Real Time with Bill Maher: Weekly discussion and pot session

I usually can't stand Cupp, but Andrew Sullivan's claims that Obama doesn't torture anyone is complete bullshit.

Edit* - As was Cupp's comparison of Bush's FP to Obama's.
 
[quote name='MSI Magus']Heh dont welcome me back yet. I dont think my blood pressure can handle coming back permanently to the politics board.[/QUOTE]
Yeah...it's not for everybody and you need thick skin cause that tends to be more important than brains and knowledge these days.

Thing with Sullivan is that I dont agree with everything he says, I dont even think I agree with most of it. But even though I still primarily see him as on the opposite side of the fence from me on many major issues, I can still respect what he has to say and how he says it.
Click to expand...
I tend to like him more when he's not acting like a court jester. He had a point when he said that we elected a Republican president though.

Also just finished watching over time! You can sign me up for the "green" party. I was always for legalization because it just makes sense, however now that I got a vaporizer and started using the shit myself, I REALLY REALLY cant understand it being illegal. There are down sides and it can have some negative effects, but the positives to society far outweigh the negatives, especially if people start say fuck combustion.
Click to expand...
Haha...I'm in the "regulate it like booze and cigs" camp, but I never really liked using it. I hate the coughing fits, dry mouth, and overall "stoned" feeling. I love the munchies aspect of it though.:lol:

I think this is a good time to make the point about very powerful lobbies shaping legislation. You not only have the alcohol and tobacco lobbies fighting it, but you also have the private prison lobby with accompanying prison guard unions wanting to retain power, influence, and money.
 
[quote name='egofed']Those darn unions!!!;-)[/QUOTE]
Unions are perfectly compatible with libertarianism. Or are corporations the only ones that can agree to bargain collectively and manipulate the market?
 
Not just the prison Lobbies and those representing prison guard unions, but Police Union lobbyists too. Not to mention Huge Pharmaceutical lobbies.
 
I was trying to be sarcastic. Sorry it flopped. I respect the right of unions to exist. I do dislike a lot of their strong arm tactics and the fact that they often kill the golden goose.
 
[quote name='dohdough']Yeah...it's not for everybody and you need thick skin cause that tends to be more important than brains and knowledge these days.

I tend to like him more when he's not acting like a court jester. He had a point when he said that we elected a Republican president though.

Haha...I'm in the "regulate it like booze and cigs" camp, but I never really liked using it. I hate the coughing fits, dry mouth, and overall "stoned" feeling. I love the munchies aspect of it though.:lol:

I think this is a good time to make the point about very powerful lobbies shaping legislation. You not only have the alcohol and tobacco lobbies fighting it, but you also have the private prison lobby with accompanying prison guard unions wanting to retain power, influence, and money.[/QUOTE]They were talking about this recently on NPR, that the tobacco companies have plans in place for when/if pot becomes totally legal. They won't admit to it, but they'd be crazy not to.
 
[quote name='egofed']I was trying to be sarcastic. Sorry it flopped. I respect the right of unions to exist. I do dislike a lot of their strong arm tactics and the fact that they often kill the golden goose.[/QUOTE]
Except that they don't and their effects are different depending on the industry.
 
Unions pushing for 20-30 dollar wages for unskilled line work, no fire contracts that end up forcing management to pay that said 20-30 dollar wage to a non performing employee who now just sweeps up rather than being let go, labor laws that slow production because certain jobs are categorized in certain ways for specific workers, forced sign up into the union to be able to work in a certain region, etc. These tactics have lead to many plant closings and a piss poor educational system. The Ford plant near me closed, and many of the workers I talked to resented the union. They demanded too much and killed the plant aka golden goose.
 
Not to mention pushing up the price of goods and services, making any raise in wages completely meaningless.

This is why I laugh every time they want to raise minimum wage. The market always adjusts.
 
I'm still torn on the concept that the minimum wage is actually causing poverty by decreasing the amount of jobs for unskilled laborers, especially in the inner cities. It sucks that good intentions can often have bad results. Kind of like college tuitions sky rocketing in part due to governmental school loans...sigh.
 
[quote name='egofed']Unions pushing for 20-30 dollar wages for unskilled line work, no fire contracts that end up forcing management to pay that said 20-30 dollar wage to a non performing employee who now just sweeps up rather than being let go, labor laws that slow production because certain jobs are categorized in certain ways for specific workers, forced sign up into the union to be able to work in a certain region, etc. These tactics have lead to many plant closings and a piss poor educational system. The Ford plant near me closed, and many of the workers I talked to resented the union. They demanded too much and killed the plant aka golden goose.[/QUOTE]
Wrong. Outsourcing our manufacturing base to developing countries is the primary factor if you're going to be using the labor cost argument. You could pay someone in Mexico for over a month on what you'd pay a union worker in a week.

And in case you haven't noticed, manufacturing and teachers unions have been making concessions for at least the last 20 years. The only unions that still have a chokehold that even come close to what you're imagining are police and firefighter unions. Nobody really fucks with them, luckily for you, but that's not for lack of want.

[quote name='egofed']I'm still torn on the concept that the minimum wage is actually causing poverty by decreasing the amount of jobs for unskilled laborers, especially in the inner cities. It sucks that good intentions can often have bad results. Kind of like college tuitions sky rocketing in part due to governmental school loans...sigh.[/QUOTE]
Tuition has gone up because public funding has gone down and private loans have gone way up before the middleman was eliminated.

[quote name='Temporaryscars']Not to mention pushing up the price of goods and services, making any raise in wages completely meaningless.

This is why I laugh every time they want to raise minimum wage. The market always adjusts.[/QUOTE]
There's a lot more to costs than just factoring wages and simple supply and demand. External forces like speculation has a much larger effect on costs than paying an extra quarter in minimum wage.
 
Did anyone catch this week's episode?

I was watching it yesterday and something that Bill said about disability benefit rates in America.

First, shortly before he mentioned it, Bill was complaining about people on the right who spoke about topics before gathering information, specifically of Rand Paul and Glenn Beck; then he does practically the same thing himself by complaining about the current U.S. disability benefit rates and how the system must have some significant scamming because they're so much higher than 50 years ago.

Anyway, by complete coincidence, Paul Krugman brings out this article on his blog, which mentions a bit about disability rates and why so many more Americans qualify for disability benefits.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/27/from-welfare-queens-to-disabled-deadbeats/

Here are a couple of quotes:

[quote name='Paul Krugman']...a large part of the rise in the disability rolls reflects simple demographics, because aging baby boomers are a lot more likely to have real ailments than those same workers did when they were in their 20s and 30s...[/QUOTE]


And this from the CBO:

[quote name='CBO']In 1984, lawmakers enacted the Disability Benefits Reform Act, which expanded the ways in which people could qualify for the DI program. That legislation, in addition to reversing several of the cost-containment measures enacted as part of the 1980 Social Security Disability Amendments, shifted the criteria for DI eligibility from a list of specific impairments to a more general consideration of a person’s medical condition and ability to work. The legislation allowed applicants to qualify for benefits on the basis of the combined effect of multiple medical conditions, each of which taken alone might not have met the criteria. It also allowed symptoms of mental illness and pain to be considered in assessing whether a person qualified for admission to the DI program, even in the absence of a clear-cut medical diagnosis.[/QUOTE]Anyway, just thought that was interesting.
 
I just didn't think this last episode was that great in general, aside from the ending rant, I thought that was pretty good. I've noticed a trend lately where his most provocative guests always seem to just do the 1 on 1 interview, never the panel.
 
[quote name='ID2006']Did anyone catch this week's episode?

I was watching it yesterday and something that Bill said about disability benefit rates in America.

First, shortly before he mentioned it, Bill was complaining about people on the right who spoke about topics before gathering information, specifically of Rand Paul and Glenn Beck; then he does practically the same thing himself by complaining about the current U.S. disability benefit rates and how the system must have some significant scamming because they're so much higher than 50 years ago.

Anyway, by complete coincidence, Paul Krugman brings out this article on his blog, which mentions a bit about disability rates and why so many more Americans qualify for disability benefits.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/27/from-welfare-queens-to-disabled-deadbeats/

Here are a couple of quotes:

And this from the CBO:

Anyway, just thought that was interesting.[/QUOTE]
Maher is a sharp witted individual, kinda have to be as a comedian at his level, but his knowledge of subjects only go so far unless he consults one of his writers, not to say that he's dumb or anything of course, but just that there are large gaps.

Personally, I thought the episode kinda dragged beyond the Dean smackdowns, but the best part of the episode for me was his tirade on how modern masculinity is based on superficial nonsense that mirrors "feminine" qualities that masculinists love to make fun of.
 
So did Palin really get dumped from Fox shortly after Jindal made that party of stupid comment? :lol:
 
Donald Trump was on Stern this morning talking about the lawsuit. The second he came on I turned off the show. I think Chevy Chase was on after Donald, so I feel good about my decision to move along with the rest of my day.

He is a bigger famewhore than the fucking Kardashian's.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I really wish somebody would get a photo of him on a really windy day. I want to see that hair not perfectly combed (over).
 
[quote name='Clak']I really wish somebody would get a photo of him on a really windy day. I want to see that hair not perfectly combed (over).[/QUOTE]
There's already been a thorough analysis of his comb over. It's quite ingenious and disgusting at the same time as well as being quite time consuming that probably pays for the annual salary of a hair stylist.
 
I just want a pic where that...thing... is blowing back and his bald head is exposed. Because frankly, Trump strikes me as someone who is incredibly vain and even with all the money he has, nature is winning the battle for his scalp. I just want to see the battlefield.
 
[quote name='Clak']I just want a pic where that...thing... is blowing back and his bald head is exposed. Because frankly, Trump strikes me as someone who is incredibly vain and even with all the money he has, nature is winning the battle for his scalp. I just want to see the battlefield.[/QUOTE]
HAHAHA...it already won. A person like him would've gotten implants years ago and while it's a much better job than Biden's, he probably didn't elect to have a natural hairline so it's all fucked up. There are hint's of it in the Seacreat interview. Honestly, if he slicked it back like Maher, it'd look much better because Maher's hair is pretty thinned out too.

I still haven't watched this week's episode, but I heard that it sucked balls. Maybe I'll watch it during the blizzard.:lol:
 
[quote name='PimpLimp']Did anybody else see that Julian Assange is gonna be a guest this week?[/QUOTE]

Just checked...pretty cool! I wonder if the Feds are going to detain him...haha. Chances are that it's going to be one of those live video feed segments since it doesn't seem like he's on the panel.
 
[quote name='Clak']I just want a pic where that...thing... is blowing back and his bald head is exposed. Because frankly, Trump strikes me as someone who is incredibly vain and even with all the money he has, nature is winning the battle for his scalp. I just want to see the battlefield.[/QUOTE]

Ironically, I've always felt that "hairstyle" is perhaps the most real thing about Trump. He likes to come across as this cocky know-it-all that has it altogether and who we should look up to, but that hair just shows how self-conscious he must be, considering the extreme lengths he does to hide the fact that he's aging. Once you realize that, it really gives insight into who he really is and chips away at the facade to which he so desperately clings.
 
[quote name='dohdough']HAHAHA...it already won. A person like him would've gotten implants years ago and while it's a much better job than Biden's, he probably didn't elect to have a natural hairline so it's all fucked up. There are hint's of it in the Seacreat interview. Honestly, if he slicked it back like Maher, it'd look much better because Maher's hair is pretty thinned out too.

I still haven't watched this week's episode, but I heard that it sucked balls. Maybe I'll watch it during the blizzard.:lol:[/QUOTE]
Yeah it kinda did, Booker was ok though. Hopefully next week's episode is better, should be.
 
I haven't watched the extended Julian Assange interview yet, but very good episode this week IMO. Maher just destroys Donald Trump at the end and I couldn't stop laughing.
 
Yeah, the episode was decent. Funny thing is that I always thought Bashir was a conservative...guess I was wrong. Krauss got interesting when he was talking about the politics of large scientific projects, which I enjoyed, but I think that Barro could've gone into more detail about how zoning laws were shaped by NIMBY sentiment. After watching Overtime, I'm not so sure Barro knows as much as he thinks he does about domestic politics. I'll watch the Assange interview later too.

One thing that's been bugging me about Maher this season is his suits and shirts. They used to be extremely well tailored and form fitting, but now, it just looks like he's wearing burlap sacks with collars 2 sizes too big for his neck. It doesn't make sense to me because his suits don't look cheap. Functional button holes on jacket sleeves isn't something you get off the rack from Macy's or Nordstrom or even half the suits at Saks and Neiman's.

edit: Oh and George Zimmerman's brother is going to be on next week...LOLOLOL
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Welp, the Zimmerman thing was...interesting. He was Very well prepared by the lawyers and obviously much more better spoken than George. I loved how he said that all of the issues brought up are "important to have a discussion about," but has absolutely nothing to do with the case, and then go on to talk about how it's related to the case. It's like someone running a red light, be asked why they ran a red light only to reply with some epistemological convoluted answer about what "red" is, and then point to the traffic signal to say that another car just ran a red light too. It was really bizarre.

Panel was actually ok despite the twirp, Weinstein, from Dally Caller. Nice to see that the Vice Chairman of the DNC, Brazile, knew her shit unlike other DNC shills that Maher has had on, and Meacham(I'd hardly call him liberal) was pretty good talking down Weinstein's talking points.

Overall an ok episode. They'll be on break next week so I can spend that time playing Revengeance. How serendipitous.
 
[quote name='dohdough']Welp, the Zimmerman thing was...interesting. He was Very well prepared by the lawyers and obviously much more better spoken than George. I loved how he said that all of the issues brought up are "important to have a discussion about," but has absolutely nothing to do with the case, and then go on to talk about how it's related to the case. It's like someone running a red light, be asked why they ran a red light only to reply with some epistemological convoluted answer about what "red" is, and then point to the traffic signal to say that another car just ran a red light too. It was really bizarre.

Panel was actually ok despite the twirp, Weinstein, from Dally Caller. Nice to see that the Vice Chairman of the DNC, Brazile, knew her shit unlike other DNC shills that Maher has had on, and Meacham(I'd hardly call him liberal) was pretty good talking down Weinstein's talking points. In defending his brother he also managed to do what pretty much every person defending him has failed to do. He came across humble instead of angry and entitled

Overall an ok episode. They'll be on break next week so I can spend that time playing Revengeance. How serendipitous.[/QUOTE]

His brother is honestly the best thing that ever happened to him. He spoke very elegantly and intelligently about race and made a lot of great points about the media.
 
[quote name='dohdough']...Panel was actually ok despite the twirp, Weinstein, from Dally Caller. Nice to see that the Vice Chairman of the DNC, Brazile, knew her shit unlike other DNC shills that Maher has had on, and Meacham(I'd hardly call him liberal) was pretty good talking down Weinstein's talking points...[/QUOTE]


Just curious — what do you mean about the bolded text? All I know about him is that he wrote a book about Jefferson (which I was considering reading.)

Also, agreed about the panel overall, although the final guest was practically not even there after his introduction. Maher was pretty funny this time around, too.
 
[quote name='MSI Magus']His brother is honestly the best thing that ever happened to him. He spoke very elegantly and intelligently about race and made a lot of great points about the media.[/QUOTE]
I was in no way complementing him about what he said or how he said it. He gave canned answers that might sound good, but were fairly evasive and strawmanning Maher a bit. Maher also went easy on the guy because he isn't a fulltime paid shill, although, when Maher tried to break through some bullshit with some soft balls, Zimmerman was lost. Repeating "it's complicated" doesn't mean that he has a deep understanding of it or really address what Maher was asking. Zimmerman Jr doesn't get a pass from me because this isn't his first rodeo. He's been on different shows doing the same schtick for months as well as being a bit of an asshole.

[quote name='ID2006']Just curious — what do you mean about the bolded text? All I know about him is that he wrote a book about Jefferson (which I was considering reading.)

Also, agreed about the panel overall, although the final guest was practically not even there after his introduction. Maher was pretty funny this time around, too.[/QUOTE]
Unless I'm mistaking him for someone else, and I might be, I was under the impression that he's more of center-right neoliberal.

I like it when he has other comedians cause he tends to be more funny. McHale was humourous too IMO.
 
I liked his ragging on religion again, especially the bit about if nobody practices what they preach anymore, why not give it up?
 
I actually liked what he said to Zimmerman's brother, that had the gun not been there it basically would have just been two people in a fight, neither probably would have died. Instead, you had some suburban commando acting like the neighborhood sheriff, and someone ended up dead simply because Martin looked suspicious. If anything is taken away from that whole episode, it's to call the police if you see something you think is suspicious, don't try to handle it yourself.


Although if you call them about a suspicious vehicle, they may end up shooting at every vehicle which meets the description. ;)
 
[quote name='Clak']I actually liked what he said to Zimmerman's brother, that had the gun not been there it basically would have just been two people in a fight, neither probably would have died. Instead, you had some suburban commando acting like the neighborhood sheriff, and someone ended up dead simply because Martin looked suspicious. If anything is taken away from that whole episode, it's to call the police if you see something you think is suspicious, don't try to handle it yourself.[/quote]
There two moments of the interview that really popped out at me. One was when Zimmerman was talking about how the media was exaggerating things and then a second later, he went on to say that Martin broke his brother's nose and was smashing his head into the ground while motioning with his hands. NO exaggeration there, right?:roll:

The next one was when Maher made the comment about wearing a hoodie being reasonable in the rain and Zimmerman gave a slight chuckle and nodded his head in agreement. That one went completely over his head and actually made me a little angry.


Although if you call them about a suspicious vehicle, they may end up shooting at every vehicle which meets the description. ;)
Click to expand...
Nice one.:lol:
 
I think Maher was wrong about him being a good spokesman, the guy didn't have a clue. Seemed like he'd been prepped, probably by lawyers. When Maher made that hoodie comment and it went over his head, I knew right then that he wasn't even paying attention during the interview, he was just waiting to hear the right questions and give his canned response. I honestly wish Maher had hammered him, but I guess he didn't want to be too hard on the guy.
 
[quote name='Clak']


Although if you call them about a suspicious vehicle, they may end up shooting at every vehicle which they think meets the description. ;)[/QUOTE]

Fixed ;)
 
I can't remember the entire panel of tonight's show but I remember seeing David Cross would be on so it should be a good one.
 
Last week's episode was kinda shitty, but this week's was pretty good.

Michael Steele gets a lot of shit for looking like that muppet on Sesame Street, but the second he stopped being head of the RNC, I hope he's changed a lot of minds about how liberals perceive him and I can understand why the Republicans booted him after seeing his appearances. The GOP will simply become less relevant as long as it insists on playing to white racial resentment, homophobia, sexism, and patriarchy amongst other things. Steele could've been a very dangerous man to the Democrats(as a political power broker;not it's members) if his own organization didn't cripple him. This becomes more clear to me as I learn more about his strategies. I don't know if liberals dodged a bullet or if we're now worse of because of it, but I can't imagine what the political landscape would be if conservatives became more inclusive.

Charlie LeDuff was an interesting character too. I'm almost tempted to get his book, but I have a huge back log. Avik Roy is as reprehensible as ever and I'm starting to find Ariana Huffington kind of a bore.
 
[quote name='Clak']I actually liked what he said to Zimmerman's brother, that had the gun not been there it basically would have just been two people in a fight, neither probably would have died. Instead, you had some suburban commando acting like the neighborhood sheriff, and someone ended up dead simply because Martin looked suspicious. If anything is taken away from that whole episode, it's to call the police if you see something you think is suspicious, don't try to handle it yourself.


Although if you call them about a suspicious vehicle, they may end up shooting at every vehicle which meets the description. ;)[/QUOTE]

Trayvon was shot just because he looked suspicious... nothing else came into play.

Rewriting history in your own mind I see.
 
[quote name='GBAstar']Trayvon was shot just because he looked suspicious... nothing else came into play.

Rewriting history in your own mind I see.[/QUOTE]
It took you 3 weeks to come up with that?

edit: for the lulz...
youre-trying-too-hard-slow-down-crazy.jpg
 
[quote name='dohdough']Last week's episode was kinda shitty, but this week's was pretty good.

Michael Steele gets a lot of shit for looking like that muppet on Sesame Street, but the second he stopped being head of the RNC, I hope he's changed a lot of minds about how liberals perceive him and I can understand why the Republicans booted him after seeing his appearances. The GOP will simply become less relevant as long as it insists on playing to white racial resentment, homophobia, sexism, and patriarchy amongst other things. Steele could've been a very dangerous man to the Democrats(as a political power broker;not it's members) if his own organization didn't cripple him. This becomes more clear to me as I learn more about his strategies. I don't know if liberals dodged a bullet or if we're now worse of because of it, but I can't imagine what the political landscape would be if conservatives became more inclusive.

Charlie LeDuff was an interesting character too. I'm almost tempted to get his book, but I have a huge back log. Avik Roy is as reprehensible as ever and I'm starting to find Ariana Huffington kind of a bore.[/QUOTE]Huffington often times seems irrelevant when she's on. She doesn't really add much most of the time.

But the GOP is definitely shooting itself in the foot with the way they refuse to embrace certain groups. Steele was a pretty good flag bearer, but having a mind of his own was just too much for the GOP.
 
So, on last Friday's show they showed interviews with folks, all staunch anti government types insisting on spending cuts. Anyone else think it was really telling that despite all of these people screaming "cut spending" most of them couldn't think of a single thing to cut? All I heard was cut the pay of congress and foreign aid. That isn't going to balance the budget of course, but none of them wanted to touch health care, or the military, or education etc.

So yeah, herp de derp derp.
 
[quote name='Clak']So, on last Friday's show they showed interviews with folks, all staunch anti government types insisting on spending cuts. Anyone else think it was really telling that despite all of these people screaming "cut spending" most of them couldn't think of a single thing to cut? All I heard was cut the pay of congress and foreign aid. That isn't going to balance the budget of course, but none of them wanted to touch health care, or the military, or education etc.

So yeah, herp de derp derp.[/QUOTE]


I'd cut a huge portion out of everything you mentioned. Crooked ass career politicians know that they can never get elected and re-elected talking like that though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top