PDA

View Full Version : Bill Maher: Conservatives 'made' McVeigh do it



PoliCon
03-23-2009, 07:38 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSlfu4cT2x4


Glenn Beck - Bill Maher: Conservatives 'made' McVeigh do it
[Insider] Audio Available:

March 23, 2009 - 11:53 ET

Related Video

GLENN: So don't think about me when you listen to this audio. Think about what this means to you. Here's Bill Maher.

MAHER: Listening to people like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck these days, I cannot figure out whether these right-wingers are more dangerous when they're in power or when they're out of power because when they're out of power, you know, their paranoia goes off the charts. This Glenn Beck guy, I wouldn't even give him the time of day except he's a big star now on Fox and a lot of people believe, and he's talking about FEMA concentration camps.

GLENN: Okay, I just want you to know this isn't accurate at all. I did mention the Internet conspiracy theory of FEMA concentration camps, particularly in relation to a segment in which we are going to debunk Internet conspiracy theories. I said on the air the day -- I snapped. Did anybody hear it? I snapped: "Can we just set the record straight on this. Stop looking at things that are on the Internet." But Bill Maher, isn't he also talking about FEMA concentration camps? Maybe he's just paranoid as well. I'm not really sure. Let's listen in.

MAHER: He says we are headed toward socialism, totalitarianism beyond your wildest imagination but apparently not beyond his wildest.

GLENN: Okay. Apparently I'm incredibly paranoid about being headed toward socialism. I wish you could see the picture of who was on the panel because on the panel, and I kid you not, is a U.S. Senator who is an avowed socialist. Bernie Sanders from Vermont, a socialist, was sitting there on the panel. You know, I don't mean socialist like "I think his policies lean social." I mean he's a card-carrying socialist! And just to show you the solid balance of the panel, you have Bill Maher on the panel, you have Keith Olbermann, you have a guy from the New York Times, somebody described as an actress, an activist sitting next to him, and Bernie Sanders, the avowed socialist. So I believe you could make the argument that the admitted socialist is actually the fifth most liberal on the panel out of five, but I'm not really sure. And saying that I am paranoid for warning that we might go down the road to totalitarianism while sitting with Keith Olbermann is particularly funny and here's why. Because Keith Olbermann is a guy who didn't warn that we might be on the road to something. He's been saying that we were already there for years, and nobody in the media even lifted an eyebrow.

CONTINUED (http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/23085/)

Lanie
03-23-2009, 11:01 PM
Conservatives are more dangerous when they are in power, but they somehow made McVeigh do this horrible stuff while Clinton was in office. Dumbass. I won't even give the second half of what I'm thinking nine times out of ten about him or most will be offended. lol.

FlaGator
03-24-2009, 05:31 AM
The problem is that Bill Maher appears to be insane and that makes all his comments questionable. As proof of this I offer his saying that conservatives are paranoid while at the same time stating that they are just as dangerous out of power as when in power.


MAHER: Listening to people like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck these days, I cannot figure out whether these right-wingers are more dangerous when they're in power or when they're out of power because when they're out of power, you know, their paranoia goes off the charts.

That statement right there is self-confirming of the parnoid nature of Mr. Maher.

noonwitch
03-24-2009, 07:39 AM
Bill Maher is a comedian and not a serious newsman. He's a blowhard, who is sometimes very funny and sometimes just an idiot who smokes too much dope.

On the other hand, Glenn Beck is treated as a serious newsperson, even though he's really just a drama queen who gets paid a lot of money to act out on a network that wants to be considered a legitimate news outlet. By him even responding to this, he lowers himself to the same level as the person he is criticizing, making himself that less legitimate.

hazlnut
03-24-2009, 01:57 PM
Bill Maher is a comedian and not a serious newsman. He's a blowhard, who is sometimes very funny and sometimes just an idiot who smokes too much dope.

On the other hand, Glenn Beck is treated as a serious newsperson, even though he's really just a drama queen who gets paid a lot of money to act out on a network that wants to be considered a legitimate news outlet. By him even responding to this, he lowers himself to the same level as the person he is criticizing, making himself that less legitimate.

There's a song by Meatloaf called: You took the words right out of my mouth...

Well said.

I watch Fox as a way to check my thinking by listening to as many perspectives as possible. I have a hard time understanding where Beck is coming from (to put it mildly). My general concern with the Fox news approach post-election, is that some people may lack the critical thinking skills to differentiate between news content and editorial content. (and extreme hypotheticals)

PoliCon
03-24-2009, 02:47 PM
Bill Maher is a comedian and not a serious newsman. He's a blowhard, who is sometimes very funny and sometimes just an idiot who smokes too much dope.

On the other hand, Glenn Beck is treated as a serious newsperson, even though he's really just a drama queen who gets paid a lot of money to act out on a network that wants to be considered a legitimate news outlet. By him even responding to this, he lowers himself to the same level as the person he is criticizing, making himself that less legitimate.
Spoken like someone who get their opinions on beck from the web and other "news" people. Beck makes it clear that he is a COMMENTATOR. Says as much all the time. He does a DAMN GOOD JOB asking the hard questions of people - doing the journalists job for them since they are too busy being commentators - but he never claims to be anything but a commentator himself.

This is one the issues I always have with people who attack Fox news. They all fall into the exact same trap. No one who criticizes FoxNews as biased - these people can almost never name the actual NEWS anchors on the network. :rolleyes:

movie buff
03-24-2009, 02:56 PM
The problem is that Bill Maher appears to be insane and that makes all his comments questionable. As proof of this I offer his saying that conservatives are paranoid while at the same time stating that they are just as dangerous out of power as when in power.



That statement right there is self-confirming of the parnoid nature of Mr. Maher.

I wouldn't call Bill Maher insane. A deeply bigoted, cynical, self-absorbed prick, but not insane.

FlaGator
03-24-2009, 03:00 PM
I wouldn't call Bill Maher insane. A deeply bigoted, cynical, self-absorbed prick, but not insane.

I think that we can agree that he is paranoid.

hazlnut
03-24-2009, 04:24 PM
Spoken like someone who get their opinions on beck from the web and other "news" people.

This is one the issues I always have with people who attack Fox news. They all fall into the exact same trap. No one who criticizes FoxNews as biased - these people can almost never name the actual NEWS anchors on the network. :rolleyes:

My opinions and observations are based on a strong background in journalism, media, and the process of network and cable television production. I was working at Fox (not the FNC division) during the early days of the news channel. There was a lot of discussion about the "Fair and Balanced" marketing strategy. The notion was that with the country becoming more divided during the Clinton era, there existed a large market share for a network catering specifically to a conservative viewpoint-- but they didn't want to come out of the gate as a purely editorial outlet and turn off moderates and independents. So, the most ironic packaging of a tv news outlet was invented. "Fair and Balanced." Sure, they report the news 24/7--it's the creative way they weave news content together with editorial--it's a very non-traditional, some would argue, non-journalistic approach. From the graphics, to the news ticker, music, regular guests, staging etc.--everything is designed to cater to an audience from center to far-right.

Their occasional denial of this reminds me of the way Vince McMahon would defend the WWF and say it wasn't staged. There were fans and still are people who believe that.

I watch FNC and accept it for what it is. However, I don't feel I'm informed only reading one source or listening to one opinion.

I've observed over the years, the on-air talent at Fox state their opinion as hard fact more boldly and sometimes brazenly than any other news source. I've often wondered if the "Fair and Balanced" packaging is what empowers them to do so.

I thought Bret Baier was an interesting replacement for Brit Hume--by interesting, I mean, I'm not sure what to make of it. Baier's much more traditional than the other anchors--a 'just the facts' approach. O'Reilly is killing at 8:00, which is good because IMO it's a solid news-based opinion show.

The old school tradition with editorial used to be that an anchor was allowed to give his opinion on a particular news story at the end of the broadcast. He'd usually turn to another camera and tell the viewers that what follows is his own opinion. There's a guy on channel 5 in L.A. that still does that. Very old school.

Constitutionally Speaking
03-24-2009, 07:46 PM
I've observed over the years, the on-air talent at Fox state their opinion as hard fact more boldly and sometimes brazenly than any other news source. I've often wondered if the "Fair and Balanced" packaging is what empowers them to do so.


This is opposed to sneaking opinion in supposed factual pieces, sublty NOT covering issues that reflect well on conservatives and overcovering issues that can be shaped (and are) to put conservatives in a bad light.

With Fox you KNOW when you are getting opinion and when you are getting news. The others??? Not so much.


I can take a Fox viewer and he can at least give me the liberal arguments on issues. You take the average mainstream news viewer and they can spout the liberal talking points inside and out, but have no clue as to what the conservative arguments even are.

PoliCon
03-24-2009, 08:19 PM
I watch FNC and accept it for what it is. However, I don't feel I'm informed only reading one source or listening to one opinion.
Really? Because Fox is the only News on TV that gives BOTH sides - both opinions air. Everyone else gives only the leftist take - and as we discovered in the last election cycle - Fox had the most balanced coverage of the election. They were the only Network not worshiping the crotch of Barry O.

PoliCon
03-24-2009, 08:22 PM
I thought Bret Baier was an interesting replacement for Brit Hume--by interesting, I mean, I'm not sure what to make of it. Baier's much more traditional than the other anchors--a 'just the facts' approach.
Are you implying that Chris Wallace and Brit Humme are not just the facts people??? O'Reilly is killing at 8:00, which is good because IMO it's a solid news-based opinion show. O'Reilly - love him or hate him does a pretty good job of digging at the issues.


The old school tradition with editorial used to be that an anchor was allowed to give his opinion on a particular news story at the end of the broadcast. He'd usually turn to another camera and tell the viewers that what follows is his own opinion. There's a guy on channel 5 in L.A. that still does that. Very old school. AH so here we have it. You - like most elitists in the field think that middle America is too stupid to be able to tell the difference between facts and opinions. :rolleyes:

hazlnut
03-24-2009, 11:43 PM
Because Fox is the only News on TV that gives BOTH sides - both opinions air. O.

If honestly believe that... Then I have some swamp land in Florida I like to sell ya...

Their analysis and overall coverage is so slanted... If you don't see that, then you're not alone.

Its not about being elitist. Its about developing critical thinking ability and sound objectivity.

PoliCon
03-25-2009, 12:28 AM
If honestly believe that... Then I have some swamp land in Florida I like to sell ya...

Their analysis and overall coverage is so slanted... If you don't see that, then you're not alone.

Its not about being elitist. Its about developing critical thinking ability and sound objectivity.

The commentart there by and large slants right - which given that ALL of the rest of teh news outlets slant HARD left - some like MSNBC - don't slant just slant - they make a hard left turn - so the fact that ONE network out of how many? ONE network slants right in the COMMENTARY - big deal. They are STILL the only ones to give both sides equal coverage - as the last election CLEARLY demonstrates - and the only ones to allow both conservatives and liberals on air to state their case. Thinking objectively is recognizing the bias that Fox exists to combat. And when it comes to presenting the NEWS - when they present the news - far better than anyone else - only CNN comes close - no other network is as fair or balanced.

Only an elitist would would imply that anyone who does not agree with them is incapable of objective thinking.

fucking rinos.

noonwitch
03-25-2009, 07:57 AM
Spoken like someone who get their opinions on beck from the web and other "news" people. Beck makes it clear that he is a COMMENTATOR. Says as much all the time. He does a DAMN GOOD JOB asking the hard questions of people - doing the journalists job for them since they are too busy being commentators - but he never claims to be anything but a commentator himself.

This is one the issues I always have with people who attack Fox news. They all fall into the exact same trap. No one who criticizes FoxNews as biased - these people can almost never name the actual NEWS anchors on the network. :rolleyes:


I can name one-Shepherd Smith. I don't count the Fox and Friends people as anchors, and I'm not around most of the rest of the day to tune in.

Lars1701a
03-25-2009, 08:06 AM
I wish a claymore or frag grenade would have went off in between them :( two assholes for the price of one :D

PoliCon
03-25-2009, 08:57 AM
I can name one-Shepherd Smith. I don't count the Fox and Friends people as anchors, and I'm not around most of the rest of the day to tune in.Shep is one. And no the hosts of Fox & friends are not news anchors. They do have news anchors on there though.

Odysseus
03-25-2009, 09:39 AM
Bill Maher is a comedian and not a serious newsman. He's a blowhard, who is sometimes very funny and sometimes just an idiot who smokes too much dope.

On the other hand, Glenn Beck is treated as a serious newsperson, even though he's really just a drama queen who gets paid a lot of money to act out on a network that wants to be considered a legitimate news outlet. By him even responding to this, he lowers himself to the same level as the person he is criticizing, making himself that less legitimate.

Maher is allegedly a comedian, but his show deals with political issues and the format is very similar to other roundtable political shows. You can't simply say that what he is doing is entertainment without saying the same thing about Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity.

BTW, back when he was hosting Politically Incorrect, he had Oliver North on as a guest and Al Franken was doing a running gag with Arianna Huffington called "strange bedfellows," which involved the two of them debating from a double bed on the set (this was back when Huffington was considered a conservative, or identified herself as one). Franken used the opportunity to make some vicious comments about North, and Maher apologized to North on the air within minutes of Franken's diatribe. Maher seemed genuinely angry at Franken for treating a guest on the show that way, and I thought that he had demonstrated a consideration and civility that transcended partisanship. Unfortunately, if that situation were repeated today, I don't think that Maher would react the way that he did then. His transformation into a partisan hack has been going on for years and appears to be complete.

PoliCon
03-25-2009, 09:41 AM
Maher is allegedly a comedian, but his show deals with political issues and the format is very similar to other roundtable political shows. You can't simply say that what he is doing is entertainment without saying the same thing about Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity.

BTW, back when he was hosting Politically Incorrect, he had Oliver North on as a guest and Al Franken was doing a running gag with Arianna Huffington called "strange bedfellows," which involved the two of them debating from a double bed on the set (this was back when Huffington was considered a conservative, or identified herself as one). Franken used the opportunity to make some vicious comments about North, and Maher apologized to North on the air within minutes of Franken's diatribe. Maher seemed genuinely angry at Franken for treating a guest on the show that way, and I thought that he had demonstrated a consideration and civility that transcended partisanship. Unfortunately, if that situation were repeated today, I don't think that Maher would react the way that he did then. His transformation into a partisan hack has been going on for years and appears to be complete.

i remember that. I used to like his show on ABC.

Gingersnap
03-25-2009, 10:22 AM
I wouldn't call Bill Maher insane. A deeply bigoted, cynical, self-absorbed prick, but not insane.

Stupid, too. McVeigh was a lot of things but he wasn't a talk radio/talk TV junkie. He bombed the Federal building to retaliate against the U.S. government for its actions at Ruby Ridge and Waco. :rolleyes:

VWkid06
03-25-2009, 11:30 AM
in the fox news argument, i don't think they are slanted, some of their commentators are, as pointed out.

that said, even if they did point right, so what? one channel vs abc, cbs, nbc/msnbc, and cnn? i think in the long run they're doing ok...

Molon Labe
03-25-2009, 11:41 AM
Bill Maher is a comedian and not a serious newsman. He's a blowhard, who is sometimes very funny and sometimes just an idiot who smokes too much dope.

On the other hand, Glenn Beck is treated as a serious newsperson, even though he's really just a drama queen who gets paid a lot of money to act out on a network that wants to be considered a legitimate news outlet. By him even responding to this, he lowers himself to the same level as the person he is criticizing, making himself that less legitimate.

Yep. Maher hardly gets the economic concepts I've seen discussed on his show.

I tend to like what Beck says of late, but I too have trouble getting past his 'drama'. I prefer to listen to him rather than watch his show. I think he suffers from Hystrionic personality disorder. :p

Odysseus
03-25-2009, 06:49 PM
i remember that. I used to like his show on ABC.
I did, too, although I liked it better when it was on the east coast. The pundits and politicians in Washington would come up to NYC for an afternoon show and catch the shuttle back, but it was too much of a hassle for them to go to LA, so the guest list lost a lot of conservative politicians and pundits when they made the switch. I remember noticing that the conservative/liberal ratio slipped from 2/2 to 1/3 after the move. If I want to see a gang of liberals beat up on a conservative, I'll watch The View. Another thing that killed Maher was his comment after 9/11 about how the terrorists were braver than we were. I understood the point that he was trying to make, but he phrased it really badly and got stung by the criticism.

Stupid, too. McVeigh was a lot of things but he wasn't a talk radio/talk TV junkie. He bombed the Federal building to retaliate against the U.S. government for its actions at Ruby Ridge and Waco. :rolleyes:
And, if we want to make the case the talk radio pushed McVeigh, then we can make a far more convincing case that Al Gore was the inspiration for the Unabomber and every eco-terrorist who's ever spray-painted a Hummer.

hazlnut
03-25-2009, 09:14 PM
Only an elitist would would imply that anyone who does not agree with them is incapable of objective thinking.

fucking rinos.

Only a narrow minded individual would label someone an elitist for taking the time to consider multiple points of view when forming an opinion. Or should I just memorize and regurgitate talking points...

It was Dan Quayle who named the liberal "cultural elite," whose avowed purpose is to undermine all that is admirable and virtuous in America, or as Quayle termed it, "the rest of us."

When asked to define the evildoers, Quayle responded, "They know who they are."

PoliCon
03-25-2009, 09:16 PM
Only a narrow minded individual would label someone an elitist for taking the time to consider multiple points of view when forming an opinion. Or should I just memorize and regurgitate talking points...

It was Dan Quayle who named the liberal "cultural elite," whose avowed purpose is to undermine all that is admirable and virtuous in America, or as Quayle termed it, "the rest of us."

When asked to define the evildoers, Quayle responded, "They know who they are."Who said someone was an elitist for considering multiple points of view? I'm pointing out that you are an elitist for the way that you look down your nose at people who do not buy into global warming alarmism or who watch fox news.

JDiddyGalt
03-25-2009, 11:13 PM
Maher is NEVER funny!

JDiddyGalt
03-25-2009, 11:16 PM
What! You're not regurgitating? Suddenly, I feel kind of queazy.

Odysseus
03-26-2009, 04:04 PM
Maher is NEVER funny!

He had one line that doubled me over laughing. It was after Rudy Giuliani had cleaned up Times' Square by giving access to Disney and driving out the worst of the seedy sex shops. Maher commented that the remaining adult businesses were trying to adapt: "I saw a hooker wearing Mickey Mouse ears today. They used to charge extra for that."