Maher: The audacity of hope is over. Right now I'm hoping for a little more audacity.

[chimpymustgo]

Another great show by Bill Maher. At the end he puts it to our President to stand up for the things we voted for: healthcare reform, banking reforms, etc.

He even has the audacity to say he wishes Obama had some of that Bush certitude - Bush who espoused - and pushed through - some of the worse policies EVER. Match Bush's determination with Obama's (campaign) ideas - and we've got a winner.

And maybe our democracy back.

[bigjohn16]

1. That was a great episode.

Larry and Bills segment was one of the funniest things I've seen on Real Time. The New Rule was also great and I totally agree with his sentiment.

[Gregorian]

2. Was there a discussion on Troy Davis?

I don't get the channel. But I heard Jealous was going to be on, (NAACP), discussing the Davis case.

[bigjohn16]

4. He brought Troy up but when he did it didn't really have anything to do with the conversation

so there wasn't any discussion of him.

[Larkspur]

3. Yes, I too would like to see more audacity from Obama against the Right Wing

and ConservaDems and support either Single Payer (my preference) or a viable public option, not a co-op or watered down version.

[KaryninMiami]

5. One of his better New Rules. Very well stated. NT

[Zavulon]

6. I'm sure Maher would do a better job.

:sarcasm: :eyes:

This is exactly why I so rarely watch him. Maher is just another blowhard armchair quarterback.

[greyl]

7. Sharp line. Maher is a good guy to have around.

(RIP Carlin)

[TexasObserver]

8. It's the fierce urgency of NOT NOW.

But it was a great marketing slogan, eh?

[FLAprogressive]

13. I prefer "The Fierce Urgency of Whenever".

[Bluenorthwest]

9. New Rules was perfect

Great show.

[lordsummerisle]

10. Great new rules n/t

[Nite Owl]

11. What a good show!

He hit it right on the mark.

[JamesA1102]

12. Maher made some valid points

But his use of right wing talking points and vitriol ruined it. I also found it a little hypocritical because Maher gives airtime to right wing nutjobs like P.J. O'Rourke.

Maher can't have it both ways, denouncing Obama on one hand for not doing enough to fix the all problems of the last 30 years while giving a platform to extremist conservative who denounce Obama, using the most extreme & dishonest rhetoric, for the steps he is taking to fix those problems.

[paulsby]

14. maher gives airtime to both sides

how is that relevant to his valid criticism of obama. obama's been weak as fuck on GLBT rights. DADT, DOMA, and his statements against gay marriage.

PJ Orourke has written some hilarious books fwiw.

he's one of the few genuinely funny people on the right.

[JamesA1102]

15. Nothing wrong with airing both sides

But calling the President a communist is just hate speech. I don't care how funny O'Rourke's books are, there is no excuse for inflammatory stuff like that. That is why I said Maher was being a hypocrite. He give a platform to those who will say the most outrageous stuff about Obama. The people who are making it difficult for Obame to do the things he is doing, then Maher turns around and criticizes Obama for not doing enough. You mention DADT and DOMA. Do you thing Obama would be as weak if he didn't have to contend with people like O'Rourke, Ann Coulter, Frank Lutz or Joe Scarbourgh who would all scream bloody murder and use as a weapon against Obama and all of whom Maher gives a platform to to do so.

[paulsby]

19. i think that's silly

first of all, maher cut his teeth on a show called "politically incorrect"

his entire schtick is to say things that people find over the top (sometimes) and outrageous.

he has had metric assloads of people on who were fiercely critical of bush. that wasn't the reason bush sucked. they were commenting ON bush.

similarly, let's be real. obama SUCKS on gay issues. how much more evidence do we need?

it's not maher's frigging fault.

you are blaming obama's weakness (i am assuming on GLBT) because he (god forbid) has to attend to critics in the media?

that excuse is almost bushian.

[JamesA1102]

25. It was about Heathcare and Global Warming not about gay issues.

And Maher is giving a platform to people that are using the most divisive rhetoric against Obama to throw roadblocks in his way and then attacking Obama for not doing more to get past those roadblocks. Like I said Maher can't have it both ways.

[paulsby]

26. my bad

on the specific issues referenced, but if a political comedian and his guests are capable of throwing a roadblock in obama's way, then obama is weak as fuck.

maher is a friggin comedian, and it's a TALK SHOW for pete's sake.

seriously. the blame for obama doing or not doing X lies with obama. not some dipshit on a comedy show who is throwing "roadblocks" by daring to criticize obama.

seriously

what next? are these people with him or against him?

[JamesA1102]

27. But Maher has on more than other comedians

He has on politicians, Senators, Governors, members of Congress as well as influential commentators. So he is enabling the very people who can throw roadblocks in Obama's way.

[paulsby]

28. well., we have this nifty thing called

"seperation of powers"

obama's power is SUPPOSED to be limited. he's head of the executive branch, not king.

there's LOTs of stuff he can do, but doesn't

1) he can order the head of the justice dept. to stop (to really stop, not just empty promises) all these stupid prosecutions of medical MJ users.
2) he can speak out publically AGAINST DOMA.
3) he can come out as 100% against DADT and say he would like to see congress vote on repealing it
4) etc. etc.

obama has a frigging democratic congress and has done tons of stuff, some of it bad. yes, there are many things that are not within his domain. but there are LOTS of things he can do that he doesn't.

i'll repeat. he is WEAK AS FUCK on GLBT issues. that fricking pisses me off.

[JamesA1102]

29. But the point is Maher trying to have it both ways

Critizicing Obama for not doing enough while giving a platform to those trying to stop him. That's just hypocrisy on Maher's part.

[paulsby]

30. that's not hypocritical

he gives a platform to people who he agrees with and who he disagrees with. that's the whole point of his show. DEBATE.

debate is pretty nonexistent when everybody agrees.

they are entirely different things.

you can criticize obama for not doing X, and have people on your political commentary show that say obama shouldn't do X anyway.

that's not hypocritical. it's the whole point of his show.

you actually believe that maher should only have people on his show that agree with him vis a vis obama if he dares to criticize obama?

cmon

[JamesA1102]

31. Yes it is hypocritcal

Because he has people on who use the most dishonest and inflammatory rhetoric against the President. If the goal of the show is debate then let it be debate but don't then turn around and attack the man when you've just given a platform for his enemies. Like I said Maher is being a hypocrite and trying to have it both ways.

[paulsby]

32. then

we can agree to disagree.

i don't think that's hypocritical.

i understand your logic, i just don't agree with it.

[JamesA1102]

33. That's fine.

I also think it is hypocritical that after years of Maher criticizing Bush for governing as a dictator to them turn around and attack Obama for not governing as a dictator.

[stanwyck]

17. Disagree about O'Rourke being funny.

Humor is very subjective, of course. But every time I see O'Rourke on TV, I just don't get it. He does his obnoxious aging fratboy schtick, which so many aging rightwing guys like to do. The off-hand snarky comments which never show a true grasp of the issues. And when others bring up substance and detail, he laughs. And laughs. The Coulter response. He doesn't know how to counter so he plays for time a lot with giggling. Maybe I don't respond to him because he reminds me so much of Dubya.

[paulsby]

18. i didn't say he was very funny in person

i said his books were.

all the trouble in the world, give war a chance, are especially good.

i don't think his humourous writing style translates very well to in person stuff.

[lame54]

20. I don't get P.J. Orourke - He's a right -wing satirists...

How can you be a satirists and ignore all the best material

Dennis Miller R.I.P.

[paulsby]

21. he doesn't

this just goes to show most people who say he isn't funny HAVEN'T READ HIS BOOKS.

orourke makes lots of fun of republicans. he's essentially a libertarian type repub. and he criticizes republican politicians quite frequently.

this is a guy who wrote a book about congress called "parliament of whores". and he wasn't referring only to democrats.

he's somebody who said (im paraphrasing) "republicans claim that government doesn't work. then, they get elected to office and prove it"

etc.

is he a repub? yes.

does he ignore right wing idiocy? no

again, he is funny. if you haven't read his books, you are arguing from a position of ignorance vis a vis his humour.

any guy who pens the line "if meat is murder, are eggs rape" is funny to me.

[lame54]

22. Why the fuck would I read his books...

If my impression from his many t.v. appearances is 'what an unfunny asshole" why would I spend a dime on his fucking books?

I am not ignorant of his "humor" - he does ignore right-wing idiocy

If he is doing the talk-show circuit to push his books but represents himself 180 degrees different - then he is a shitty salesman - fuck him

[paulsby]

23. no, it comes down to the fact

that somebody whose BOOKS are funny may not be as funny in person.

those are entirely different skillsets.

i think hunter thompson (who clearly was an influence on orourke) similarly wrote great books, but in interviews and stuff left me kind of cold.

[malaise]

16. Profound comment

It was one of his better programs in recent times.

[bobbolink]

24. I didn't see it, but it sounds like he's pointing out how the Dems are going to LOSE

By not standing by their word, and by NOT taking the mandate they were handed, people will be just as disgusted with the Dems.

2010?

Shooting themselves in the foot.

Just watch.