided and can't work with each other and Congressional Democrats have no political incentive to work with Republicans, because they want to at least win back the House in 2018, the Congressional GOP will go down and we'll have a new Congress in 2019 with Democrats controlling at least the House.

I agree with Bill Maher about the Republican hypocrisy when it comes to Donald Trump.

Had Barack Obama said that John McCain a Vietnam POW wasn't a war hero, they would've called him an agent of the Communist Party of Vietnam. And perhaps the Birthers would then say that Barack Obama is from Vietnam instead of Kenya.

Had Barack said that he openly grabbed women's pussies in public, Sean Hannity and many others on the Tea Party right would have said that Barack belongs in prison and called him a serial rapist from the ghetto or someplace.

If President Obama had taken as much time off for vacation at this point in his administration, the Tea Party and others would have labeled President Obama as a lazy bum from the hood who wasn't raised right. And I could go on but I'll spare you.

And I'm not trying to excuse the GOP's double standard for Donald Trump, because their hypocrisy is obvious and disgusting. And just trying to explain it in political terms and what they believe they can achieve with a Donald Trump in the White House and how bad a hand they have with him. And they've decided that sticking with him at all costs is the best decision they can make right now.

You can also see this post at The Daily View, on WordPress.

You can also see this post at The Daily View, on Blogger.

Real Time With Bill Maher: Christopher Hitchens- in 2010

Source:Daily Hitchens- Columnist Christopher Hitchens, on Real Time With Bill Maher, in 2010.

"For more videos, updates and info on Christopher Hitchens. Please visit us at Daily Hitchens"

Source:Real Time With Bill Maher- Bill Maher, in 2010.

From Daily Hitchens

The way I look at Catholics and Christians in general when it comes to terrorists and other bad apples like child molesters, is the way I look at Muslims in this sense. There are roughly two-billion Muslims in the world, maybe a hundred-thousand of them are terrorists. You could do a lot with a military of a hundred-thousand especially if you're a mid-size country. But out of two-billon people that is not much of an army when it comes to percentages.
The overwhelmingly majority of Muslims in the world are peaceful people. Who may have far-right cultural views, but not to the point they're willing to kill themselves and others to express those views.

I'm not Catholic, even though a lot of Germans Americans and otherwise are Catholic or Lutheran, but most Catholics are good moral people. The sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic Church in the early and mid two-thousands, was a horrible scandal with a lot of people hurt badly. But if that scandal represented Catholicism in general, we would see a lot more people come forward and share their abuse stories at the hands of Catholic priests and other Catholic leaders.

Chris Hitchens and to a certain extent Bill Maher, are guilty of over-generalizing here. 

You can also see this post at The Daily Times, on Blogger.

Britcoin Faucets: Politically Incorrect With Bill Maher-Discussing 9/11 in 2001

Source:The Daily Review- Politically Incorrect With Bill Maher, talking about 9/11, in 2001.

"Christopher Hitchens on Politically Incorrect With Bill Maher. discussing 9/11." Originally from Bitcoin Faucets, but the video has since been deleted or blocked on YouTube.

To blame Bill Clinton for 9/11 after the Clinton national security team warned the Bush Administration about Al-Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden before the Bush team came into office, is like blaming the Pittsburgh Steelers for the lack of success that the Cleveland Browns have had in the last twenty years. "Hey, if only the Steelers hadn't been so good and beat us over and over, maybe the we the Browns wouldn't have had lost so much. It's all Pittsburgh's fault for our lack of success."

The Clinton Administration went after Osama Bin Laden, at least since 1996 when Al-Qaeda attacked one of our ships in the Middle East. America was at peace when the Clinton Administration came into power in 1993 and we were still at peace when they left office in January, 2001. The economy was still booming and the Bush's inherited a budget surplus of two-hundred-billion-dollars and twenty-three-million net jobs.

Before 9/11, the Bush Administration was focused on trying to jump start the economy was starting to slow and worrying about what to do with the record budget surplus they just inherited and thinking they could be allies with Vladimir Putin's Russia and education reform. Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda, wasn't a huge priority for them.

It wasn't until 9/11 that they became neoconservative defense hawks, thinking that our civil liberties and constitutional rights, might be threatening our national security. And coming up with indefinite detention without arrest, the Patriot Act, that spies on who Americans associate with and what we read even. Where we could become potential suspects and even detained, for what we might read or who we might know.

The Bush Administration, didn't have much of a national security or foreign policy, pre-911. The so-called War on Terror, wasn't part of our national language yet.

Did Bill Clinton eliminate Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda as President, of course not. But to say they weren't paying attention to him and not trying to do that when they actually tried to assassinate him both in Sudan and Afghanistan in 1998, is nonsense. (To be generous)

George W. Bush and company, obviously didn't eliminate Osama and Al-Qaeda as well. But President Barack Obama, had Osama assassinated in his third year in office in 2011. And the Obama Administration has come damn close to eliminating Al-Qaeda the last eight years. And have destroyed a lot of ISIS in Syria and Iraq in the last two years.

George W. Bush, obviously didn't create Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda either, but they got off to a late start to the threat of that organization. Especially since the previous administration were already going after them. And that the Clinton national security team warned the incoming Bush Administration about the threat in late 2000. According to Clinton counter-terrorism director Richard Clark.

Real Time With Bill Maher: 'A System of Racism'

Source:Real Time With Bill Maher- panel talking about racism in America.

"Bill Maher and panelists Baratunde Thurston, Zanny Minton Beddoes and former Rep. Tom Davis discuss the comments made by FBI Director James Comey and the police shooting of an unarmed man in Washington state. (Warning: Graphic Content)"

From Real Time With Bill Maher

Source:Real Time With Bill Maher- talking about racism in America.

Instead of trying to take fascist unconstitutional actions like trying to ban free speech on campus, or anywhere else in America, how about we ban Red Bull, Starbucks, every other coffee-house and alcohol in America. And instead legalize pot so students can learn how to chill. Then we’ll see who really wants to go to college in America and as a result we would save a lot of money on student debt. Especially for people who perhaps the only thing they got out of their student debt was how to protest and bitch about nothing.

College students, should just relax and realize they live in a society where not everyone loves them. And when they do see racist behavior, especially crimes, they should report them to the appropriate authorities. With those authorities acting appropriately.

Racism, is not the issue in America. A blind racist could see that there’s racism in America. I guess now I’ll get hate email about making fun of blind people and perhaps even blind racists. The question is what can we do and what should we do about it. And when you live in a liberal democracy where everyone is guaranteed a constitutional right to free speech, not a hell of a lot can be done as far trying to close the mouths of stupid people.

We have to let stupid assholes be themselves and laugh like hell, because of how incredibly stupid they are. While at the same time teaching kids who haven’t graduated with a degree in stupidity yet about how to treat people. Especially people you don’t know and may not look and sound like you.

The only cure for racism when it comes to speech and thought is education and commentary. If it is possible to teach a bigot how dumb they are by all means try, but if not make an example of them and show other people who have a full brain why you don’t want to be like that asshole.

The only thing that political correctness and fascism in general does is piss people off. Even people who aren’t bigots, because when even stupid people lose their free speech protections, that puts everyone else’s free speech in jeopardy. So at the end of the day assholes are to be made fun of and made examples of. And the uneducated should be educated which cuts down on future stupidity.

You can also see this post at FreeState MD, on Blogger.

Salon: Sophia McClennen- 'Lets Listen to Bill Maher: How Bill Maher Walks a Fascinating and Tricky Line'

Source:Salon- Real Time With Bill Maher.

"Bill Maher has made his mark as the comedian who refuses to toe the party line—any party’s line.  He has come under attack by both the right and the left for his positions. This week’s show exemplifies his unflinching desire to muddy the waters of extremist thinking and get viewers to ask tough questions and refuse pre-packaged scripts.

He hit the spotlight after September 11 when he rejected the idea that the 9/11 attackers were cowards. Talking with conservative pundit Dinesh D’Souza, Maher stated: "We have been the cowards. Lobbing cruise missiles from 2,000 miles away. That's cowardly. Staying in the airplane when it hits the building. Say what you want about it. Not cowardly.” The comment cost him his ABC show. But he soon landed back on his feet with HBO for “Real time with Bill Maher.”

This week’s show, which tackled both the Paris attacks and campus protests over racial discrimination, reminds us why Maher is a comedian we need to watch.  In the wake of the crises on the campuses of University of Missouri and Yale and on the heels of the Paris attacks, Maher rejected the fundamentalist thinking that often tends to frame these issues.  With regard to the student protests, he attacks racism, but defends free speech.  And in connection to the Paris attacks, he asks why liberals refuse to condemn the oppressive fundamentalism connected to the version of Islam practiced by terrorists." 

From Salon Magazine 

"Bill Maher and panelists Dylan Ratigan, Michael Steele and Jay Leno discuss the motivations behind extremists’ attacks on western countries and the GOP's approach to foreign policy in this clip from November 13, 2015." 

Source:Real Time With Bill Maher- with Dylan Ratigan, Michael Steele, and Jay Leno.

From Real Time With Bill Maher

I think the best way to look at Bill Maher’s politics is to look at him from a George Carlin perspective as someone who leans left and Democrat, but in his heart he’s an Independent. Whose free to critique both sides especially the fringes on both sides when it comes to issues that he cares about.

Bill Maher, will go after the Christian-Right when they proposing outlawing adultery, or homosexuality and create a national time machine that will take America back to 1955. Or economic Libertarians when they call for outlawing all social insurance programs in one hand, as they fight like hell for their corporate welfare. That in many cases keeps them in business if you look at how they mismanage their own companies. 

On the Left, Maher will go after so-called Progressives (Socialists, in actuality) that have this marijuana high utopian notion that minorities aren’t entitled to any criticism. And they should be left to a world where there’s no criticism of anything that they do or say. While the New-Left goes after the Far-Right every time they breathe on someone they care about.

What I think the New-Left in America and I call them that, because they are made up of Democratic Socialists and New-Marxists, who apparently aren’t fans of either economic or personal freedom and just wants a society where government takes care of protects everyone, especially minorities, even everyone from themselves, but what I think they don’t get about Bill Maher is that his show is called Real Time with Bill Maher for a very good reason. He tells it like it is (at least from his perspective) and what he knows and in many cases is right. 

So Salon, the AlterNet, TruthOut, etc, if you’re looking for someone to put down America and bash the Christian-Right, while calling Islāmic terrorism and culture, Freedom of Religion and expression, even though you don’t believe in Freedom of Religion, Bill Maher is not your boy. If you want someone to defend both the welfare state when it comes to Bernie Sanders and nanny state when it comes to Mike Bloomberg, Bill Maher is not your boy. And you should just stick with people who are in your league like Michael Moore.  

You can also see this post at The Daily Journal, on Blogger.

You can also see this post at FreeState MD, on Blogger.

No Cow Eyes: Politically Incorrect With Bill Maher- Power of Political Polls and Stupidity- July, 1993

Source:Now Cow Eyes- Politically Incorrect With Jerry Seinfeld in 1993. Apparently ABC kidnapped Bill Maher and replaced him with Jerry Seinfeld. LOL

"Air Date: July 25th, 1993

Panelists: Jerry Seinfeld, Larry Miller, Robin Quivers & Ed Rollins."

From No Cow Eyes

Political polls do have a place in American politics. I’m just not sure it is a good place, because imagine what our government would be like if politicians just made decisions based on what they believed and knew what was the right thing to do. And then let their voters decide if they should get reelected or not. Instead of a politician taking a poll on what is the best shirt to wear with their jacket. Or what they should eat at political events. Political polls do have a positive place in America if leaders actually use them correctly. Because a politician who might actually know what he thinks about an issue can see where their public is and far they are apart. And then stick with their position, but now they knew who they need to bring to their side and communicate to them. Instead of just taking positions based on polls.

The early 1990s, America was under attack from bogus lawsuits. Seemed like every stupid person was smart or lucky enough to find a lawyer even from accidentally backing into one, because they didn’t know their car was in reverse when they hit the accelerator. And every stupid person that was guilty of hurting themselves, but not able to hurt anyone else, found a lawyer who could find a way to blame their stupidity on smart people. We had women who sued McDonald’s, because she spilled her hot coffee on herself in her car. I remember hearing about that one in high school. We had someone else sue a tobacco company because they were now addicted to cigarettes, even though the cigarette box had warning labels on about the dangers of smoking tobacco. Another lawsuit involving someone being obese suing a good company for their obesity.

What political polls and bogus lawsuits have in common, is that they are both for stupid people. For politicians to show voters that they care about them, as they’re laughing behind their voters backs with their hands pulling out their wallets and taking their money. The bogus lawsuits, are also for stupid people and greedy lawyers, because it gives idiots who actually might be embarrassed for being as stupid as they are, an opportunity for blame someone else for their stupidity and then profit off it.

“It is now my fault that I pored that hot coffee down my throat without first checking to see how hot it was. It’s also my fault that I spilled my coffee on myself in the car. That coffee should have never been that hot in the first place.”

That is the lack of logic that are behind bogus lawsuits where the person suing is simply stupid, or irresponsible, or both. And if we had better judges in America, these lawsuit would get thrown out. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Politically Incorrect With Bill Maher: George Carlin (2001)

Source:Amet Reloads- George Carlin and that guy on Politically Incorrect with Bill Maher in 2001. 

"Bill Maher & George Carlin , Politically Incorrect : Politics, Government, Corruption." 

From Amet Reloads

Not clear the date of this show, but it sounds like the early days of the George W. Bush Administration in 2001, when our long national nightmare was just beginning (to paraphrase former President Gerald Ford) You would think after being appointed President of the United States and losing the popular vote and arguably Florida as well that would have given the election to Al Gore and not being very popular when assuming office in January, 2001 and having a divided Senate and a House with bare Republican majority, that President Bush just might try to govern as a uniter. And not try to force his right-wing agenda that the country didn’t support on the country.

But you gotta give President Bush credit for one thing (and that’s where his credit runs out) he told the country what he believed and what he would do and then he did exactly that. He really is one of the most honest president’s we’ve ever had. Which is sort of like being the tallest man in Japan. So what! But it's true. 

That whole cliché that elections matter: that is so true with G.W. Bush. The country knew what they were getting when they voted for him, other than that little trillion-dollar debacle called the Iraq War. And they voted for him anyway. I don’t blame President Bush for being who he was. I blame the Democratic Party who both times had a candidate better than Bush, but barely lost to him twice, for not running good campaigns and taking Bush seriously.

It is one thing to be a bad president and good luck finding a worst one than G.W. Bush where you look at the State of The Union when he took office and where it was when he left, but that person still has to get the job first and beat the opposition. 

I blame Al Gore, for not winning his home state Tennessee and not winning Florida in a walk with the senior vote and coming off as rude with superficial voters in the debates, for not taking advantage of the most popular politician in the country who just happened to be his boss in President Clinton and using him to take apart the Bush Campaign. 

I blame John Kerry, for again not taking President Bush seriously enough as a politician. And not taking the swift boat debacle seriously and wasting a whole summer not moving past that. 

But more importantly, I blame fifty-million or so American voters who didn’t have the decency to be awake, sober, and on their medication when they went into the voting booths in 2000. And voting for the wrong person.  

You can also see this post on WordPress. 

You can also see this post at The Daily Times, on Blogger.

Real Time With Bill Maher: 'Bernie Sets The Record Straight on Democratic Socialism'

Source:Real Time With Bill Maher- U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders: Democratic Socialist, Socialist Republic of Vermont .

"Bill Maher and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) discuss his Presidential campaign and what "socialism" really means." 

From Real Time With Bill Maher

Every time I hear someone interview Senator Bernie Sanders and someone asks him what does he mean by socialist and socialism, I end up feeling like I’m one of his campaign spokesmen. Because he never fully answers that question and I end up explaining what he means by socialist and socialism just based on positions he takes in his campaign and his speeches.

Democratic Socialist, Bernie Sanders. Marxists, Fidel Castro, Che Guevara, Mao, Joe Stalin and people like that. A Democratic Socialist, just wants to tax most of your money away from you and use government to take care of you.

A Marxist, won’t ever let you see your own money. Because in a Marxist state you don’t own anything and you’ll probably be poor anyway, unless you have a sweet gig with the central government. And then they might use some of the state revenue to see to it that you don’t have to starve, or something.

Any politician who tells you that they have free government programs for you, ask them if they know of any great ski resorts in San Diego and hows the snow there. You might want to ask them if they also have a great deal on a 1978 Ford Pinto, or do they have any New Hampshire palm trees that they want to sell.

All these new government programs that Bernie is talking about all come with a cost. What’s the clue there? They are government programs! Anyone who pays taxes in America knows that government is not free. And you could raise taxes on the wealthy by fifty-percent if you want to. (Some people are screaming why not!) And watch people in Canada and Mexico get rich because of all the new money that is now being invested in those counties in order to avoid 60-70% tax rates in capitalist America.

So of course the middle class are going to have to pay for their free college, free childcare, free health insurance, free health care, free food, free housing, whatever else the Senator wants to give away for free. Because those things won’t be free for anyone whose receiving them. He’ll have to increase payroll taxes and income taxes on perhaps everybody to pay for them.

Even when government pays for services through borrowing and asking for a check from the King of Saudi Arabia, or the Prime Minister of Japan, taxpayers have to pay for that as well. In the form of interest on the national debt and higher interest rates.

You want government services, you have to pay for them unless you’re too poor to pay taxes. Which most of the country isn’t . If Senator Sanders is going to become President Sanders, he’s going to have to convince millions of Americans, especially Americans who aren’t Democratic Socialists that they should want to pay for these new services.

The weakness of the Sanders Campaign, is that they’re promising a lot of Christmas gifts (even in October) without telling people who they will be charged for their own gifts.

Imagine receiving a Christmas gift from your brother and he tells you: “Joe, I’m glad you enjoy your new book, but that’s going to be twenty bucks. I don’t have the money to pay for it myself.” I would probably hit my brother with the book, or throw the book at him. (Pun intended)

So what Bernie should be doing is saying: “Look at these other countries and the services that they provide for their people. And how they pay for them. That is what I want to do here.” While also explaining to people that those services are paid for through payroll taxes, income taxes and sales taxes. I don’t agree with that approach, but at least he would be straight with the hundreds of millions of American taxpayers that he wants to represent as their president. 

You can also see this post at The Daily Journal, on Blogger.

AlterNet: Adam Johnson: 'Richard Dawkins & Bill Maher- Still Baffled Why So Many Leftists Think They're Bigots'

Source:Alter Net- left to right: Richard Dawkins & Bill Maher: two men that the Far-Left hates.

“Bill Maher and his good friend, Richard Dawkins, sat down on his show Real Time Friday night for the fifth time in almost eight seasons. Their discussion, per usual, was an agreeable, tedious mix of self-victimization and indignation about why so many on the left – specifically the Twitter left – think their obsession with “radical Islam” makes them bigots.”

From AlterNet

You couldn’t count how many times you’ll see and rightfully so how many times the AlterNet and Salon in particular, will how some piece about the Christian-Right and how radical they are and show this bigotry, or that bigotry from them. They both everyday have some negative piece about the Christian-Right and this blog posts a lot negative pieces about the Christian-Right as well. That is not why Richard Dawkins (can I call him Dick) and Bill Maher are annoyed, or surprised by the New-Left in America. People that author/blogger Sam Harris calls regressive leftists. It’s when something radical and horrible is done by non-Christians in America especially right-wing Muslims who believe women should be treated like second-class citizens that the New-Left will either ignore, or defend that gets to Dawkins and Maher.

Atheism and liberalism and they’re not the same thing, is not about going after Christianity and only defending speech that critiques the Christian-Right and the broader right-wing in America. Liberalism is not about defending speech against Christians while trying to censor speech against Muslims. It’s about defending speech regardless of who it comes from and what the speaker says. Short of libeling people and inciting violence. Which is why the New-Left aren’t Liberals, but what I at least call New Marxists, because they don’t understand that. And have this real fascist element that says they’re going to defend their right to free speech to the hill, as they try to shut down speech and speakers they disagree with. The Real Liberals in this debate are the defenders of free speech regardless of who is speaking. Which are Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher, because they’re defending free speech.

I’ve made this point several times before, but you can’t be a Liberal if you don’t believe in free speech. And you’re not much of an Atheist if you only concentrate on one religion and in this case that religion being Christianity and the Southern Anglo-Saxon right-wing form of it. If you have a problem with Christian Conservatives who say that women’s place is in the home and that gays should be in a mental institution, or someplace, great! I’m with you, but how about Muslim countries that don’t allow women to even drive, or vote, show their faces in public even. Do you not have a problem with that and just view as part of their culture? Is so like Richard Dawkins said, the hell with their culture! Because that is not a culture that is worth defending. Not talking about ignoring the problems with the radical Christian-Right. Just saying that they aren’t the only source of radical religion in the world. 

You can also see this post on WordPress. 

You can also see this post at The Daily Journal, on Blogger.

You can also see this post at FreeState MD, on Blogger.

Real Time with Bill Maher: Richard Dawkins- Regressive Leftists: Leftists Who Don't Understand Liberalism

Source:Real Time With Bill Maher - Dr. Richard Dawkins: champion of free speech.

"Bill Maher and Professor Richard Dawkins discuss politically correct censorship and Islamophobia in this clip from October 2, 2015."

From Real Time With Bill Maher:

I believe Sam Harris’s term regressive leftists is perfect. I mean if you call yourself a Liberal, but you don’t believe in free speech, just speech that you agree with that some collective has decided is appropriate speech, in other words collective speech, you’re not progressive and not a Liberal. But you’re regressive and perhaps collectivist, or statist would be a more appropriate political label for you. Being a Liberal whose against free speech would be like being a Conservative whose against free enterprise. Well, if you’re against free enterprise, you would be a Marxist, which is a hell of a lot different from being a Conservative. Or being a Catholic who doesn’t believe in God. A quarterback who doesn’t believe in the passing game. Well then what the hell are you doing as a quarterback?

The New-Left in America, which is what we are really talking about here when it comes to regressive leftists, has this far out on Mars one month-long of nothing but marijuana type of trip that Muslims and other minorities aren’t subjected to criticism in America. Even though they live in America where we have a Constitution with the first amendment to it being our First Amendment (surprise, surprise) that guarantees our Freedom of Speech. That can’t be taken away from us, because some political correctness tight ass who apparently has nothing better to do with their time than to protect all minorities from criticism, disagrees with what’s being said. If you don’t believe in free speech whether it’s about Muslims, Christians, or anyone else, America might not be the country for you.