Bill Maher editorial about the Republican Base (Read: Base)

[Jschmuck2]

Surprisingly Bill Maher doesn't come across like a massive douche like he is want to do, much of the time. I think these are all valid points that he touches on, no?

http://www.latimes.com/news/op...09apr24,0,927819.story

 

[MikeMike]

but yet just 4 years ago, and 8 years before that, the Dumocraps were bitching about rigged elections, stumbling words, etc... no one seems to ever go "oh, when people lose, they go into personal attack mode"

Both parties sling so much shit at each other it isnt funny...

but i will be lambasted for that on this completely D biased board.

 

[Jschmuck2]

Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE
but yet just 4 years ago, and 8 years before that, the Dumocraps were bitching about rigged elections, stumbling words, etc... no one seems to ever go "oh, when people lose, they go into personal attack mode"

Both parties sling so much shit at each other it isnt funny...

but i will be lambasted for that on this completely D biased board.

Dumocraps? C'mon.

 

[cubby1223]

If there is one thing I've learned the past few years, is to *never* listen to any liberal's assessment of the Republican Party. And Maher is about as liberal as they come. He would never vote for a Republican no matter what they do, so why should he have any influence on the direction of the party?

 

[microbial]

Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE
but yet just 4 years ago, and 8 years before that, the Dumocraps were bitching about rigged elections, stumbling words, etc... no one seems to ever go "oh, when people lose, they go into personal attack mode"

Both parties sling so much shit at each other it isnt funny...

but i will be lambasted for that on this completely D biased board.

I think what Maher was getting at, and rightly so-- is the triviality, and limp-wristedness of those attacks.

The sum total of everything the right has thrown at Obama so-far amounts to "we got nothing"

The teleprompter thing was as pussy as you can possibly get.

Next scandal will be that he doesn't wear a flag lapel pin--which proves he's not a true and loyal torturer.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Originally posted by: microbial

Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE
but yet just 4 years ago, and 8 years before that, the Dumocraps were bitching about rigged elections, stumbling words, etc... no one seems to ever go "oh, when people lose, they go into personal attack mode"

Both parties sling so much shit at each other it isnt funny...

but i will be lambasted for that on this completely D biased board.

I think what Maher was getting at, and rightly so-- is the triviality, and limp-wristedness of those attacks.

The sum total of everything the right has thrown at Obama so-far amounts to "we got nothing"

The teleprompter thing was as pussy as you can possibly get.

Next scandal will be that he doesn't wear a flag lapel pin--which proves he's not a true and loyal torturer.

3.5 trillion dollar budget and doubling of the debt.. THATS what we got..

 

[Jschmuck2]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: microbial

Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE
but yet just 4 years ago, and 8 years before that, the Dumocraps were bitching about rigged elections, stumbling words, etc... no one seems to ever go "oh, when people lose, they go into personal attack mode"

Both parties sling so much shit at each other it isnt funny...

but i will be lambasted for that on this completely D biased board.

I think what Maher was getting at, and rightly so-- is the triviality, and limp-wristedness of those attacks.

The sum total of everything the right has thrown at Obama so-far amounts to "we got nothing"

The teleprompter thing was as pussy as you can possibly get.

Next scandal will be that he doesn't wear a flag lapel pin--which proves he's not a true and loyal torturer.

3.5 trillion dollar budget and doubling of the debt.. THATS what we got..

But it was done in response to the shambles that the elected Republican leadership left for us. Don't you see that?

EDIT: It's a shit sandwich, to be sure and I don't think anyone is thrilled with it but it has to be done.

 

[cubby1223]

Originally posted by: microbial

Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE
but yet just 4 years ago, and 8 years before that, the Dumocraps were bitching about rigged elections, stumbling words, etc... no one seems to ever go "oh, when people lose, they go into personal attack mode"

Both parties sling so much shit at each other it isnt funny...

but i will be lambasted for that on this completely D biased board.

I think what Maher was getting at, and rightly so-- is the triviality, and limp-wristedness of those attacks.

The sum total of everything the right has thrown at Obama so-far amounts to "we got nothing"

The teleprompter thing was as pussy as you can possibly get.

Next scandal will be that he doesn't wear a flag lapel pin--which proves he's not a true and loyal torturer.

It's because the liberal media selectively reports on only those criticisms that they deem as "laughable". It's not much different than the "Oh my Gosh Sarah Palin wears clothes bought from a store!!!! Oh Noes, the Horrors!!!!"

The Republicans have alternative solutions on just about every issue. Their problem is that the liberal media refuses to give them a voice. Their other problem is they lost the election and have virtually no say in anything Washington does.

 

[cubby1223]

When Bill Maher begins with "I still don't know what those "Tea Bag" protests were for" that's as far as anyone needs to read. Maher is a douchebag.


And notice he doesn't call them "Tea Party" protests, he makes a clear reference to the term popular with the far-left douches "teabaggers", clearly not understanding that the protests were not a Republican or conservative only protest.

 

[Jschmuck2]

Originally posted by: cubby1223
When Bill Maher begins with "I still don't know what those "Tea Bag" protests were for" that's as far as anyone needs to read. Maher is a douchebag.

Fair enough. Here's a question for you:

Why then, for the eight years of the Bush administration when deficit spending was at it's peak and we were paying for two wars and the budget surplus was frittered away - where were the protests then? Why were there no mass movements to curb government spending at that time?

You don't think it smacks of hypocrisy and partisan bitterness when these faux grassroots protests are staged less than 100 days after a Democrat is elected?

 

[Jschmuck2]

Originally posted by: cubby1223
When Bill Maher begins with "I still don't know what those "Tea Bag" protests were for" that's as far as anyone needs to read. Maher is a douchebag.


And notice he doesn't call them "Tea Party" protests, he makes a clear reference to the term popular with the far-left douches "teabaggers", clearly not understanding that the protests were not a Republican or conservative only protest.

Sorry friend, that phrase came from Fox News originally:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mwbR9gYc7Q

1:59

We just picked it up and ran with it. Because it is hilarious.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: cubby1223
When Bill Maher begins with "I still don't know what those "Tea Bag" protests were for" that's as far as anyone needs to read. Maher is a douchebag.

Fair enough. Here's a question for you:

Why then, for the eight years of the Bush administration when deficit spending was at it's peak and we were paying for two wars and the budget surplus was frittered away - where were the protests then? Why were there no mass movements to curb government spending at that time?

You don't think it smacks of hypocrisy and partisan bitterness when these faux grassroots protests are staged less than 100 days after a Democrat is elected?

Deficit spending was not at its peak during those years though.

In terms of GDP most of Bush's deficits were below the 60? year average.

And compared to what Obama is proposing Bush's deficits are practically nothing.

 

[microbial]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: microbial

Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE
but yet just 4 years ago, and 8 years before that, the Dumocraps were bitching about rigged elections, stumbling words, etc... no one seems to ever go "oh, when people lose, they go into personal attack mode"

Both parties sling so much shit at each other it isnt funny...

but i will be lambasted for that on this completely D biased board.

I think what Maher was getting at, and rightly so-- is the triviality, and limp-wristedness of those attacks.

The sum total of everything the right has thrown at Obama so-far amounts to "we got nothing"

The teleprompter thing was as pussy as you can possibly get.

Next scandal will be that he doesn't wear a flag lapel pin--which proves he's not a true and loyal torturer.

3.5 trillion dollar budget and doubling of the debt.. THATS what we got..

I was referencing the article in the OP.

Having said that, even if you broaden the scope beyond Maher's comment to the spending program the Obama administration is instigating which is clearly meant as a strategy to jump-start our economy. I'm not happy about it either, but I recognize that it is meant as an emergency economic measure and strategy. Less than 100 days into his administration.

One would have to be a pretty big douche to try and make political alfalfa out of this. Some even want to capitalize on others economic misery by wishing Obama fail. Now that is Douchie, ++

 

[SirStev0]

Originally posted by: cubby1223
When Bill Maher begins with "I still don't know what those "Tea Bag" protests were for" that's as far as anyone needs to read. Maher is a douchebag.


And notice he doesn't call them "Tea Party" protests, he makes a clear reference to the term popular with the far-left douches "teabaggers", clearly not understanding that the protests were not a Republican or conservative only protest.

I still don't know what the fuck they were about either. When I hear "Tea Party" I think uppity rich ass holes whining about taxes with krumpets.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: cubby1223
When Bill Maher begins with "I still don't know what those "Tea Bag" protests were for" that's as far as anyone needs to read. Maher is a douchebag.

Fair enough. Here's a question for you:

Why then, for the eight years of the Bush administration when deficit spending was at it's peak and we were paying for two wars and the budget surplus was frittered away - where were the protests then? Why were there no mass movements to curb government spending at that time?

You don't think it smacks of hypocrisy and partisan bitterness when these faux grassroots protests are staged less than 100 days after a Democrat is elected?

No.

First off, there was no "surplus" despite the repeated claims there was. Accounting tricks allow for a "surplus" but if any real person or company tried to do the same, they'd be screwed.

Second, deficit spending was increasing to be sure, but for you or other libs to claim there was no protest is dishonest. There were plenty of use protesting the increases in gov't spending. Not in the form of tea parties though.

Third, people were promised "change" and they've gotten nothing but even WORSE deficit spending since BHO was elected. The bailouts and supposed "stimulus" triggered people into action. Yes, some might be partisan, but there are plenty of people who voted for BHO but took part in the tea parties and dislike the massive spending he and the D controlled Congress are ramming through.

 

[cubby1223]

Originally posted by: SirStev0

Originally posted by: cubby1223
When Bill Maher begins with "I still don't know what those "Tea Bag" protests were for" that's as far as anyone needs to read. Maher is a douchebag.


And notice he doesn't call them "Tea Party" protests, he makes a clear reference to the term popular with the far-left douches "teabaggers", clearly not understanding that the protests were not a Republican or conservative only protest.

I still don't know what the fuck they were about either. When I hear "Tea Party" I think uppity rich ass holes whining about taxes with krumpets.

Then you are nothing more than a partisan hack, because the majority of the people out protesting was lower to middle class.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: microbial

Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE
but yet just 4 years ago, and 8 years before that, the Dumocraps were bitching about rigged elections, stumbling words, etc... no one seems to ever go "oh, when people lose, they go into personal attack mode"

Both parties sling so much shit at each other it isnt funny...

but i will be lambasted for that on this completely D biased board.

I think what Maher was getting at, and rightly so-- is the triviality, and limp-wristedness of those attacks.

The sum total of everything the right has thrown at Obama so-far amounts to "we got nothing"

The teleprompter thing was as pussy as you can possibly get.

Next scandal will be that he doesn't wear a flag lapel pin--which proves he's not a true and loyal torturer.

3.5 trillion dollar budget and doubling of the debt.. THATS what we got..

But it was done in response to the shambles that the elected Republican leadership left for us. Don't you see that?

EDIT: It's a shit sandwich, to be sure and I don't think anyone is thrilled with it but it has to be done.

That's a bogus accusation on so many levels.

1. You can not blame the recession solely on Republican leadership. There is more than enough blame to go around.

2. You can not claim that Obama's spending is domestic, while Bush's was on external wars. Domestic spending under Bush grew drastically. Also Obama's war spending is going to be nearly the same as Bush's has been in the last few years.

 

[cubby1223]

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: cubby1223
When Bill Maher begins with "I still don't know what those "Tea Bag" protests were for" that's as far as anyone needs to read. Maher is a douchebag.

Fair enough. Here's a question for you:

Why then, for the eight years of the Bush administration when deficit spending was at it's peak and we were paying for two wars and the budget surplus was frittered away - where were the protests then? Why were there no mass movements to curb government spending at that time?

You don't think it smacks of hypocrisy and partisan bitterness when these faux grassroots protests are staged less than 100 days after a Democrat is elected?

Stop watching the Daily Show for updates on conservatives.

 

[MikeMike]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: microbial

Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE
but yet just 4 years ago, and 8 years before that, the Dumocraps were bitching about rigged elections, stumbling words, etc... no one seems to ever go "oh, when people lose, they go into personal attack mode"

Both parties sling so much shit at each other it isnt funny...

but i will be lambasted for that on this completely D biased board.

I think what Maher was getting at, and rightly so-- is the triviality, and limp-wristedness of those attacks.

The sum total of everything the right has thrown at Obama so-far amounts to "we got nothing"

The teleprompter thing was as pussy as you can possibly get.

Next scandal will be that he doesn't wear a flag lapel pin--which proves he's not a true and loyal torturer.

3.5 trillion dollar budget and doubling of the debt.. THATS what we got..

But it was done in response to the shambles that the elected Republican leadership left for us. Don't you see that?

EDIT: It's a shit sandwich, to be sure and I don't think anyone is thrilled with it but it has to be done.

That's a bogus accusation on so many levels.

1. You can not blame the recession solely on Republican leadership. There is more than enough blame to go around.

2. You can not claim that Obama's spending is domestic, while Bush's was on external wars. Domestic spending under Bush grew drastically. Also Obama's war spending is going to be nearly the same as Bush's has been in the last few years.

Yes they can, why? because they dont want to blame Clinton...

 

[Jschmuck2]

Originally posted by: cubby1223

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: cubby1223
When Bill Maher begins with "I still don't know what those "Tea Bag" protests were for" that's as far as anyone needs to read. Maher is a douchebag.

Fair enough. Here's a question for you:

Why then, for the eight years of the Bush administration when deficit spending was at it's peak and we were paying for two wars and the budget surplus was frittered away - where were the protests then? Why were there no mass movements to curb government spending at that time?

You don't think it smacks of hypocrisy and partisan bitterness when these faux grassroots protests are staged less than 100 days after a Democrat is elected?

Stop watching the Daily Show for updates on conservatives.

You didn't answer the question.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: cubby1223
When Bill Maher begins with "I still don't know what those "Tea Bag" protests were for" that's as far as anyone needs to read. Maher is a douchebag.

Fair enough. Here's a question for you:

Why then, for the eight years of the Bush administration when deficit spending was at it's peak and we were paying for two wars and the budget surplus was frittered away - where were the protests then? Why were there no mass movements to curb government spending at that time?

You don't think it smacks of hypocrisy and partisan bitterness when these faux grassroots protests are staged less than 100 days after a Democrat is elected?

Deficit spending was not at its peak during those years though.

In terms of GDP most of Bush's deficits were below the 60? year average.

And compared to what Obama is proposing Bush's deficits are practically nothing.

Medicare Part D ALONE added $8 TRILLION in unfunded liabilities, ie: future debt. Not a tea party in sight! Obama adds $1 trillion?! Tea parties everywhere!

Remember though guys, this wasn't a Republican party thing. Nosiree!

 

[SirStev0]

Originally posted by: cubby1223

Originally posted by: SirStev0

Originally posted by: cubby1223
When Bill Maher begins with "I still don't know what those "Tea Bag" protests were for" that's as far as anyone needs to read. Maher is a douchebag.


And notice he doesn't call them "Tea Party" protests, he makes a clear reference to the term popular with the far-left douches "teabaggers", clearly not understanding that the protests were not a Republican or conservative only protest.

I still don't know what the fuck they were about either. When I hear "Tea Party" I think uppity rich ass holes whining about taxes with krumpets.

Then you are nothing more than a partisan hack, because the majority of the people out protesting was lower to middle class.

interestingly, I actually don't support the bailout. Nor do I support a lot of things that Obama is accused of doing. The fact is, however, he has yet to do many of the things he is already accused of doing.

All I have seen so far of these "tea parties" are whining and misplaced racism. People's taxes didn't go up, but form the sounds of it Obama not only took every dime they earned but also raped their daughter then forced her to have an abortion.

These "tea parties" didn't accomplish anything but make a bunch of people look foolish and give Jon Stewart a week of material.
They were a joke because they came off as paranoid sore losers. I have yet to hear ANY OTHER PLAN from ANY POLITICIANS or protesters to fix the mess we are in.

Their whole position is that "Obama is wrong and everything Democrats do is wrong". It all the same tired lines, like if 500 people carried around Fear No Evil posts.

 

[newnameman]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: cubby1223
When Bill Maher begins with "I still don't know what those "Tea Bag" protests were for" that's as far as anyone needs to read. Maher is a douchebag.

Fair enough. Here's a question for you:

Why then, for the eight years of the Bush administration when deficit spending was at it's peak and we were paying for two wars and the budget surplus was frittered away - where were the protests then? Why were there no mass movements to curb government spending at that time?

You don't think it smacks of hypocrisy and partisan bitterness when these faux grassroots protests are staged less than 100 days after a Democrat is elected?

Deficit spending was not at its peak during those years though.

In terms of GDP most of Bush's deficits were below the 60? year average.

And compared to what Obama is proposing Bush's deficits are practically nothing.

Medicare Part D ALONE added $8 TRILLION in unfunded liabilities, ie: future debt. Not a tea party in sight! Obama adds $1 trillion?! Tea parties everywhere!

Remember though guys, this wasn't a Republican party thing. Nosiree!

Could you be any more dishonest in that comparison? You're comparing one year of Obama spending to the cost of Medicare Part D over 75 years.

 

[MotF Bane]

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: cubby1223
When Bill Maher begins with "I still don't know what those "Tea Bag" protests were for" that's as far as anyone needs to read. Maher is a douchebag.


And notice he doesn't call them "Tea Party" protests, he makes a clear reference to the term popular with the far-left douches "teabaggers", clearly not understanding that the protests were not a Republican or conservative only protest.

Sorry friend, that phrase came from Fox News originally:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mwbR9gYc7Q

1:59

We just picked it up and ran with it. Because it is hilarious.

Wait, so you're saying the Tea Party protests are a Republican thing, yet the Republican news channel came up with the term "teabaggers"? Does not compute.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: cubby1223
When Bill Maher begins with "I still don't know what those "Tea Bag" protests were for" that's as far as anyone needs to read. Maher is a douchebag.

Fair enough. Here's a question for you:

Why then, for the eight years of the Bush administration when deficit spending was at it's peak and we were paying for two wars and the budget surplus was frittered away - where were the protests then? Why were there no mass movements to curb government spending at that time?

You don't think it smacks of hypocrisy and partisan bitterness when these faux grassroots protests are staged less than 100 days after a Democrat is elected?

Deficit spending was not at its peak during those years though.

In terms of GDP most of Bush's deficits were below the 60? year average.

And compared to what Obama is proposing Bush's deficits are practically nothing.

Medicare Part D ALONE added $8 TRILLION in unfunded liabilities, ie: future debt. Not a tea party in sight! Obama adds $1 trillion?! Tea parties everywhere!

Remember though guys, this wasn't a Republican party thing. Nosiree!

There were a lot of Republicans who were unhappy with Medicare Part D.