Chrystia Freeland (@cafreeland), James Carville, Mike Murphy (@murphymike), Bill Maher (@billmaher).
Here's a clip from the January 14, 2011 episode of HBO Real Time discussing gun control after the Gabrielle Giffords shooting of January 8, 2011.
Showing posts with label Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Obama. Show all posts
Saturday, December 15, 2012
Gun Control Debate
Here's a clip from the January 14, 2011 episode of HBO Real Time discussing gun control after the Gabrielle Giffords shooting of January 8, 2011.
Friday, November 30, 2012
Power Outrage
By Bill Maher
Our stupid media managed to become so obsessed with Paula Broadwell and Jill Kelly that they completely forgot about another woman who caused even more damage: Sandy. As in Hurricane Sandy.
Thousands of people were without power for weeks, many are still displaced and criticism has been leveled at FEMA and the Red Cross. I'm not saying it was as bad as Katrina, but it was pretty bad, and people are starting to say that President Obama just doesn't care about white people.
The New York City subway was back to 80 percent normal operation just a week after the hurricane hit, thanks to incredible dedication and hard work of the transit workers. Or as the Republicans call them, those lazy public union employees who sit around doing nothing, so we should cut their pension.
Meanwhile, the utility companies couldn't seem to get their shit together. Partly because they're just like any other corporation, trying to maximize profits by cutting corners. Which is OK when you make a toaster or a vibrator, because when those things fail nobody gets hurt. They just don't get toast or an orgasm.
Look, it's fun when the power goes out for a couple of hours. You can make a baby, you can loot a Best Buy; it's party time. But when the power's out for more than a day, Americans start to freak out. We can't survive without electricity anymore. We're like a fish that's jumped out of the aquarium and is flopping around on the counter. If we don't have access to heat and light and WiFi, we go crazy. I'm just surprised New Yorkers didn't turn to cannibalism. Especially after reading the review of Guy Fieri's new restaurant.
New York City's grid dates to the early 20th Century. People are plugged into power lines put up by Nucky Thompson.
Because of our old grid, Americans in the northeast lose power an average of 214 minutes a year, versus just 53 minutes a year for the French. And the French don't care; they just open a bottle of wine and sing Edith Piaf songs.
What we need to do is bury the power lines, modernize the equipment, and decentralize the grid, so when one transformer goes out or one power plant goes offline it doesn't take out the power for the entire tri-state area.
Our stupid media managed to become so obsessed with Paula Broadwell and Jill Kelly that they completely forgot about another woman who caused even more damage: Sandy. As in Hurricane Sandy.
Thousands of people were without power for weeks, many are still displaced and criticism has been leveled at FEMA and the Red Cross. I'm not saying it was as bad as Katrina, but it was pretty bad, and people are starting to say that President Obama just doesn't care about white people.
The New York City subway was back to 80 percent normal operation just a week after the hurricane hit, thanks to incredible dedication and hard work of the transit workers. Or as the Republicans call them, those lazy public union employees who sit around doing nothing, so we should cut their pension.
Meanwhile, the utility companies couldn't seem to get their shit together. Partly because they're just like any other corporation, trying to maximize profits by cutting corners. Which is OK when you make a toaster or a vibrator, because when those things fail nobody gets hurt. They just don't get toast or an orgasm.
Look, it's fun when the power goes out for a couple of hours. You can make a baby, you can loot a Best Buy; it's party time. But when the power's out for more than a day, Americans start to freak out. We can't survive without electricity anymore. We're like a fish that's jumped out of the aquarium and is flopping around on the counter. If we don't have access to heat and light and WiFi, we go crazy. I'm just surprised New Yorkers didn't turn to cannibalism. Especially after reading the review of Guy Fieri's new restaurant.
New York City's grid dates to the early 20th Century. People are plugged into power lines put up by Nucky Thompson.
Because of our old grid, Americans in the northeast lose power an average of 214 minutes a year, versus just 53 minutes a year for the French. And the French don't care; they just open a bottle of wine and sing Edith Piaf songs.
What we need to do is bury the power lines, modernize the equipment, and decentralize the grid, so when one transformer goes out or one power plant goes offline it doesn't take out the power for the entire tri-state area.
Saturday, November 24, 2012
Hypnosis Politics
By Bill Maher
Did the ability to raise an infinite amount of money in this election make a difference?
If you just paid attention to the Presidential race, then you might think the answer is no. But that's because the Presidential race is unlike any other contest in the country. People take it personally. They're invested in it. They'd seen Obama for four years and they'd seen Romney on Jay Leno and the cable shows and the debates. People in swing states may have been drowning in a bukkake-like stream of Romney and Obama ads, but it's not like those ads were providing all of their information.
But when it comes to state contests and ballot propositions, people generally don't know much beyond the ads, so in those races money isn't just the main thing, it's the only thing.
Prop 37 went down in defeat because $48 million was spent to defeat it. This was a proposition that asked the simple question, "Wouldn't you like to know what you're putting in your mouth?" Before the ads started running, something like 90 percent of Californians who answered were for Prop 37. Now, they're against it. They're against knowing what they're putting in their mouth.
It's not that the anti-37 ads were particularly convincing. They didn't make any real arguments. It's just that there were so many of them. I saw them on Hulu when I watched old episodes of "My Favorite Martian." People keep complaining about the repetition of political ads, the same ad over and over and over, but that's the whole point -- it's hypnosis. That's how hypnosis works. The same thing. Repeated over and over. And over again. The same thing. Repeated over and over. Again. Repeated. And before you know it, you think you're a chicken. Or you don't care what's in your chicken.
Did the ability to raise an infinite amount of money in this election make a difference?
If you just paid attention to the Presidential race, then you might think the answer is no. But that's because the Presidential race is unlike any other contest in the country. People take it personally. They're invested in it. They'd seen Obama for four years and they'd seen Romney on Jay Leno and the cable shows and the debates. People in swing states may have been drowning in a bukkake-like stream of Romney and Obama ads, but it's not like those ads were providing all of their information.
But when it comes to state contests and ballot propositions, people generally don't know much beyond the ads, so in those races money isn't just the main thing, it's the only thing.
Prop 37 went down in defeat because $48 million was spent to defeat it. This was a proposition that asked the simple question, "Wouldn't you like to know what you're putting in your mouth?" Before the ads started running, something like 90 percent of Californians who answered were for Prop 37. Now, they're against it. They're against knowing what they're putting in their mouth.
It's not that the anti-37 ads were particularly convincing. They didn't make any real arguments. It's just that there were so many of them. I saw them on Hulu when I watched old episodes of "My Favorite Martian." People keep complaining about the repetition of political ads, the same ad over and over and over, but that's the whole point -- it's hypnosis. That's how hypnosis works. The same thing. Repeated over and over. And over again. The same thing. Repeated over and over. Again. Repeated. And before you know it, you think you're a chicken. Or you don't care what's in your chicken.
Friday, November 23, 2012
The Mormon Non-Issue
By Bill Maher
Andrew Sullivan was on the show Friday, and he's written several blog posts on The Daily Dish wondering why the media never asked Romney to be more specific about his Mormon faith, especially the part about not allowing blacks into the priesthood and temple ceremonies until 1978.
Sure, they had their prophecy in '78, but the old blacks-are-cursed-by-God stuff is still in their books, and Romney apparently believed it until he was in his thirties. Maybe he still believes it. It's not like they erased the passages in the Mormon literature. Why didn't a journalist ask Romney about this during the election?
The standard line about this stuff is that "religion is off limits," which makes no sense because religion is just something someone believes, the same as their belief on abortion or tax cuts or any other issue. Maybe whether a candidate has Type O blood or is a Sagittarius or enjoys a finger in his butt during sex is irrelevant, but a system of beliefs that informs one's entire moral code?
Why are Mormons against gay marriage? Jealousy? No, it's because of their religion. Because of their religion, gays in California can't get married. Why should this be "off limits" to journalists?
As Andrew points out, if Obama belonged to a church that preached for decades that whites were inferior, don't you think it might become an issue?
Andrew Sullivan was on the show Friday, and he's written several blog posts on The Daily Dish wondering why the media never asked Romney to be more specific about his Mormon faith, especially the part about not allowing blacks into the priesthood and temple ceremonies until 1978.
Sure, they had their prophecy in '78, but the old blacks-are-cursed-by-God stuff is still in their books, and Romney apparently believed it until he was in his thirties. Maybe he still believes it. It's not like they erased the passages in the Mormon literature. Why didn't a journalist ask Romney about this during the election?
The standard line about this stuff is that "religion is off limits," which makes no sense because religion is just something someone believes, the same as their belief on abortion or tax cuts or any other issue. Maybe whether a candidate has Type O blood or is a Sagittarius or enjoys a finger in his butt during sex is irrelevant, but a system of beliefs that informs one's entire moral code?
Why are Mormons against gay marriage? Jealousy? No, it's because of their religion. Because of their religion, gays in California can't get married. Why should this be "off limits" to journalists?
As Andrew points out, if Obama belonged to a church that preached for decades that whites were inferior, don't you think it might become an issue?
Thursday, November 1, 2012
Why Aren't GMOs a Campaign Issue?
By Bill Maher
According to a poll done a few years ago, over 90 percent of Americans in all age groups and income levels think genetically modified food should be labeled. Seems like a no-lose campaign issue for either Romney or Obama. So why aren't they talking about it?
Back in 2007, Obama said he supported food labeling; but since he's been president he's been silent. And so has Romney, even though there's evidence both Romney and his wife eat mostly organic food, which suggests to me that they have at least some concern about what they put in their mouths. Or maybe they're just trying to counteract the daily campaign diet of photo-op corn dogs.
Actually, I can see why Romney would be hesitant to talk about GMOs, because in his early days as a consultant he helped convince the company Monsanto to shift its focus from chemical manufacturing to biotech.
Leaving aside the question of whether genetically-modified crops are good or bad (and since some studies have shown feeding it to rats gives them giant tumors, I vote for "bad"), it’s a simple issue of you have the right to know what you're eating.
Conservatives are constantly having freakouts over the phony notion that Obamacare gives government bureaucrats control over their bodies. But Monsanto already has control over your body, unless you spend eight hours a day researching every item sold at Trader Joe's. Scientists can't even do studies on Monstanto GM seeds unless Monstanto gives them permission first.
It reminds me of how when you buy the new Taylor Swift album on iTunes you don't actually own the music. You only own a license to play the music file.
Corporations are able to arbitrarily make the rules and we just have to suck it up and accept it. That is, if we want to eat and listen to music.
According to a poll done a few years ago, over 90 percent of Americans in all age groups and income levels think genetically modified food should be labeled. Seems like a no-lose campaign issue for either Romney or Obama. So why aren't they talking about it?
Back in 2007, Obama said he supported food labeling; but since he's been president he's been silent. And so has Romney, even though there's evidence both Romney and his wife eat mostly organic food, which suggests to me that they have at least some concern about what they put in their mouths. Or maybe they're just trying to counteract the daily campaign diet of photo-op corn dogs.
Actually, I can see why Romney would be hesitant to talk about GMOs, because in his early days as a consultant he helped convince the company Monsanto to shift its focus from chemical manufacturing to biotech.
Leaving aside the question of whether genetically-modified crops are good or bad (and since some studies have shown feeding it to rats gives them giant tumors, I vote for "bad"), it’s a simple issue of you have the right to know what you're eating.
Conservatives are constantly having freakouts over the phony notion that Obamacare gives government bureaucrats control over their bodies. But Monsanto already has control over your body, unless you spend eight hours a day researching every item sold at Trader Joe's. Scientists can't even do studies on Monstanto GM seeds unless Monstanto gives them permission first.
It reminds me of how when you buy the new Taylor Swift album on iTunes you don't actually own the music. You only own a license to play the music file.
Corporations are able to arbitrarily make the rules and we just have to suck it up and accept it. That is, if we want to eat and listen to music.
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Flying Killer Robots
By Bill Maher
There's been a lot of talk about the Obama administration's drone policy -- the one that was denied for years but now is begrudgingly acknowledged with the insistence that there have been no "conclusive" civilian casualties. Isn't America wonderful, developing an unmanned robotic plane that can shoot missiles into populated areas and kill only the bad guys? Why, it sounds almost too good to be true.
The Bureau of Investigative Journalism reports that the zero civilian casualty count claimed by the Obama administration is a little, let’s say, hopeful -- the number is more likely between 474-884 killed in Pakistan alone since 2004 -- with over a thousand more people injured.
And a Stanford/NYU report says our drone strikes have had a "damaging and counter-productive effect" and have likely resulted in civilian Pakistanis being less likely to help us find and eliminate terrorists.
In a recent poll, three out of every four Pakistanis said they now consider the United States an enemy. The other one out of four recognized the pollster as American and cut off his head. And who can blame them? Imagine living under the constant threat of imminent demise -- like that new sitcom about men with babies.
The study says,
There's been a lot of talk about the Obama administration's drone policy -- the one that was denied for years but now is begrudgingly acknowledged with the insistence that there have been no "conclusive" civilian casualties. Isn't America wonderful, developing an unmanned robotic plane that can shoot missiles into populated areas and kill only the bad guys? Why, it sounds almost too good to be true.
The Bureau of Investigative Journalism reports that the zero civilian casualty count claimed by the Obama administration is a little, let’s say, hopeful -- the number is more likely between 474-884 killed in Pakistan alone since 2004 -- with over a thousand more people injured.
And a Stanford/NYU report says our drone strikes have had a "damaging and counter-productive effect" and have likely resulted in civilian Pakistanis being less likely to help us find and eliminate terrorists.
In a recent poll, three out of every four Pakistanis said they now consider the United States an enemy. The other one out of four recognized the pollster as American and cut off his head. And who can blame them? Imagine living under the constant threat of imminent demise -- like that new sitcom about men with babies.
The study says,
"Drones hover 24 hours a day over communities in northwest Pakistan, striking homes, vehicles and public spaces without warning… Those living under drones have to face the constant worry that a deadly strike may be fired at any moment, and the knowledge that they are powerless to protect themselves."You may argue that waging war with machines where you get to kill the enemy and anyone standing near them without bodily risk to yourself is immoral. But so is terrorism. On the other hand, are we just repeatedly whacking the beehive with a stick and creating more enemies who want to sting?
Saturday, October 6, 2012
QUOTES FROM “REAL TIME WITH BILL MAHER" Oct. 5, 2012
Friday, October 6, 2012
QUOTES FROM “REAL TIME WITH BILL MAHER”
Following are quotables from “Real Time with Bill Maher” for Friday, October 6, 2012. “Real Time with Bill Maher” airs Fridays at 10:00PM ET (10:00PM PT, tape delayed) on HBO, with additional replays throughout the week on HBO and HBO 2.
New job numbers came out today…unemployment went way down from 8 percent to 7.8 percent. Of course, a lot of this was because of the ever expanding industry of Mitt Romney fact checkers.
- Bill Maher in his opening monologue
Now we know what Romney looks like when he is all charged up. And now we know what Michael Jackson looks like on diprivan.
- Bill Maher in his opening monologue regarding Obama’s performance at the Presidential debate
I have not seen a black man that disinterested and annoyed since I dragged Chris Rock to that Beach Boys concert.
- Bill Maher in his opening monologue regarding Obama’s performance at the Presidential debate
You know what the American people want right now? They don’t want you, they don’t want me. They just want these guys to work together, cut the crap, shut the hell up and do your jobs.
- Frank Luntz
Congress has a 10 percent approval rating. Gaddafi had a 14 percent approval rating and that was from the people who killed him.
- Frank Luntz
Mitt Romney has just been practicing for a year and a half. That’s what he’s been doing in the primaries…Barack Obama has been running a country.
- Kerry Washington
You can’t look presidential when you’re just saying lies.
- Kerry Washington on Mitt Romney at the Presidential debate
I think he doesn’t care anything about ideology…he’ll do whatever; the Tea Party, the Democrats, Liberals, Conservatives. He just wants to establish that Mormons are part of the mainstream of this country; he wants to be the first Mormon president.
- Bill Maher on Mitt Romney
I tend to think of the government is best symbolized by the DMV. They don’t run anything very well. To pull off a massive conspiracy theory like this is totally out of character.
- Will Cain
New Rule: Before beginning any scientific study, you must first ask ‘does anyone care about what I am studying?’ Like a recent study revealed that people who decorate their bedrooms purple have the most active sex lives. Yes, because only three types of men have purple bedrooms: pimps, Herman Cain and the Minnesota Vikings.
- Bill Maher in his ‘New Rules’ segment
This week's guests were Frank Luntz, Mark Foley, Will Cain, Kerry Washington and Bill McKibben.
Following are quotables from “Real Time with Bill Maher” for Friday, October 6, 2012. “Real Time with Bill Maher” airs Fridays at 10:00PM ET (10:00PM PT, tape delayed) on HBO, with additional replays throughout the week on HBO and HBO 2.
New job numbers came out today…unemployment went way down from 8 percent to 7.8 percent. Of course, a lot of this was because of the ever expanding industry of Mitt Romney fact checkers.
- Bill Maher in his opening monologue
Now we know what Romney looks like when he is all charged up. And now we know what Michael Jackson looks like on diprivan.
- Bill Maher in his opening monologue regarding Obama’s performance at the Presidential debate
I have not seen a black man that disinterested and annoyed since I dragged Chris Rock to that Beach Boys concert.
- Bill Maher in his opening monologue regarding Obama’s performance at the Presidential debate
You know what the American people want right now? They don’t want you, they don’t want me. They just want these guys to work together, cut the crap, shut the hell up and do your jobs.
- Frank Luntz
Congress has a 10 percent approval rating. Gaddafi had a 14 percent approval rating and that was from the people who killed him.
- Frank Luntz
Mitt Romney has just been practicing for a year and a half. That’s what he’s been doing in the primaries…Barack Obama has been running a country.
- Kerry Washington
You can’t look presidential when you’re just saying lies.
- Kerry Washington on Mitt Romney at the Presidential debate
I think he doesn’t care anything about ideology…he’ll do whatever; the Tea Party, the Democrats, Liberals, Conservatives. He just wants to establish that Mormons are part of the mainstream of this country; he wants to be the first Mormon president.
- Bill Maher on Mitt Romney
I tend to think of the government is best symbolized by the DMV. They don’t run anything very well. To pull off a massive conspiracy theory like this is totally out of character.
- Will Cain
New Rule: Before beginning any scientific study, you must first ask ‘does anyone care about what I am studying?’ Like a recent study revealed that people who decorate their bedrooms purple have the most active sex lives. Yes, because only three types of men have purple bedrooms: pimps, Herman Cain and the Minnesota Vikings.
- Bill Maher in his ‘New Rules’ segment
This week's guests were Frank Luntz, Mark Foley, Will Cain, Kerry Washington and Bill McKibben.
Sunday, September 16, 2012
Chump Change
By Bill Maher
There's nothing wrong with change, but there’s also nothing inherently right with change -- if the "change" you're being offered is "Rich people stop paying taxes and let’s see what happens."
If I had been running the Democratic Convention, I would have barely mentioned Obama at all -- you know, like the Republicans did with Romney -- and I would've put up a 100-by-100 foot poster of Mitt Romney and George Bush and never take it down.
You know the Republican Party's "debt clock"? I would put up this number: 0.82%.
That's Mitt Romney’s tax rate if Paul Ryan’s latest budget became law. 0.82%. As in "less than 1%."
Maybe you don't think that's a problem. An effectively zero percent tax rate on investment, speculation and inherited wealth. But I'll bet most people do think it's a problem, and that's an argument Democrats can win.
There's nothing wrong with change, but there’s also nothing inherently right with change -- if the "change" you're being offered is "Rich people stop paying taxes and let’s see what happens."
If I had been running the Democratic Convention, I would have barely mentioned Obama at all -- you know, like the Republicans did with Romney -- and I would've put up a 100-by-100 foot poster of Mitt Romney and George Bush and never take it down.
You know the Republican Party's "debt clock"? I would put up this number: 0.82%.
That's Mitt Romney’s tax rate if Paul Ryan’s latest budget became law. 0.82%. As in "less than 1%."
Maybe you don't think that's a problem. An effectively zero percent tax rate on investment, speculation and inherited wealth. But I'll bet most people do think it's a problem, and that's an argument Democrats can win.
Monday, September 10, 2012
Birther Control
By Bill Maher
Chris Matthews dressed down RNC Chair Reince Priebus last week for Romney's playing the race card with the birther joke, and the party doing it with the false welfare ads, constantly bringing up that he's a "European-style socialist," etc. At first, Priebus didn't have much of a response at all, because he knows it's true. By the end, he just seemed contemptuous of Matthews, but had no legitimate defense.
But Tom Brokaw chimed in that he disagreed with Chris, and thought it was just an "awkward joke," adding that Republican leaders should have corrected the record when people started calling Obama a Muslim and a socialist, but "both sides" do it. Bullshit. Half of Democrats don't believe Romney was born in a foreign country. On another planet, maybe, but not a foreign country. That was the whole point of Romney's "joke," wasn't it? "Nobody's ever asked to see my birth certificate" -- yeah, because you're a white guy, you dipshit, and you're not the victim of that kind of racism. When people say he can't empathize with ordinary people, that's part of what they mean.
Ta-Nehisi Coates has an amazing essay in this month's Atlantic called, "Fear of a Black President." He writes, "Racism is not merely a simplistic hatred. It is, more often, broad sympathy toward some and broader skepticism toward others. Black America ever lives under that skeptical eye." True dat.
The first time I ever saw Obama’s citizenship questioned was in a chain email well before the 2008 election. I thought, "Wow, this is obviously racist," and dismissed it as a fringe rumor that would end with white supremacists. How did it grow to the point where half of Republican primary voters believed it? It wasn’t just the silence of Republican leaders, it was the failure of people like Tom Brokaw to just dismiss it as racism from the beginning. People like him are always championing "balance" over objectivity. They have to bring everything back to a discussion about how "both sides" are guilty, instead of doing his job as a referee. If every single journalist just simply labeled birtherism what it obviously is -- racism -- the cancer wouldn't have infected half the party. Maybe 25% or so, but most would be like, "Okay, this isn't socially respectable."
Every journalist knows it comes from a racist place, so why can't they all be as no-bullshit about it as Chris Matthews?
Chris Matthews dressed down RNC Chair Reince Priebus last week for Romney's playing the race card with the birther joke, and the party doing it with the false welfare ads, constantly bringing up that he's a "European-style socialist," etc. At first, Priebus didn't have much of a response at all, because he knows it's true. By the end, he just seemed contemptuous of Matthews, but had no legitimate defense.
But Tom Brokaw chimed in that he disagreed with Chris, and thought it was just an "awkward joke," adding that Republican leaders should have corrected the record when people started calling Obama a Muslim and a socialist, but "both sides" do it. Bullshit. Half of Democrats don't believe Romney was born in a foreign country. On another planet, maybe, but not a foreign country. That was the whole point of Romney's "joke," wasn't it? "Nobody's ever asked to see my birth certificate" -- yeah, because you're a white guy, you dipshit, and you're not the victim of that kind of racism. When people say he can't empathize with ordinary people, that's part of what they mean.
Ta-Nehisi Coates has an amazing essay in this month's Atlantic called, "Fear of a Black President." He writes, "Racism is not merely a simplistic hatred. It is, more often, broad sympathy toward some and broader skepticism toward others. Black America ever lives under that skeptical eye." True dat.
The first time I ever saw Obama’s citizenship questioned was in a chain email well before the 2008 election. I thought, "Wow, this is obviously racist," and dismissed it as a fringe rumor that would end with white supremacists. How did it grow to the point where half of Republican primary voters believed it? It wasn’t just the silence of Republican leaders, it was the failure of people like Tom Brokaw to just dismiss it as racism from the beginning. People like him are always championing "balance" over objectivity. They have to bring everything back to a discussion about how "both sides" are guilty, instead of doing his job as a referee. If every single journalist just simply labeled birtherism what it obviously is -- racism -- the cancer wouldn't have infected half the party. Maybe 25% or so, but most would be like, "Okay, this isn't socially respectable."
Every journalist knows it comes from a racist place, so why can't they all be as no-bullshit about it as Chris Matthews?
Monday, August 27, 2012
Stimu-late Than Never
by Bill Maher
Question: How come preventing chaos and civil war in Iraq was enough to say, “Bush’s surge worked,” but averting a complete financial meltdown and a second Great Depression isn’t enough to say, “Obama’s stimulus worked”? No, we haven’t achieved full employment, but neither was Iraq transformed to a model of peace and democracy. Have we been conditioned to think of economic success only in terms of immediate prosperity? Don’t you get any points for halting decline? Stopping a free fall? Turning the tide?
Conservatives say “Obama’s policies have failed” but the fact is we need a second stimulus, and Obama has served one up in the form of his jobs bill, which is being cock-blocked in Congress by Republicans. It’s as if the doctor has said to a dying patient, “You need two shots. The first will arrest your illness and save your life and the second will get you healthy and back on your feet.” And Republicans voted against the first injection to stave off death and now they’re refusing the second to stave off an Obama second term. Isn’t it clear Republicans are purposely delaying recovery so they can blame Obama for keeping us bedridden?
Question: How come preventing chaos and civil war in Iraq was enough to say, “Bush’s surge worked,” but averting a complete financial meltdown and a second Great Depression isn’t enough to say, “Obama’s stimulus worked”? No, we haven’t achieved full employment, but neither was Iraq transformed to a model of peace and democracy. Have we been conditioned to think of economic success only in terms of immediate prosperity? Don’t you get any points for halting decline? Stopping a free fall? Turning the tide?
Conservatives say “Obama’s policies have failed” but the fact is we need a second stimulus, and Obama has served one up in the form of his jobs bill, which is being cock-blocked in Congress by Republicans. It’s as if the doctor has said to a dying patient, “You need two shots. The first will arrest your illness and save your life and the second will get you healthy and back on your feet.” And Republicans voted against the first injection to stave off death and now they’re refusing the second to stave off an Obama second term. Isn’t it clear Republicans are purposely delaying recovery so they can blame Obama for keeping us bedridden?
The American Media’s Guide to Disaster Porn
By Bill Maher
That’s the term I used a couple years ago when the media was milking the earthquake in Haiti, and a lot of people didn’t like it. But a lot of people got shot this summer and since we’re not going to do anything about any of it – not even a token gesture with no real impact – it’ll happen again soon. And everyone’s reactions will be exactly the same. So just imagine another shooter. Let’s say he’s got green hair this time and he hated working at Lobster Pot – it doesn’t matter. This is now the mass-shooting template for America:
Day one: The shooting. The shock. The live coverage. Footage of crying people hugging and police in riot gear making their way through the building. Death tolls indicate the amount of coverage: Below five; it’s a one-day story. If it’s above five, it’s officially a national tragedy. Brian Williams is going to be there all week.
Both candidates release statements saying they’re shocked by this senseless tragedy and their hearts go out to the victims and their families and the community at large. They will rebuild.
Day two: We find out who the gunman is. We’ll also find out it was easy for him to build a small arsenal. Interviews with neighbors former teachers, etc. Lots of shots of candles and teddy bears by a fence.
Day three: We find out someone warned someone else about the gunman being a nut. The media asks, “Could more have been done?”
The NRA sends out a fundraising letter saying Obama will use this to come and take your guns.
Day four: Here come the stories of heroism. They replace the stories of tragedy. You’ll hear the term “guardian angel.” A lot. Because viewers can only do tragedy for so long. They want to hear about someone taking a bullet for a loved one.
Day five: Liberal columnists start pressing the gun issue. Conservative columnists respond by saying more people with guns could have shot the gunman earlier. Nobody changes their mind.
Day six: President Obama tells us to search our souls. Which sounds better than “Really, stop asking me to do something about guns. It’s election season. And I don’t care.”
And we’re done.
That’s the term I used a couple years ago when the media was milking the earthquake in Haiti, and a lot of people didn’t like it. But a lot of people got shot this summer and since we’re not going to do anything about any of it – not even a token gesture with no real impact – it’ll happen again soon. And everyone’s reactions will be exactly the same. So just imagine another shooter. Let’s say he’s got green hair this time and he hated working at Lobster Pot – it doesn’t matter. This is now the mass-shooting template for America:
Day one: The shooting. The shock. The live coverage. Footage of crying people hugging and police in riot gear making their way through the building. Death tolls indicate the amount of coverage: Below five; it’s a one-day story. If it’s above five, it’s officially a national tragedy. Brian Williams is going to be there all week.
Both candidates release statements saying they’re shocked by this senseless tragedy and their hearts go out to the victims and their families and the community at large. They will rebuild.
Day two: We find out who the gunman is. We’ll also find out it was easy for him to build a small arsenal. Interviews with neighbors former teachers, etc. Lots of shots of candles and teddy bears by a fence.
Day three: We find out someone warned someone else about the gunman being a nut. The media asks, “Could more have been done?”
The NRA sends out a fundraising letter saying Obama will use this to come and take your guns.
Day four: Here come the stories of heroism. They replace the stories of tragedy. You’ll hear the term “guardian angel.” A lot. Because viewers can only do tragedy for so long. They want to hear about someone taking a bullet for a loved one.
Day five: Liberal columnists start pressing the gun issue. Conservative columnists respond by saying more people with guns could have shot the gunman earlier. Nobody changes their mind.
Day six: President Obama tells us to search our souls. Which sounds better than “Really, stop asking me to do something about guns. It’s election season. And I don’t care.”
And we’re done.
A Truce Proposal for the Republican Party
By Bill Maher
No matter who you talk to on the right about the frothing insanity and Congressional belligerence directed at President Obama, inevitably they’ll all raise the same point: You did it to Bush when he was in office. Which wasn’t equivalent, or even close, but this seems to be something we can never get beyond – this tit for tat. Now, I don’t remember Democrats deciding, as an electoral strategy, to oppose everything the president proposed or did, even when they agreed with it, and to use the filibuster in ways never seen before in order to deny him legislative victories so that the public would not see the change they were promised and vote against the president’s party in the midterms – all of which has happened to Obama. No, I don’t remember the Democrats doing that. Quite the opposite. I remember the Democrats saying, “Oh, you want a pre-emptive war? Aye-aye, Captain!”
But let’s not get into that. I come in peace.
And I’ll even go first, and make a gesture of goodwill: I apologize for blaming Bush for the conditions at Walter Reed. When that Dana Priest/Anne Hull story came out and we found that Walter Reed was in rough shape and had mold and exposed wires and rats and nothing was being done to fix it, we all added that to the growing list of Bush administration scandals, along with Iraq, and Abu Ghraib, torture, the response to Katrina, outing a CIA agent, etc. But it really didn’t deserve to be there. Because Bush wasn’t in charge of the wiring at Walter Reed, or even aware of it. So, yes, that was unfair and I take it back. Bush wasn’t directly to blame for the conditions at Walter Reed. There. That was overly-partisan.
Your turn. …I’ll wait. It’ll be like the Dayton Peace Accords. We could even hold it in Dayton. I’m sure they’d appreciate the business.
And here’s my proposal: if we agree not to go crazy on Mitt Romney should he be elected, and I don’t take to the airwaves days after his inauguration and say that I hope he fails and pledge to oppose everything he does like Rush Limbaugh did after Obama was elected, then Republicans have to agree to chill the fuck out should Obama be re-elected, and to let him run the country, and staff positions without needlessly filibustering, and let bills pass in the Senate with a simple majority, and to finally shut the hell up about the socialism and the Kenya and the America-hating.
…Deal?
No matter who you talk to on the right about the frothing insanity and Congressional belligerence directed at President Obama, inevitably they’ll all raise the same point: You did it to Bush when he was in office. Which wasn’t equivalent, or even close, but this seems to be something we can never get beyond – this tit for tat. Now, I don’t remember Democrats deciding, as an electoral strategy, to oppose everything the president proposed or did, even when they agreed with it, and to use the filibuster in ways never seen before in order to deny him legislative victories so that the public would not see the change they were promised and vote against the president’s party in the midterms – all of which has happened to Obama. No, I don’t remember the Democrats doing that. Quite the opposite. I remember the Democrats saying, “Oh, you want a pre-emptive war? Aye-aye, Captain!”
But let’s not get into that. I come in peace.
And I’ll even go first, and make a gesture of goodwill: I apologize for blaming Bush for the conditions at Walter Reed. When that Dana Priest/Anne Hull story came out and we found that Walter Reed was in rough shape and had mold and exposed wires and rats and nothing was being done to fix it, we all added that to the growing list of Bush administration scandals, along with Iraq, and Abu Ghraib, torture, the response to Katrina, outing a CIA agent, etc. But it really didn’t deserve to be there. Because Bush wasn’t in charge of the wiring at Walter Reed, or even aware of it. So, yes, that was unfair and I take it back. Bush wasn’t directly to blame for the conditions at Walter Reed. There. That was overly-partisan.
Your turn. …I’ll wait. It’ll be like the Dayton Peace Accords. We could even hold it in Dayton. I’m sure they’d appreciate the business.
And here’s my proposal: if we agree not to go crazy on Mitt Romney should he be elected, and I don’t take to the airwaves days after his inauguration and say that I hope he fails and pledge to oppose everything he does like Rush Limbaugh did after Obama was elected, then Republicans have to agree to chill the fuck out should Obama be re-elected, and to let him run the country, and staff positions without needlessly filibustering, and let bills pass in the Senate with a simple majority, and to finally shut the hell up about the socialism and the Kenya and the America-hating.
…Deal?
Thursday, July 26, 2012
The War on Error
By Bill Maher
Someone pointed out that the problem with Obama’s press conference gaffe earlier this month –
"The private sector is doing fine. Where we're seeing weaknesses in our economy have to do with state and local government."
– was that Obama didn't have anything else to say in the press conference. If he had made any actual news, the gaffe wouldn’t have been the only thing people had to talk about. And I think that's a fair charge.
Anyway, gaffe outrage is how we play the game. And since Mitt Romney hired Sarah Palin's speechwriter, that's the only game in town. Or at least the favorite game. You say something, I repeat it, over and over and over and over and over, like it's so obviously fucking comically ludicrous that it doesn't even have to be explained.
Can you believe it? Obama actually said we're a super power "whether we like it or not!" Whether we like it or not??! "Whether" we "like it" or "not"!!!???!!! WHETHER we LIKE IT or NOT???!!!!!!!!?????????
Which is why it was inevitable that Mitt Romney's campaign released a web video all about Obama saying "doing fine." Here's The Hill's description:
The video ad follows Obama's remarks with clips of workers discussing their struggles with the weak economy.
"We've seen layoffs, cutbacks," says one woman.
"I've been looking for a job for two years haven't found any," says another.
"I had to file my own personal bankruptcy and had to close my business," says a man.
The video closes by repeating clips of Obama's quote, before an on-screen graphic reading, "No, Mr. President, we are not 'doing fine.'"
Meow! But isn't there a less stupid way to play this game?
Woody Allen once wrote an essay called "Miscellaneous Methods of Civil Disobedience" and one of them was "Standing in front of City Hall and chanting the word "pudding" until one’s demands are met." Woody wasn't wrong by much. But the trick is to wait until your enemy accidentally says "pudding" first.
Wednesday, June 27, 2012
Mission: Failure
By
Bill Maher
Obviously, last month’s jobs report sucked. Only 69,000 new jobs were created – about half what economists expected – and the worst number in a year. The economy has to create about 120,000 jobs every month just to keep up with the increase in population.
That’s just the hard data. But here’s how I know the news was really bad: Republicans on TV could barely contain their smiles. To them, an economy back in the shitter means only one thing: “Woo hoo! President Romney!”
The biggest problem they have with this jobs report is that 69,000 jobs created is 69,000 too many.
Since day one, Republicans have cock-blocked any effort to create jobs. They tried to filibuster the stimulus – one thing that did create a ton of jobs – even though roughly one third of it was tax cuts. They filibustered last summer’s American Jobs Act. They took the government hostage over the debt ceiling, which led to our credit rating being lowered and destroyed any potential for recovery last summer.
This is worse than rooting for failure – it’s ensuring failure. People don’t like it when I bring up the “t word” – treason – but I haven’t heard any convincing arguments suggesting Republicans have done anything but try to thwart efforts to create jobs since Obama became president.
We know where the worst job losses are coming from: the public sector. We could hire back the 300,000 teachers who lost their jobs because of the recession right now.
We can also accelerate private sector jobs by doing the massive infrastructure projects that we need to do sometime anyway – why not now, when borrowing money is free? It doesn’t make any sense not to do that unless you’re rooting for the economy to remain stalled. And no, don’t say the deficit. What really hurts deficits is a stalled economy.
Also, when Democrats would criticize the war in Iraq, they got accused of hurting the morale of the troops. What about hurting the morale of the economy? Talking it down definitely creates negative animal spirits that make the economy sucking a self-fulfilling prophecy. On this front, the worst is yet to come: Romney’s Super PACs are going to spend a billion dollars over the next few months telling us how much the economy sucks.
By the way, as bad as the jobs report was, if you watched the news, it was like Lehman Brothers collapsed again. Yet, 69,000 jobs were created. You know how many on average per month were created under Bush, even after you take out his worst months from the Great Recession? 66,000. You know how many for Bush if you include the recession months? 11,000. And ALL his job creation came from public sector growth. He lost private sector jobs, where Obama has created about 3.8 million.
That’s the truly horrible news – as bad as this job report was, it was much better than the average over the last decade. Though it would be nice if both parties were interested in doing something about it.
Obviously, last month’s jobs report sucked. Only 69,000 new jobs were created – about half what economists expected – and the worst number in a year. The economy has to create about 120,000 jobs every month just to keep up with the increase in population.
That’s just the hard data. But here’s how I know the news was really bad: Republicans on TV could barely contain their smiles. To them, an economy back in the shitter means only one thing: “Woo hoo! President Romney!”
The biggest problem they have with this jobs report is that 69,000 jobs created is 69,000 too many.
Since day one, Republicans have cock-blocked any effort to create jobs. They tried to filibuster the stimulus – one thing that did create a ton of jobs – even though roughly one third of it was tax cuts. They filibustered last summer’s American Jobs Act. They took the government hostage over the debt ceiling, which led to our credit rating being lowered and destroyed any potential for recovery last summer.
This is worse than rooting for failure – it’s ensuring failure. People don’t like it when I bring up the “t word” – treason – but I haven’t heard any convincing arguments suggesting Republicans have done anything but try to thwart efforts to create jobs since Obama became president.
We know where the worst job losses are coming from: the public sector. We could hire back the 300,000 teachers who lost their jobs because of the recession right now.
We can also accelerate private sector jobs by doing the massive infrastructure projects that we need to do sometime anyway – why not now, when borrowing money is free? It doesn’t make any sense not to do that unless you’re rooting for the economy to remain stalled. And no, don’t say the deficit. What really hurts deficits is a stalled economy.
Also, when Democrats would criticize the war in Iraq, they got accused of hurting the morale of the troops. What about hurting the morale of the economy? Talking it down definitely creates negative animal spirits that make the economy sucking a self-fulfilling prophecy. On this front, the worst is yet to come: Romney’s Super PACs are going to spend a billion dollars over the next few months telling us how much the economy sucks.
By the way, as bad as the jobs report was, if you watched the news, it was like Lehman Brothers collapsed again. Yet, 69,000 jobs were created. You know how many on average per month were created under Bush, even after you take out his worst months from the Great Recession? 66,000. You know how many for Bush if you include the recession months? 11,000. And ALL his job creation came from public sector growth. He lost private sector jobs, where Obama has created about 3.8 million.
That’s the truly horrible news – as bad as this job report was, it was much better than the average over the last decade. Though it would be nice if both parties were interested in doing something about it.
Wednesday, June 13, 2012
Supreme Contort
The Supreme Court will soon rule in
the case of Arizona v. United States: Turn That Damn Music Down, We're
Trying to Sleep. It's a hot tamale, because it's about Latinos, who are
an important voting block, and because it looks like the second case
this year -- along with Obamacare -- where the Supreme Court could hand
the President his ass. Here's what's at stake: In 2010, Arizona -- land that was Mexican, after it belonged to Spain, after it belong to the Anasazi -- passed a law designed to make life as unpleasant as possible for anyone whose skin is less pink than gum. The law was pretty openly intended to make illegal aliens self-deport, and take the legal aliens with them, while they're at it, so that Arizona can be what God intended -- a nice sunny place for angry white people to get skin cancer and die.
Another irony? The Spanish also gave us the word "vamoose."
The law encourages cops to check the immigration status of anyone they suspect of being in America illegally. Nothing racist about that. Your suspect could be an illegal Canadian, giving himself away by wearing cross-country skis. The law requires all non-citizens to carry a federal registration card at all times, and produce the document on demand. The law authorizes Arizona cops to arrest any immigrant without a warrant if they have probable cause to believe the immigrant committed a deportable offense.
The law has only two exceptions: Selena Gomez and Justin Bieber. Some Mexicans have a little Canadian in them.
It’s a repulsive law that redefines "probable cause" as "not being white." Latino Americans hate it, for good reason, and the Obama administration filed a lawsuit seeking a temporary injunction against it. A federal judge agreed, the Ninth Circuit affirmed, and now the Supremes get their say. A decision is expected very soon.
It could be bad for Obama if he loses, because it makes him look like a weakling and a fuck-up. It could be good for Obama, if it reminds Latinos that Republicans aren't their friends. We'll see.
-Bill Maher
Monday, November 2, 2009
Is This as Good as It Gets From Obama?
Yeah, I'm disappointed, too. I thought we were sweeping into power; I thought change meant Change. I believed all that talk about another First 100 Days, a la Roosevelt. Well, that didn't happen. The question is, is this as good as it gets from Obama, or is he pacing himself? He may have a four and eight-year plan and they included a first year of just gettin' to know you and not gonna rock the boat too much. Well, Mission Accomplished on that.
It's still to early to lose hope in a guy as smart and talented as Barack Obama. But I would counsel him to remember: If you're going undercover to infiltrate how Washington works, so you become one of them for a while, to gain their confidence, well, it can be just like all those movies where a cop goes deep, deep, DEEP undercover with drug people and -- fuck, he's a drug addict, too!
Logic tells me that really smart guys like Obama and Rahm Emanuel know better what they're doing than I do. They certainly know things I don't know. I think we have the same general goals and beliefs. And this is what they do for a living -- I wouldn't even try it. But I will never stop having this doubt: that maybe if they had really charged in there riding the forceful energy of the historic election, and acted like it was an emergency moment -- which it was -- they could have gotten some big victories right up front, and there really could have been an historic "first hundred days" for this administration and the country. Instead of what happened, which is the Obamas got a dog. It could have worked -- the country had given its endorsement to "...and now for something completely different." There might have been a way to knock the Republicans back on their heels right away, with the argument that "The American people demanded we make these changes, and you are unpatriotic to stand in their way."
We'll never know. Because that moment passed, and now it could follow the pattern of World War I and devolve into boring, static trench warfare where nothing really game changing happens while both sides slowly bleed to death.
That said, I do not forget that if the election had gone the other way, we'd right now have a barter economy and be at war with Honduras.
It's still to early to lose hope in a guy as smart and talented as Barack Obama. But I would counsel him to remember: If you're going undercover to infiltrate how Washington works, so you become one of them for a while, to gain their confidence, well, it can be just like all those movies where a cop goes deep, deep, DEEP undercover with drug people and -- fuck, he's a drug addict, too!
Logic tells me that really smart guys like Obama and Rahm Emanuel know better what they're doing than I do. They certainly know things I don't know. I think we have the same general goals and beliefs. And this is what they do for a living -- I wouldn't even try it. But I will never stop having this doubt: that maybe if they had really charged in there riding the forceful energy of the historic election, and acted like it was an emergency moment -- which it was -- they could have gotten some big victories right up front, and there really could have been an historic "first hundred days" for this administration and the country. Instead of what happened, which is the Obamas got a dog. It could have worked -- the country had given its endorsement to "...and now for something completely different." There might have been a way to knock the Republicans back on their heels right away, with the argument that "The American people demanded we make these changes, and you are unpatriotic to stand in their way."
We'll never know. Because that moment passed, and now it could follow the pattern of World War I and devolve into boring, static trench warfare where nothing really game changing happens while both sides slowly bleed to death.
That said, I do not forget that if the election had gone the other way, we'd right now have a barter economy and be at war with Honduras.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)