Bill Maher: 'enemy combatant'

[zsdersw]

This is one I can totally agree with from Bill:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nj85PgMtZcM

"So, I'm not saying we should let our guard down. But, our ever-expanding Homeland Security Department has gotten $790 billion since 9/11.

Bin Laden's plan wasn't to kill us all. It was to scare us into overreacting and destroying ourselves. Because if there's one thing those terrorists proved they can blow up, it's our balance sheet."

 

[thraashman]

This is one I can totally agree with from Bill:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nj85PgMtZcM

"So, I'm not saying we should let our guard down. But, our ever-expanding Homeland Security Department has gotten $790 billion since 9/11.

Bin Laden's plan wasn't to kill us all. It was to scare us into overreacting and destroying ourselves. Because if there's one thing those terrorists proved they can blow up, it's our balance sheet."

I watch Real Time every week. It's one of the few shows that's willing to have a diverse panel every week discuss the issues and isn't afraid to be profane about it. Bill himself likes to go back and forth between moments of total brilliance and moments of complete jackassery. It's kinda fun seeing which he'll do next.

 

[Druidx]

Blow up our blance sheet.

LMAO

 

[Jaskalas]

This is one I can totally agree with from Bill:

My face will never be the same after cracking up so bad watching him deliver that. Thanks.

Yes, I agree wholeheartedly with him on this subject.

 

[zsdersw]

Muhammad Kablooey.. 😀

 

[Doppel]

He is so right. Much policy in this country is guided by emotion and willingly-embraced shock. Terrorism works very, very well on Americans because any time anything happens the country goes full retard.

I am surprised fireworks haven't been banned yet.

Mayer is saying what I noticed: most of these terrorists are fucking stupid and that is that.

 

[KB]

I would agree with him. We have small town sheriffs with Armored Vehicles thanks to 9/11. Armored vehicles will not prevent terrorism, but politicians will do anything to make it look like they are doing something.

 

[Jaskalas]

I would agree with him. We have small town sheriffs with Armored Vehicles thanks to 9/11. Armored vehicles will not prevent terrorism, but politicians will do anything to make it look like they are doing something.

Armored Vehicle makers are happy.

 

[glenn1]

This is one I can totally agree with from Bill:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nj85PgMtZcM

"So, I'm not saying we should let our guard down. But, our ever-expanding Homeland Security Department has gotten $790 billion since 9/11.

Bin Laden's plan wasn't to kill us all. It was to scare us into overreacting and destroying ourselves. Because if there's one thing those terrorists proved they can blow up, it's our balance sheet."

I agree with him because I don't think NYC is worth spending that much money to defend. The WTC and a couple thousand New Yorkers can be had for far cheaper than $790b.

 

[Pr0d1gy]

He is so right. Much policy in this country is guided by emotion and willingly-embraced shock.

It's called the Hegelian Dialectic. This is a very relevant video for everyone:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYhmATD8hLk

Here is another good one that delves more into the thesis, antithesis, synthesis method of Hegelian leadership:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IxnNWZu-Ak

 

[Matt1970]

I watch Real Time every week. It's one of the few shows that's willing to have a diverse panel every week discuss the issues and isn't afraid to be profane about it. Bill himself likes to go back and forth between moments of total brilliance and moments of complete jackassery. It's kinda fun seeing which he'll do next.

That diverse panel is usually one conservative and 4 liberals. Atleast he does have the one conservative.

 

[Jaskalas]

That diverse panel is usually one conservative and 4 liberals. Atleast he does have the one conservative.

Oh no no no. Their view is 3 Mod, 1 Lib and 1 Con.

 

[Juddog]

Oh no no no. Their view is 3 Mod, 1 Lib and 1 Con.

To Matt1970, everybody not extremely right wing is a "one o dem libruls".

 

[fskimospy]

I agree with him because I don't think NYC is worth spending that much money to defend. The WTC and a couple thousand New Yorkers can be had for far cheaper than $790b.

You realize that homeland security defends the whole country, right?

 

[Sonikku]

Nothing like good ol' Obama racking up huge deficits and expanding the role of government like handing out a $790 billion tax payer gift to some nonsense department created in a knee jerk reaction with little thought. It's because of shenanigans like this that we need to go back to Republican lead government and move away from the ludicrous spending/knee jerk reactions and gluttonous expansion of government.

 

[glenn1]

You realize that homeland security defends the whole country, right?

Al Qaeda seems to prefer attacking NYC and similar prestige targets, so the risk is relatively minor elsewhere. Besides, my statement still holds - the replacement value of buildings and people from BFE town in flyover country is probably even less than NYC due to cost of living differences. Spending $790B to perhaps (and that's a big perhaps) save us all from the very low risk of a periodic terrorist attack is stupid. And turning it into an economic argument is hardly an unspeakable act; liberals had no problem citing costs as a reason against spending on Reagan's "Star Wars" initiative (which was designed to counter a risk just as improbable as terrorist attacks).

 

[OutHouse]

He is so right. Much policy in this country is guided by emotion and willingly-embraced shock. Terrorism works very, very well on Americans because any time anything happens the country goes full retard.

I am surprised fireworks haven't been banned yet.

Mayer is saying what I noticed: most of these terrorists are fucking stupid and that is that.

dry ice bombs are a felony. yea know not a "firework" but a lot of fun on the 4th.

 

[OutHouse]

You realize that homeland security defends the whole country, right?

and I see none of that 700B on my little patch of unincorporated dirt i call home until I go to DIA and get molested by the retard TSA.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Nothing like good ol' Obama racking up huge deficits and expanding the role of government like handing out a $790 billion tax payer gift to some nonsense department created in a knee jerk reaction with little thought. It's because of shenanigans like this that we need to go back to Republican lead government and move away from the ludicrous spending/knee jerk reactions and gluttonous expansion of government.

Bill Maher says this shit, than 2 minutes later he goes back to stroking Obama's dick. I never understand the poor little dumbfuck.

 

[fskimospy]

Al Qaeda seems to prefer attacking NYC and similar prestige targets, so the risk is relatively minor elsewhere. Besides, my statement still holds - the replacement value of buildings and people from BFE town in flyover country is probably even less than NYC due to cost of living differences. Spending $790B to perhaps (and that's a big perhaps) save us all from the very low risk of a periodic terrorist attack is stupid. And turning it into an economic argument is hardly an unspeakable act; liberals had no problem citing costs as a reason against spending on Reagan's "Star Wars" initiative (which was designed to counter a risk just as improbable as terrorist attacks).

I actually agree with you that a lot of homeland security spending is wasteful, although quite a few otherwise useful services have been folded into homeland security. Customs, INS, airport security, FEMA, the Coast Guard, the Secret Service, etc, are all parts of homeland security. It's not like we wouldn't have spent any of that $790B without 9/11 happening. My guess is that we would have spent most of it, and it's not like they exist only to prevent terrorist attacks.

Oh, and the reason to oppose Star Wars (at least in my opinion) was that it was a destabilizing weapon; it made war more likely, not less likely. That's another argument, however.

 

[Matt1970]

I actually agree with you that a lot of homeland security spending is wasteful, although quite a few otherwise useful services have been folded into homeland security. Customs, INS, airport security, FEMA, the Coast Guard, the Secret Service, etc, are all parts of homeland security. It's not like we wouldn't have spent any of that $790B without 9/11 happening. My guess is that we would have spent most of it, and it's not like they exist only to prevent terrorist attacks.

Oh, and the reason to oppose Star Wars (at least in my opinion) was that it was a destabilizing weapon; it made war more likely, not less likely. That's another argument, however.

And the minute news gets out that a program like that might get cut you go on and on about how austerity is so bad for the country.

 

[fskimospy]

And the minute news gets out that a program like that might get cut you go on and on about how austerity is so bad for the country.

Austerity is bad for the country, but that doesn't mean I can't identify wasteful spending. What that would mean is that in a perfect world we could cut that wasteful spending and increase spending elsewhere.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

This is one I can totally agree with from Bill:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nj85PgMtZcM

"So, I'm not saying we should let our guard down. But, our ever-expanding Homeland Security Department has gotten $790 billion since 9/11.

Bin Laden's plan wasn't to kill us all. It was to scare us into overreacting and destroying ourselves. Because if there's one thing those terrorists proved they can blow up, it's our balance sheet."

Fuck Bill Maher.

This is the guy that wants higher taxes and government playing a larger role in society yet he then complains about the expansion of the DoHS and billions of dollars going to the DoHS on top of it.

What fuck did Bill think was going to happen when we grow out this already bloated government???

Then again he pushes out these distorted talking points disguised in his comedy routine to cater to his audience, aka democrats/leftists so as to absolve his and their views from barring any blame in contributing to this mess as government as usual mis-spends the increased tax money it collect from taxpayers by growing out the agencies like the DoHS.

So really fuck him and fuck his fan base. They get the government they deserve.

 

[Zxian]

This is the guy that wants higher taxes and government playing a larger role in society yet he then complains about the expansion of the DoHS and billions of dollars going to the DoHS on top of it.

Because the money spent on the DoHS couldn't have been better spent on something like... oh, I don't know.... education or health care? Something that would actually show definitive benefit?

I don't know how many times I've passed through security with an otherwise restricted item. I had a small swiss army pocket knife in my backpack that has been back and forth to Europe several times, and in and out of the States. It was discovered when I moved from one apartment to the next. Eight return flights and nothing.

 

[CountZero]

Fuck Bill Maher.

This is the guy that wants higher taxes and government playing a larger role in society yet he then complains about the expansion of the DoHS and billions of dollars going to the DoHS on top of it.

What fuck did Bill think was going to happen when we grow out this already bloated government???

Then again he pushes out these distorted talking points disguised in his comedy routine to cater to his audience, aka democrats/leftists so as to absolve his and their views from barring any blame in contributing to this mess as government as usual mis-spends the increased tax money it collect from taxpayers by growing out the agencies like the DoHS.

So really fuck him and fuck his fan base. They get the government they deserve.

You do realize that there are few, if any, politicians, pundits, etc that fully support cutting from everything. Just look at a conservative budget: cuts to welfare programs but nothing from defense or even increasing defense spending. What people want is a balanced budget, balanced spending on the things they think government should do and cuts or total removal to the things they think government shouldn't do or should do less of.

Both groups want to spend freely they just have different ideas on where to spend and how to get that money. It is a fallacy to call the modern Republican party fiscal conservatives they are just anti-progressive taxation and welfare.