Bill Maher Tells On Obama [Archive]

Prairie Fire

21st June 2009, 19:34

He is a Zionist piece of shit.

Word. That is actually my biggest beef with his documentary "Religulous". The stuff in the USA is smart and entertaining, but his stuff against Islam and Judaism...

For Judaism, the only Rabbi he fucks with in the movie is one who is Anti-Zionist, against the practices of the current state of Israel. He is not able to actually address any of the Rabbi's point's,and I'm pretty sure that this is the only representative of Judaism that he messes with in the movie (in stark contrast to the other two major abrahamic faiths).

For Islam, there is a part in Jerusalem, where he is whining and making a fuss that generally Jewish Israeli's(non-muslims in general) are not allowed inside the Dome of the Rock (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dome_of_the_rock).

Yes, that is certainly the biggest injustice in Israel/Palestine today. :rolleyes:

Maher espouses his extremely ethno-centric approach to Islam in the documentary, as well as most of his comedy DVD's.

His comedy DVD's also espouse his extreme anti-womyn stances (especially the one with him as uncle sam on the cover).

His bashing of George W Bush is luke-warm at best, occasionally entertaining, but the problem is that he is making George Bush the issue rather than the United states and it's foreign and domestic policies in general . Maher was a Clinton supporter, so his concerns against the war in Iraq are valid, but also border line hypocritical.

Also, let's not forget his knee-jerk anti-communism (8:00-10:42).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xDd6ZzKnMM

This clip also includes all of Bill's trademark cartoon 2-D stereotypes of Islam, "Clash of civilizations" crap.

Mysoginistic Zionist, bourgeois commentator who I have only watched because I run out of HBO specials to watch.

GPDP

21st June 2009, 20:04

God, that clip made me rage.

Thanks for posting that, PF. It really shows Maher for the bourgeois asshole he really is.

IcarusAngel

22nd June 2009, 01:11

Most people would probably agree though that communism is a failure and redistribution of wealth doesn't work, and most commentators here in the US are far more harsh on Communism when they talk about it. Anti-communism was a bit of a religion for a while in the US so much so that all regimes, even fascist, were seen as better than the communist ones.

On top of that, not all leftist systems are based on the 'redistribution of wealth' anyway so much as they are based on workers equally owning what they create, and preventing tyrannies from coming into existence.

The fact is that Maher is the lone voice on any of the corporate media who provides at least some alternative to the so-called 'status quo.' Maybe some commentators on MSNBC are rival him I guess. I think it's good that they're there as otherwise you'd have solid Republican talking points.

It should also be pointed out that the design of Politically Incorrect was such that there were two or three segments inbetween commercials and there was no time for intelligent discussion. He would bring on complete idiots from both sides to make their case. Obviously, Boots Riely was a rare exception to this rule, but both the left and the right "commentors" were mostly idiots and actors and columnists. On his new format Maher invites much more intelligent guests on to comment at length on issues.

Maher's viewpoints have also changed over the years and have obviously gotten more progressive. He no longer believes that humans are just 'greedy' and believes that greed is a bad thing that should be curbed:

LQmpbgWZhvI

He also has been one of the only ones in the media to point out that BOTH parties are on the right:

DtUAHPYYzeM

Although it's not clear if he has reached democratic-socialism yet I'd say much of his points are nonetheless accurate including on Christianity and Islam, both of which are religions he takes potshots at.

progressive_lefty

22nd June 2009, 02:03

Maher: 1
Obama: 0.5

HWulnfog20c

I have not time for Maher, he supports Likud and Netanyahu.

New Tet

22nd June 2009, 02:39

I have not time for Maher, he supports Likud and Netanyahu.

Since when?

khad

22nd June 2009, 02:42

Comrade Anarchist

22nd June 2009, 03:53

im glad he is because liberals need to stop sucking obamas ass as he slowly turns on each of his promises like single payer health care and etc

IcarusAngel

22nd June 2009, 04:15

Because Stalinism is associated with communism here in the US it generally has negative connotations. Even real communism is seen as Stalinism. This isn't unique to Bill Maher. It's stupid to not watch the media based on whether or not they are communist or anti-communist because nearly everything is produced by people who are 'anti-communist.'

People have a knee-jerk reaction to wealth distribution because of anti-communism. That was my point. Of course, they are blind to the fact that capitalism is wealth distribution. As Marx pointed out capitalism is wealth redistribution going upwards because people do not receive fair wages for the work they put into the product.

Yazman

22nd June 2009, 12:18

Why the hell aren't you in OI?

Obviously in your zealous fervour you've missed the point. What he said IS true. Its unrealistic to expect any mainstream american commentators who are on during prime time slots, or really any well-watched slots, to be supportive of revolutionary left politics.

Like I said, Bill Maher is a lot better than the alternatives. This doesn't mean I'm not critical of him myself, which two of you seemed to think even though I pointed out I have my own problems with him. But it is ridiculous to assert he's "no better" than other political commentators like O'Reilly, Beck, Limbaugh, Jones, etc.

That is unless your politics hinge on binary or dualistic ideas, in which case you're going to immediately hate anybody if they disagree with you on one thing.

Dimentio

22nd June 2009, 12:35

Obama's position is enviable. He is hardly questioned for his policies. Media is more remarking about his private life. He is treated more like the king of Sweden by media than as a politician is treated.

I think media has altered what a presidency means, and strengthened the position of the executive. Take for example movies like Independence Day or Air Force One.

mykittyhasaboner

26th June 2009, 15:14

Bill Maher is a hypocrite; he makes money and gains notoriety for being 'anti-religious' yet he supports the most brutal and murderous religious state around. I find it pitiful that some people here are giving him any inch of credit.

And I hope this doesn't ruin your birthday, but I have to say, watching George Bush talk about Israel the last week has reminded me of a feeling that I hadn't felt in so long I forgot what it felt like: the feeling of pride when your president says what you want your president to say, especially in a matter that chokes you up a bit. I surrender my credentials as Bush exposer - from the very beginning - to no man, but on Israel, I love it that a U.S. president doesn't pretend Arab-Israeli conflict is an even-steven proposition. Lots of ethnic peoples, probably most, have at one time or another lost some territory; nobody's ever completely happy with their borders; people move and get moved, which is why the 20th century saw the movement of tens if not hundreds of millions of refugees in countries around the world. There was no entity of Arabs called "Palestine" before Israel made the desert bloom. If those 600,000 original Palestinian refugees had been handled with maturity by their Arab brethren, who had nothing but space to put them, they could have moved on -- the way Germans, Czechs, Poles, Chinese and everybody else has, including, of course, the Jews.
But I digress. I really wanted to say that, for all those who accuse the likes of myself and the birthday girl of being unpatriotic, or hating America first, the feeling I've had watching Israel defend herself and a US president defend Israel (a country that is held to a standard for "restraint" that no other country ever is asked to meet, but that's another story) just reminds me how wrong that is. I LOVE being on the side of my president, and mouthing "You go, boy" when he gets it right. He just, outside of this, almost never does.
Now can I get a piece of cake?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-maher/i-love-being-on-the-side-_b_25375.html

GPDP

26th June 2009, 15:20

Bill Maher is a hypocrite; he makes money and gains notoriety for being 'anti-religious' yet he supports the most brutal and murderous religious state around. I find it pitiful that some people here are giving him any inch of credit.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-maher/i-love-being-on-the-side-_b_25375.html

Wow. He can choke on a bag of Bush's pretzels for all I care.

I don't give a shit if he's "the best we got" in the states. No leftist worth their salt should excuse such blatant Israeli apologism and dismissal of the plight of the Palestinians. He is chauvinist to the core.

mykittyhasaboner

26th June 2009, 23:42

But back on topic, Bill Maher sucks sometimes, but within the realm of mainstream TV commentators, he's about the best we've got. His criticism of Obama here, while stuck in a lot of capitalist framework, is solid.
The best "we've" got? Hahah.

How can his criticism, if it is stuck in a capitalist framework, be in any way solid? If he were to simply criticize Obama, then he's already missed the point, by not criticizing the whole system in the first place.

So much for solid.

IcarusAngel

27th June 2009, 00:11

Maher has indeed a warped view of Israel. He also has a warped view of the goodness of American foreign policy. He's even worse than some liberals. But, as for entertainment, I don't think he's that bad and I'm not going to apologize for appreciating his brand of humor.

And "Redistributing wealth" sounds like reformist bullshit anyway. Usually, it is a charge against liberals for favoring higher taxes on those who've 'earned' their wealth.

Communism is when people receive according to need. Why then would you need to "re-distribute" said wealth? You wouldn't. In nearly every leftist theory, the people are supposed to own the means of production, and they enjoy the wealth that they create. If they contribute more to the public good, they would, in turn, receive more. Given needs would be taken care of first, there would be no need to redistribute wealth.

Not even a planned economy would be about "redstributing wealth.'

Redistributing the capitalists' wealth is more about making capitalism more 'fair,' and is a different movement than leftism.

New Tet

27th June 2009, 00:14

Bill Maher is a hypocrite; he makes money and gains notoriety for being 'anti-religious' yet he supports the most brutal and murderous religious state around. I find it pitiful that some people here are giving him any inch of credit.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-maher/i-love-being-on-the-side-_b_25375.html

This can hardly be taken as support for the state of Israel. Bill Maher was just telling the truth here: There existed no such thing as a state of Palestine when European Jews were cynically used by the U.S. to invade the region. Also, it is absolutely true that most, if not all, of the Arab nations that surrounded Palestine took a cynical view of the plight of the Palestinians and used it to advance their own objectives in the region instigated, sometimes, by the rulers of Moscow, whose own policy of containment requred it.

I may disagree with Maher's implied conclusion that if those Arab nations had behaved diferently toward the Palestinians, "everybody would have just moved on". But even that erroneous statement cannot justify the conclusion that he is a supporter of "most brutal and murderous religious state around".

If, for example, I say (as I've said elsewhere in this forum) that I believe that Israel should continue to exist, it would be most unfair and incorrect for anyone to read into my statement that I support a Jewish state there.

mykittyhasaboner

27th June 2009, 00:29

This can hardly be taken as support for the state of Israel.
Then you ignore the evidence, which reeks of Zionism. For fucks sake, he said he supported what Bush said about Israel; if that's not a reference to Zionism then I don't know what it is.

Bill Maher was just telling the truth here: There existed no such thing as a state of Palestine when European Jews were cynically used by the U.S. to invade the region. This does not mean the Palestinian people did not exist, and that they weren't slaughtered and uprooted by imperialism; to this day.

Also, it is absolutely true that most, if not all, of the Arab nations that surrounded Palestine took a cynical view of the plight of the Palestinians and used it to advance their own objectives in the region instigated, sometimes, by the rulers of Moscow, whose own policy of containment requred it.Your just pointing fingers now, unnecessarily if I might add.

I may disagree with Maher's implied conclusion that if those Arab nations had behaved diferently toward the Palestinians, "everybody would have just moved on". But even that erroneous statement cannot justify the conclusion that he is a supporter of "most brutal and murderous religious state around".Lol, he "loves being on the side of "his president" when he's defending Israel. Go read the paragraph again you dimwit.

If, for example, I say (as I've said elsewhere in this forum) that I believe that Israel should continue to exist, it would be most unfair and incorrect for anyone to read into my statement that I support a Jewish state there.So you think Israel should continue to exist? That's support for a Jewish state, lol. Your a Zionist.

New Tet

27th June 2009, 01:13

Then you ignore the evidence, which reeks of Zionism. For fucks sake, he said he supported what Bush said about Israel; if that's not a reference to Zionism then I don't know what it is.

This does not mean the Palestinian people did not exist, and that they weren't slaughtered and uprooted by imperialism; to this day.
Your just pointing fingers now, unnecessarily if I might add.
Lol, he "loves being on the side of "his president" when he's defending Israel. Go read the paragraph again you dimwit.

So you think Israel should continue to exist? That's support for a Jewish state, lol. Your a Zionist.

And you're a moron for thinking so.

Guerrilla22

27th June 2009, 08:57

Wow a US politician is more concerned about PR than actual policy making, this is extremely shocking. :rolleyes: Maher can make all the jokes he wants, but he and other celebrities no doubt all ran out and voted for Obama in Novemeber.

heylelshalem

27th June 2009, 10:04

i had my hopes up a little about obama. but now as time has passed the delusional thinking has been all too apparent. there can be no real change under the farce of the two-party system that we have now. It will always be to support the interests of the pigs and the fucking over of the working man.

makesi

27th June 2009, 10:31

A couple of things, if I could:

I haven't had a tv in years so I don't get many opportunities to watch Bill Maher and all the others but I have seen bits and pieces of his show "Politically Incorrect" more than once and seen a little bit of a stand-up routine that he had.

I believe I was watching "Politically Incorrect" in a hotel room a couple of years ago when I saw him pull an Amy Goodman (my own neologism there to describe the deliberate ignoring of a guest so as to restrict their ability to put forth their view, something shameless and pathetic that Goodman did to Norman Finkelstein in a debate with Alan Dershowitz on Democracy Now) on D.L. Hughley so as to give Christopher Hitchens more than ample time to hold forth in his usual manner.

Sure, Maher isn't as bad as Colin Farrell or Carlos Mencia or Dennis Reynolds or David Spade, etc. but, for that matter, I would say John Stewart and Stephen Colbert and Dave Chapelle are better and more consistently left of center than he is (and, just to note, I don't think very much at all of them either). And, although I consider and call myself an atheist, (albeit I try to be more circumspect amongst my co-workers) I don't find Maher's atheist iconoclasm to be all that impressive. Much atheism appears to me to be more often based on a kind of Nietzschean superiority complex and disdain for the duped believers than any kind of measured historical and social view of religion.

Another point I'd like to make, and this is almost certainly more appropriate for a different thread, is that the abrasive or hostile arguing style of some leftists has very little, to nothing, to do with the lack of success of a popular leftist movement in the United States. Hostility and belligerence ebb and flow in all sectors of the political spectrum and, in my opinion at least, can often demonstrate a surging and confident movement that is making strides forward in realizing its goals or at least holding the line, so to speak. The US right is very good at this in my opinion. People tried to lift the Pentagon with positive energy back in the 60's and didn't have much luck. I don't see cordiality and forced politeness as doing anything for the left today. But, like I said, this is a topic that belongs on a thread all to its own, as people may start to bring up notions such as not destroying the master's house with his own tools, etc.

Kwisatz Haderach

27th June 2009, 10:48

I have not time for Maher, he supports Likud and Netanyahu.
But but but... if you don't support the Israeli government all the time, no matter who's in charge or what they do, then you're an evil vicious anti-Semite! :rolleyes:

heylelshalem

27th June 2009, 10:55

But but but... if you don't support the Israeli government all the time, no matter who's in charge or what they do, then you're an evil vicious anti-Semite! :rolleyes:
funny how that works no? :P

CommunityBeliever

28th June 2009, 01:15

It is true taht he is the best we got and people like him tend to bring common people towards our movement so don't just hate on him I mean save your hate for something like Fox News.

He clearly gives the impression that he is an athiest and that he hates religion in all forms although he was born a half-jew so was Marx.

mykittyhasaboner

30th June 2009, 20:14

And you're a moron for thinking so.

Thanks for the compliment. Tell me, why do you believe Israel should continue to exist, yet you somehow don't "support" a Jewish state there? That simply doesn't make sense, and I think that is pretty moronic. Israel is a direct product of western imperialism, it's very existence as a state is unjustified, and frankly, covered in blood. So sorry if I think that supporting the existence of Israel is anything short of Zionist bullshit.

New Tet

30th June 2009, 22:30

Thanks for the compliment. Tell me, why do you believe Israel should continue to exist, yet you somehow don't "support" a Jewish state there?

Maybe to a dogmatist like yourself the position of supporting the existence of Israel sans a Jewish state is irreconcilable.

That simply doesn't make sense, and I think that is pretty moronic. Israel is a direct product of western imperialism, it's very existence as a state is unjustified, and frankly, covered in blood. So sorry if I think that supporting the existence of Israel is anything short of Zionist bullshit.

I agree that the present state of Israel is a criminal government, created and supported by American imperialism and its indiscriminate violence against the Palestinian people. But what would you do with the millions of Israeli Jews who call Israel their home? Would you like to see them expelled out of the region?

You want to talk about covered in blood? Then talk about your pathetic worship of Stalin and Stalinism, your unsupportable belief that the USSR, in spite of its awful crimes and betrayals against the working class, was somehow socialist! Talk about moronic!

khad

30th June 2009, 23:52

Maybe to a dogmatist like yourself the position of supporting the existence of Israel sans a Jewish state is irreconcilable.

I agree that the present state of Israel is a criminal government, created and supported by American imperialism and its indiscriminate violence against the Palestinian people. But what would you do with the millions of Israeli Jews who call Israel their home? Would you like to see them expelled out of the region?

Can we all take a rain check on this argument again, at least until next week?

mykittyhasaboner

30th June 2009, 23:58

Maybe to a dogmatist like yourself the position of supporting the existence of Israel sans a Jewish state is irreconcilable.
Israel has always been a 'Jewish state', so yeah it's pretty irreconcilable.

By the way, I'm liking all the compliments from you; "dogamtist" has a nice ring to it.

I agree that the present state of Israel is a criminal government, created and supported by American imperialism and its indiscriminate violence against the Palestinian people.It doesn't show.

But what would you do with the millions of Israeli Jews who call Israel their home? Would you like to see them expelled out of the region?No, I would like a secular worker's state to be established by all the exploited classes who are living in the region, but that's probably not going to happen anytime soon though.

You want to talk about covered in blood? Then talk about your pathetic worship of Stalin and Stalinism, your unsupportable belief that the USSR, in spite of its awful crimes and betrayals against the working class, was somehow socialist! Talk about moronic!Talk about ad-hominem and off topic. You know your in a corner when you have to rely on calling your opponent a "Stalin worshipper". I don't expect anything better though.

progressive_lefty

2nd July 2009, 03:34

I have not time for Maher, he supports Likud and Netanyahu.Since when?

Have you not seen his interview with Netanyahu? It's on youtube, if you can't find it tell me, and I could probably find it for you.

If you need more evidence, try this (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-maher/i-love-being-on-the-side-_b_25375.html).

I used to find him funny, until I found out what a pathetic individual he is.

Chicano Shamrock

2nd July 2009, 08:52

He's a vocal critic of religion in one of the more hardcore religious countries, and the world needs more of those. I don't always agree with his political views though (because he's a reformist and sometimes an apologist for capitalism).

He's still a fuck of a lot better than most political commentators though.
Yes a Zionist, Pro-Capitalist and Anti-Athiest. Great political commentator...:confused:

When pushing his shitty movie I saw him talking everywhere how he is Agnostic because atheists are just as bad as religious people. I can not stand him at all or any of his horrible politics. I can't get over how pro-Israel he is. Just like Jon Stewart. It seems every Jew I know or have seen on TV is pro-Israel just because they are Jewish.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-9qBY-Bypk

If you don't want to watch the whole videos watch the last minute of video 2 for Bill Mahr's best imitation of Joe McCarthy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xDd6ZzKnMM&feature=related

Boots was on the wrong side of the argument a lot of the time. He could have also had better arguments but it must be hard put on the spot on a show and not having enough time to talk.

EDIT*******
Damn it if only I had read a few more posts before quoting I would have seen the Boots video was already up.

Module

2nd July 2009, 12:01

Someone should tell on Bill Maher for not being any better at all.
Bill Maher wasn't elected on the basis that he would do things that he isn't doing.
Nice video - this isn't to make any comment on Bill Maher as a person or his wider politics, but as has been said elsewhere, most people aren't communists, doesn't mean that most people don't have reasonable expectations or the ability to make a meaningful point. It doesn't matter from what perspective the people of America elected Obama, if he's not backing up his serious rhetoric with substance (who would've thought it?) then those people have a right and genuine reason to be concerned.

Just to swiftly defend CommunityBeliever on this;

Wait, are you implying that there's something wrong with being a Jew? Or something?No, he's presumably saying that he was born into a Jewish family but apparently rejected the religion itself. Let's not come to rash conclusions!

ZeroNowhere

2nd July 2009, 12:04

No, he's presumably saying that he was born into a Jewish family but apparently rejected the religion itself. Let's not come to rash conclusions!Perhaps, but half-Judaism isn't a religion, and people aren't born religious either.
Still, I wasn't concluding that it was anti-Semitic, in all likelihood it was just not communicated perfectly.

progressive_lefty

3rd July 2009, 03:44

Yes a Zionist, Pro-Capitalist and Anti-Athiest. Great political commentator...:confused:

When pushing his shitty movie I saw him talking everywhere how he is Agnostic because atheists are just as bad as religious people. I can not stand him at all or any of his horrible politics. I can't get over how pro-Israel he is. Just like Jon Stewart. It seems every Jew I know or have seen on TV is pro-Israel just because they are Jewish.

Jon Stewart isn't radically pro-Israel. He has taken on the Israeli policy in West Bank and Gaza on 'the Daily Show' before. eg. here (http://blogs.jta.org/telegraph/article/2009/01/15/1002273/israel-losing-on-the-daily-show), here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovugclIWMEk)

I'm not American, but I would probably say without a doubt, that he is the 'best you've got'.

GPDP

3rd July 2009, 03:55

I dunno. I still think Keith Olbermann is the best liberal commentator, mainly because he actually fucking recognizes America's socialist tradition, and doesn't talk down on us like that asshole Maher does. He even spoke rather well of Eugene Debs and his bid for the presidency once.

Klaatu

3rd July 2009, 04:43

Even though I hate George Bush, I have got to agree with Maher, Bush had balls. That is, he got things done.

Obama should take lessons from the "Shrub." He MUST GET THINGS DONE. (Stop trying to please everyone;
screw the opposition. Just get the right things done. We all know what that is folks...)

Klaatu

3rd July 2009, 04:48

"people aren't born religious either."

thank "the gods" for that...

Chicano Shamrock

3rd July 2009, 05:02

Jon Stewart isn't radically pro-Israel. He has taken on the Israeli policy in West Bank and Gaza on 'the Daily Show' before. eg. here (http://blogs.jta.org/telegraph/article/2009/01/15/1002273/israel-losing-on-the-daily-show), here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovugclIWMEk)

I'm not American, but I would probably say without a doubt, that he is the 'best you've got'.
Yes I have seen him on both sides of it if I recall correctly. Are you saying Jon Stewart is the best we've got? I don't even know what that phrase means at this point but I like Jon Stewart. He's funny and smart and doesn't let people give him shit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFQFB5YpDZE

n0thing

5th July 2009, 01:37

Thanks for the compliment. Tell me, why do you believe Israel should continue to exist, yet you somehow don't "support" a Jewish state there? That simply doesn't make sense, and I think that is pretty moronic. Israel is a direct product of western imperialism, it's very existence as a state is unjustified, and frankly, covered in blood. So sorry if I think that supporting the existence of Israel is anything short of Zionist bullshit.
Please point to one middle-eastern state that wasn't forged in the blood of western imperialism.

What exactly do you plan on doing with all the Israelis when you smash the Israeli state? Send them back to Europe? Because if they just stay in the land they're in currently, all you will really be doing is renaming Israel to Palestine. Which will in turn lead to it having all the characteristics of the Israeli state that we see today, just with the name Palestine. And of course they would then be free to re-elect the same old people, who would no doubt continue the persecution of the ethnically native Palestinians in the West Bank, only in the name of Palestine, rather than Israel. What you are in essence proposing is the old one-state Israeli solution, but with a slight aesthetic change.

Haven't really thought this through have you?