home

Crocodile Tears For Bill Maher

So David Axelrod won't appear on Bill Maher's show. Ann Althouse chortles:

Rush Limbaugh is a media genius, but I don't think he's enough of a genius to have laid this trap. It has worked as a trap. By going too far, on one well-chosen occasion — picking on a young woman about sex — he got an immense reaction from Rush haters, who smelled blood and imagined that they could use this incident to drive Rush off the air. In making their strong argument, Rush's opponents articulated a rule demonizing those who use offensive language to describe a woman. [...] In this Fluke incident, many left-liberals have committed to a rule that can now be used to take out some of their most valuable speakers and media outlets.

(Emphasis supplied.) Weird. I thought she was talking about Bill Maher. Oh noooo! Bill Maher!! Is Althouse serious? Who cares about Bill Maher?

Speaking for me only

< Wednesday Morning Open Thread | Hillary And The Fight For Women's Rights >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Oh, nooooooooooo .... Mr. Bill! (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Yman on Wed Mar 14, 2012 at 01:48:38 PM EST
    Pfffttttt ...

    This is soooooo ridiculous, but it probably doesn't even crack Althouse's Top 10.  I don't know how anyone can take her seriously.

    Ann Althouse? Really? (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by Anne on Wed Mar 14, 2012 at 02:00:39 PM EST
    Golly, I didn't know she had any relevance; kind of felt like she was glomming on to the Rush Limbaugh debacle in hope of having someone actually pay attention to her.

    Looks like she got you there, BTD!

    And maybe going to why Althouse isn't relevant might be her kind of contorted effort to make Maher the left's equivalent of Limbaugh - does anyone actually think these two are the same?  I mean, I don't care for Maher - I think he's snotty and irritating and way too fond of his own special insights (well, that could sound like a Limbaugh description, I guess) - but Maher is not to the Democratic Party what Limbaugh is to the GOP, for sure.   Would anyone really want Maher to be that?  

    But, whatever - I jus think it's hilarious that Althouse is quoting someone who is pretty universally reviled in conservative circles, but then, people of her ilk have a long history of situational memory loss.  

    And now I can go back to forgetting Ann Althouse... :-)


    The righties started screeching (none / 0) (#27)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 12:40:38 AM EST
    about Maher within seconds of the Limbaugh debacle.  Althouse is just echoing what she's hearing on Fox and even CNN.  The right wing has been using Maher as their counter-example every time some right-winger steps in it and gets called on it for years now.

    Parent
    Yes Ann, I am firmly committed to (5.00 / 4) (#9)
    by ruffian on Wed Mar 14, 2012 at 02:22:10 PM EST
    the rule that anyone on the left that calls women whores for having their birth control covered by insurance should be criticized, and I will stop supporting their sponsors.

    I have been watching Bill Maher for years, and yes, sometimes he makes crass jokes, but I have never heard anything near that stupid. Moreover, he is nothing close to a spokesman for the left.

    Does She Even Know ? (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Mar 14, 2012 at 02:54:46 PM EST
    That he is on HBO, which of course isn't regulated by the FCC, not available to most people, and most importantly, he doesn't have advertisers.

    Plus of course that rule 'we' tried to invoke is Florida law and I am pretty sure Bill is in California.

    I would miss him, like I miss every other HBO show, not so much...  He maybe got a season out of me, just not that interesting.

    If Bill Mahar is out Rush Limbaugh, well then I have vastly over-estimated Rush's influence.  Because I doubt Bill has influenced anyone over the age of 20.

    what are you, some kind of an elitist fact-nut? (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by ruffian on Wed Mar 14, 2012 at 02:58:11 PM EST
    The only time I've watched (none / 0) (#15)
    by oculus on Wed Mar 14, 2012 at 03:11:23 PM EST
    Maher was for the "reading" of former Rep. Weiner's tweets, texts, and e-mails.  Very funny but not very nice to this beleaguered man.  (Crocodile tears."  

    Parent
    He's not very nice to anyone (5.00 / 2) (#16)
    by ruffian on Wed Mar 14, 2012 at 03:27:05 PM EST
    Whether that is part of his stage persona, or his real self, I have no way of knowing. I think it is funny that the right is picking on him, when he was actually speaking out against the boycott of Limbaugh. It's like that just reminded him that he was out there, and they latched on.

    To me there is a huge difference between a career professional comedian making insulting remarks about people in the public eye, and an influential political commentator that is regularly courted by politicians insulting a private citizen in the most personal way.  I can't even fathom making an equivalence.


    Parent

    Was it Digby, Greenwald, or (none / 0) (#17)
    by oculus on Wed Mar 14, 2012 at 03:29:51 PM EST
    Juan Cole who recently opined GOP politicians and candidates must run with what Limbaugh spews.  

    Parent
    digby talks about it a lot (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by ruffian on Wed Mar 14, 2012 at 03:40:43 PM EST
    Can you even imagine anyone thinking Dem pols take their marching orders from Maher? Ha!

    Parent
    It would be equivalent (none / 0) (#19)
    by jbindc on Wed Mar 14, 2012 at 03:41:35 PM EST
    If Maher had a show with the audience the size of Rush's.

    Of course, Maher was influential enough to do things like help take down Christine O'Donnell - at least, according to him. So, does he have political influence, or doesn't he?

    Parent

    Political influence... (5.00 / 6) (#21)
    by kdog on Wed Mar 14, 2012 at 03:50:14 PM EST
    yeah, some.  Good comedy can make people think and influence the national political debate.

    Influence with politicians? No, none, not at all.  But Rush does.

    Parent

    According to Him... (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Mar 14, 2012 at 03:57:50 PM EST
    Funny, I mean really funny.  He does resemble Rush in regards to his gigantic ego.

    O'Donnell ?  I mean really, as if without Mahar O'Donnell was going places.

    Parent

    Put it this way (5.00 / 2) (#37)
    by Socraticsilence on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 11:36:39 AM EST
    would any GOP political figure ever dare do to Rush what Axelrod did to Maher? Hell, Rush gets pols to come on and apologize for far less.

    Parent
    I find him to be a nice guy... (none / 0) (#23)
    by kdog on Wed Mar 14, 2012 at 05:45:59 PM EST
    or his "Real Time" stage persona to be a nice guy at least...he sticks up for righties on his panel, hushes his studio audience when they rain the boos on somebody.

    Well said on the faux equivalency.  

    Parent

    You are right about that (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by ruffian on Wed Mar 14, 2012 at 08:12:45 PM EST
    He is a good host. I just meant he is an equal opportunity insulter in his comedy routines.

    Parent
    The Right is not reminding Maher (none / 0) (#30)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 08:07:47 AM EST
    of what he has said. The Right is reminding the world.

    And Limbaugh may be a "political commentator" but he is an "entertainer" to his audience. When he ceases to entertain he will be gone.

    Limbaugh was wrong.

    Period.

    But defending Maher doesn't make anything right.

    Parent

    No one's defending Maher (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by Yman on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 09:42:40 AM EST
    They're pointing out that the weak comparisons of Limbaugh to Maher are laughable.

    Limbaugh's Unrivaled Influence On Republican Politics

    Get back to me when a:

    1.  A Democratic POTUS ersonally carries Maher's bag to the Lincoln bedroom (Bush).

    2.  A Democratic POTUS Calls Maher "The number one voice for progressivism in our country" (Reagan)

    3.  Maher is named an honorary member of the "1994 Limbaugh Congress".

    4.  The Chairman of the DNC apologizes profusely for doing what you just did - calling Rush an "entertainer".

    Heh.

    Parent
    I meant that Maher sticking his neck out (none / 0) (#44)
    by ruffian on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 01:33:45 PM EST
    to speak against the boycott of Rush reminded the right that Maher was out there. No 'good' deed goes unpunished.

    Now maybe there has been a continuous hue and cry from the right about Maher for a while. I ignore them when possible.

    What is Rush to politicians? That is the point.

    Parent

    Since Limbaugh is not under their control (none / 0) (#56)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 10:51:50 PM EST
    I would say he is a pain in the behind.

    Of course when he contributes $1,000,000 to Romney's PAC then.....wait... That's not Limbaugh, it is Maher the well known woman attacker giving money to Obama....who calls Fluke....

    Sorry, this makes my head spin.

    Parent

    Trying to think can be hard (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by Yman on Fri Mar 16, 2012 at 07:24:08 AM EST
    Maybe you should sit down.  

    Rush is faaaaaaar more than a "pain in the behind" to the Republican party - even Reagan called him "the voice of conservatism".

    Although the reason you'd like to pretend otherwise is obvious.

    Parent

    Does it make any difference where he's at? (none / 0) (#28)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 08:00:15 AM EST
    Isn't it the use of the vulgar words and studied disrespect for someone based on their gender that's important?

    You know, in somethings you have to say they are wrong, no matter who does them. And trying to "context" them always makes it worse.

    As is said, "When you dance with the Devil he always leads."

    Parent

    Maher was wrong - and was condemned (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by Yman on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 09:46:31 AM EST
    Rush was wrong - and is defended by many on the Right, because they agree with him and see nothing wrong in what he did.  Rush isn't just a shock comedian - he's a leader of the Republican/Conservative movement, and he represents their mainstream.

    But I understand why you'd like to pretend otherwise.

    Parent

    Dennis Miller called Hillary (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 12:13:11 PM EST
    An old p-double S.  But Dennis doesn't have a spare million because to pull down THAT KIND OF MONEY you have to be able to make girls laugh sometimes too.

    Parent
    in "some things" (none / 0) (#29)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 08:01:17 AM EST
    Jim (none / 0) (#33)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 10:05:01 AM EST
    My point was that no one on the left gives a F if Mahar was shut down yesterday.

    He's not important in a political text to the left.

    And as far as condemning him, well I never really though Rush deserved the guillotine.  You said something disrespectful, like he does daily, like a lot of people do, including myself.  Including nearly every rate R movie, most comedians, and one and on, it was words.

    I think the left only jumped on it because it forced the right to defend it, somewhat.  They are the ones who take words way too seriously IMO.  But compared to actual legislation and actions, the words ay best, were 2 out 10 on the offensive scale.

    Parent

    Surely you jest (none / 0) (#57)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 10:55:11 PM EST
    to the extent that what Althouse (5.00 / 4) (#14)
    by The Addams Family on Wed Mar 14, 2012 at 02:59:29 PM EST
    is talking about is a "rule," it's not a "new rule" (h/t Bill Maher) - for example, it was invoked against MSNBC's David Shuster four years ago when he made his "p1mping out" remark

    which kind of underscores the point that BTD makes here: that those of us who are "left-liberal" don't necessarily regard members of the He-Man Woman Haters Club as "some of [our] most valuable speakers and media outlets"

    Althouse is a big Rush fan (5.00 / 0) (#20)
    by Yman on Wed Mar 14, 2012 at 03:44:22 PM EST
    From an article about her in the NYT:

    Ann Althouse, 58, is a law professor at the University of Wisconsin, Madison who blogs about politics, law and cultural whatnots in a sharp, occasionally ribald tone. She admires Rush Limbaugh, voted for George Bush in '04 and Barack Obama in '08.

    Did a quick search of her website and its obvious she's a huge Rush fan.

    Shocker.

    For pity's sake. If you're going (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by Towanda on Wed Mar 14, 2012 at 08:01:58 PM EST
    to pay attention to anything in Wisconsin, don't make it Althouse.

    Huge news is happening there, much of it having to do with the law and not this excuse for a law prof.

    Smelled blood? (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 10:41:48 AM EST
    No, I was outraged.  Cuz now I'm a slut.  I took copay birth control and had sex with my husband before I married.  And I also notice that I paid a copay and the person who Really got the free sex was my husband.  But magically he is not a slut.

    Sarah Palin cares about Bill (none / 0) (#1)
    by oculus on Wed Mar 14, 2012 at 01:37:46 PM EST
    Maher:

    But Maher also recently took the step of donating $1 million to the pro-Obama Super-PAC.
    Palin, who has been on the receiving end of many of Maher's insults -- a "c" word was once invoked, in his stand-up act -- has joined with other Republicans calling for the president to demand that money to be returned.

    can the president demand (none / 0) (#2)
    by CST on Wed Mar 14, 2012 at 01:39:34 PM EST
    anything of a super-pac?

    I thought that's the whole thing with them, is that they aren't controlled by the campaign.  I guess that he could ask, but they don't have to listen.

    Parent

    It is Palin... (5.00 / 0) (#6)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Mar 14, 2012 at 01:52:45 PM EST
    I'm confused. Weren't (none / 0) (#4)
    by oculus on Wed Mar 14, 2012 at 01:41:16 PM EST
    there SuperPacs b/4 "Citizens United"?  

    Parent
    But isn't Alinsky anethema to (none / 0) (#3)
    by oculus on Wed Mar 14, 2012 at 01:40:15 PM EST
    the likes of Althouse?  

    Parent
    Who is John Galt? (none / 0) (#35)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 10:54:41 AM EST
    And while we're at it, who is Saul Alinsky?  And why are Republicans fascinated and obsess over people that few of us know anything about?

    Parent
    John Galt (none / 0) (#38)
    by CST on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 11:42:05 AM EST
    is a fictional character in an Atlas Shrugged.  According to wiki (I quit reading Ayn Rand after Fountainhead), he is a sort of super-human inventor/philosopher/creater of jobs, and he tries to get the other job creaters to go on strike against the government that celebrates mediocrity.

    Basically it's who Rush Limbaugh likes to think he is.

    The telling part is that they're obsessing over a fictional character - because no one like him exists in real life.

    Parent

    I know who John Galt is :) (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 12:07:01 PM EST
    And strangely I don't find Rand offensive.  She writes a great bodice ripper for people who have business degrees and that is no small thing.  I find it comical how Conservatives cherry pick Rand works though and only want some markets free.

    Hey though, I'm really busy today, could someone call into Rush's program today and ask him who Joanna Galt is?  There's all these rumors out there.  Some say she went to Georgetown, others say she doesn't exist at all, and still others say she has an invisible hand that can slap the advertisers right off of ya.

    Parent

    I actually got through Anthem (5.00 / 2) (#41)
    by CST on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 12:18:25 PM EST
    just fine.  Something about Fountainhead really rubbed me the wrong way.  Maybe because it was about architecture/engineering and I felt that in some way the book was arguing that my personal ideology didn't exist.  That is, the protagonist shared my design sensibilities, but the argument she was making was that in order to have and be effective at that you had to be an individualist.  Reading that book just made me really angry.  So I didn't bother with Atlas Shrugged.

    Speaking of Joanna Galt, did you see the latest in Arizona where they are trying to make you give your boss a doctor's note if you want them to cover birth control?  It must say you aren't being a hussy and that you do in fact have acne or painful cysts and you need it for a "true" medical purpose.  Because apparently that is your boss's business now.  Also, Arizona is an at will state, which means they don't need a reason to fire you.  I can see how well that's gonna end.  I should say that there is probably no way this will remain established law even if it gets passed - the courts will have something to say about it.  Doesn't make the sentiment any less disgusting though.

    Parent

    I really liked Anthem.... (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 12:53:30 PM EST
    Atlas Shrugged was 500 pages too long...get that crazy lady an editor!

    Though Rand did pen one of my favorite quotes of all time...

    "There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. When there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws."

    Dig this one too...have her "papers please" admirers ever heard it?

    "Existence is Identity, Consciousness is Identification"


    Parent
    As your friend Taibbi says (none / 0) (#45)
    by jondee on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 01:34:11 PM EST
    in Ayn Rand's world there are never any BP spills, Love Canals, Thalidomide babys -- or inside jobs/rigged games on Wall St. Nor should anyone ever worry about wasting a second 'impeding markets' in to safeguard against them..

    The state doesn't create criminals by itself; a whole culture and populace with it's roots in irrationality, puritanism, and scapegoating creates the state that creates criminals..

    Rand stole Nietsche's idea of the ubermann and dressed him up as a hypercapitalist for the American market and her rich husbands. In most of the rest of the world she's considered less than a bad joke as a serious thinker.  

    Parent

    No doubt... (none / 0) (#52)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 02:44:36 PM EST
    Objectivism gets whacky, and when taken to extremes would be as distasterous as any other ideology taken to extremes.  But I think there is room in the ideological stew for a dash of it.

    The state is the only one with the power to create a criminal, unless you count states that allow ballot initiatives...only there can the populace create criminals directly.  The state may claim a mandate, but I don't think it is there very often.  Draconian sentences ya can blame on we the people, but not all the bullsh*t criminalization of nonsense.

    Parent

    kdog, I don't completely disagree with (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by Anne on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 03:44:43 PM EST
    you that there are too many laws, or that the sentencing has gotten out of control, but...I don't think the answer is an absence of laws - that, in my mind, is where chaos lives, and it would make it much easier than it already is for the weakest among us to be preyed upon by those in power.

    I know you hate the whole caging people thing, but there are some things I just can't condone.

    Imagine coming home from work one day, and someone else is living in your apartment.  Just sittin' back, drinking your beer, eating your food, wearing your clothes.  "Get out," you say.  "Uh, no," the interloper says - "you can't make me, there's no law that says I can't be here, so what are you gonna do about it?"  So you say, "well, here's my gun - there's no law that says I can't shoot you, drag your stealing ass out into the street, and be done with you."  He says, "Well, here's my phone - I'm gonna call my homies, who will return the favor if you do - and there's no law that says they can't."

    See where this is going?

    Yeah, I know that the balance of power in this country is upside-down.  The banksters and Masters of the Universe are stealing from us every day, preying on the weak for sport, and they do so with impunity, while the poor slob who's down on his luck is ground through the "justice" system like so much meat and ends up in jail for stealing a pack of cigarettes.  I don't like that, either.  

    But the answer isn't going to the other extreme, and the real possibility of anarchy, so that we can indulge ourselves in whatever is our daily pleasure.

    The truth is that we have a broken and dysfunctional society, one that would rather put people in cinderblock cells than address the problems of poverty, unemployment, malnutrition, homelessness, throwaway children, and lack of health care - to name a few.  Address these issues, crime goes down, and we live in a more stable and humane society.

    That will shift the balance of power which is, in my opinion, why the authoritarians are not vested in improving the society as a whole - people who have control over their lives are harder for those in power to control.  That's where we need to go, but I will probably be long dead and buried before it happens - if it ever does.


    Parent

    The human race is not ready... (none / 0) (#54)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 03:50:15 PM EST
    for anarchy, I agree.  But that should be the ultimate goal.  Maybe in another 5000 years?;)

    I'm not saying no laws...but when there are so many federal crimes punsihable by fines and/or prison that they literally can't be counted...literally can't be counted!!!...thats a sign of a pretty big problem.  We can repeal thousands before we got anywhere near repealing one society needs to function or one necessary to protect the weak.

    Parent

    My suggestion would be to skip (none / 0) (#55)
    by jondee on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 04:42:29 PM EST
    that her warmed-over, heavy-handed, nonsense entirely and go right to Nietzsche -- leavened with a little Bertrand Russell. But its your ride.

    Imo, Rand is how the Cato Institute types try to suck stoners into their slash-and-burn variety of Libertarianism.

    Parent

    Fear not jondee my brother... (none / 0) (#59)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 16, 2012 at 08:03:46 AM EST
    my momma didn't raise no fool.  And pops taught me to question anything and everything, and twice on Sunday.

    Not for nothing, Liberal Dems and Conservative Repubs drew first blood Col. Trautman..."you don't belong in handcuffs" is a mighty strong selling point, the "liberal" party (lol) would be wise to stop driving naturally liberal community conscious people out of the tent with the threat of arrest.

    Parent

    Do you know how much in (none / 0) (#49)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 02:00:16 PM EST
    Scholarship funds you get for a great Conservative serving  Rand essay these days?  For awhile there it got pretty substantial.  And I don' care if you are an intelligent Liberal, take the dumba$$ money and laugh all the way to school and write your real thesis on Rand there.

    Parent
    There's an old jewish saying: (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by jondee on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 02:09:14 PM EST
    if you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he gives it.

    Parent
    But Conservatives aren't God (none / 0) (#51)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 02:17:07 PM EST
    They just think they are.

    Parent
    The People Who Can't Afford to... (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 01:19:07 PM EST
    ...take it through the courts who will suffer before they can slap it down.  Or who can't afford to see if they will get fired so they comply and smile.

    Does this 'at will' state mean there is no recourse, like financially, for them canning people for no reason ?  Is it a statute ?  And how far does it go, just firing ?

    Parent

    Yup, New York (none / 0) (#47)
    by NYShooter on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 01:38:16 PM EST
    is an "at will" state also

    Basically, it means the employer can fire you for any reason. As far as I know, the only exceptions are if the reason violates Federal laws i.e. age, religion, ethnicity. But, something like they don't like how you part your hair, go for it.

    You're outta here.

    Seriously.  


    Parent

    Yeah (none / 0) (#48)
    by jondee on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 01:44:52 PM EST
    Them liberal New Yorkers..

    Parent
    Some say they are destroying (none / 0) (#46)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 01:34:33 PM EST
    Their next generation of female voters.  And when you have gone out of your way to destroy what base you would have with Latinos, it makes sense to destroy your female base.

    Can the Republican smoke filled rooms goal still be to hate everyone who isn't white, and to make up for all demographics they have burnt to the ground,demand that these white women reproduce like cows for them?

    Parent

    In an effort to have individuals (none / 0) (#36)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Mar 15, 2012 at 10:58:03 AM EST
    and corporations to float more money her way, Sarah demands that Barack give his up.

    Parent
    What nonsense. (none / 0) (#8)
    by Radix on Wed Mar 14, 2012 at 02:17:22 PM EST
    When has the "Right" cared about how the left behaves, except to point out some imagined hypocritical behavior? The reality is the "Right" has always gone after anyone who disagrees with them.

    Lies, all lies: (none / 0) (#10)
    by oculus on Wed Mar 14, 2012 at 02:41:04 PM EST
    lol, very good (none / 0) (#12)
    by ruffian on Wed Mar 14, 2012 at 02:56:23 PM EST
    Ann (none / 0) (#24)
    by Nic108 on Wed Mar 14, 2012 at 06:16:47 PM EST
    It was the box wine talking.