|
|
Submit your question now for Bill and his roundtable guests, and selected questions will be answered on the HBO.com website in our weekly program Overtime, immediately following the Friday premiere of Real Time, or during the show on the new "Blogga, Please" segment.
Please be aware concise, single-topic questions have the best chance of being selected.
Refresh the Bill Maher homepage right before midnight if you do not see the "Watch Overtime" video link.
Please note: Video is optimized for use with Windows Media Player on a PC.
|
Posts:
4
Registered:
2/2/08
|
|
(1597 of 1687)
Feb 2, 2008 10:57 AM
|
Bill made a great point about Hillary Clinton "If you hate her, it is about you; not her."
Hillary Clinton has worked most of her adult life to help others! The media continues to bash this woman, and it is without merit. She has her strengths and weaknesses, as we all do.
I am voting for Hillary Clinton because I believe she is best equipped to lead our country for the next four years!
Yes, she voted to authorize president Bush to go to war more than five years ago. At the time, none of us knew how badly George W. Bush could screw things up. My biggest disappointment is that she continued to fund the war (as did Barack Obama) as the democrats don't want to appear weak on defense! This is a mistake, and she recognized it and has changed her position. I heard her speak last night in San Jose, California, and it is pretty clear that she will lead us out of Iraq in an orderly manner.
She knows how to fix many of our current problems, including health care and education. She will provide grants so that college will be more affordable for everybody, and not just for rich people's children. She knows that education is not about "little test takers, and big test givers" which is the NCLB that Ted Kennedy and W have given us and underfunded!
She knows how to fight the battles on health care (the biggest issue, and Barack is clueless) and will not compromise with the insurance companies and republicans.
She will create millions of jobs with green technology, and tax the oil men who are raping this country!
That is why I will vote for a great American; Hillary Clinton! I don't care if she is a woman; she is the best person for the job at this time!
|
|
|
Posts:
4
Registered:
2/2/08
|
|
(1596 of 1687)
Feb 2, 2008 10:41 AM
|
I don't understand why there are not more jokes about the potential Bush library. "Bush isn't going to have a libray; he will have the Presidential Arcade." Please go there. It is a ripe field, and no one seems to be reaping.
Slogan for Hillary, "More brains than Bush." It is a smutty double entendre, but with the right delivery....
I am not a writer. I don't want to be scab. I just don't want to see Bill dance again. Just trying to do my part.
By the way, great panel last night. Does anyone know which Neo-con media personality spun the "polarization" thing? All of my robotic friends are dropping that word every chance they get. I am not sure they know what it means.
|
|
|
Posts:
13,288
Registered:
2/5/06
|
|
(1595 of 1687)
Feb 2, 2008 10:40 AM
|
The show did not cover broad or in-depth topics. Just say it, "Republicans are having more sex and happier." The spin-room report was pretty good.
The spins are slower than usual. It's definitely not one of the best episodes, but it's important. Mr. Maher is one of the few talking about getting out of Iraq right now. How much the war is costing vs. the cost of popular domestic programs both parties are arguing will probably drive the message home to everybody better.
They want to talk about economics, then name the most valid scapegoat (Cost of Iraq War), unless this war is actually good for the economy... Is that what's becoming of us?
--
Edited by infoseek at 02/02/2008 7:49 AM
|
|
|
Posts:
15
Registered:
2/2/08
|
|
(1594 of 1687)
Feb 2, 2008 10:20 AM
|
So much was said on last night's show about how vulnerable Hillary would be to attacks by the Republicans should she be the Democratic nominee. Why is no one talking about how vulnerable Obama will be to such attacks? For example, why do we hear almost nothing about Obama's devotion to to the teachings of Rev. Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr. of the Trinity United Church? Does anyone really believe that the Republicans aren't already salivating at the prospect of exposing the arguably racist ideology of that church? What about Rev. Wright presenting Louis Farrakhan with a lifetime achievement award last year (yes, the same Louis Farrakhan who calls Jews "bloodsuckers"; who refers to the "white man" as his mortal enemy; and who said "White people are potential humans ? they haven't evolved yet.") Also, does any informed voter think that the Republicans won't milk Obama's affiliation with the recently indicted Tony Rezko for all they can get (e.g. his reluctance to tell the truth about the nature of their relationship; the extent of the monetary support provided to him by Rezko; the letters sent by Obama to assist Rezko in obtaining lucrative contracts in Obama's district; and the episode involving Obama's purchase of a $2,000,000 mansion for approx. $1.7 million, with Mrs. Rezko buying the lot next door)? And what about allegations of "dirty politics" regarding Obama's treatment of incumbent Alice Palmer during his bid for his state senate seat in 1996? (See http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-070403obama-ballot,1,57567.story?ctrack=1&cset=true)
Just because the mainstream media has failed to discuss any of these issues, does not mean that the Republicans will let these opportunities slip by. I tend to agree with one of the prior posters who said that the Republicans have already thrown everything they can at Hillary. Obama on the other hand . . .
Also, to the poster who implied that the above information was gleaned from FOX News, I don't watch FOX News. All of the above issues have been discussed in the mainstream media, but not to the extent that most voters would know about them. I'm sure the Republicans will address this underreporting issue vigorously if Obama is the Democratic nominee.
|
|
|
Posts:
31
Registered:
1/26/08
|
|
(1593 of 1687)
Feb 2, 2008 10:19 AM
|
|
Obama trots out Oprah again....
|
|
|
Posts:
6
Registered:
2/2/08
|
|
(1592 of 1687)
Feb 2, 2008 9:01 AM
|
> I caution
> > other women who might get lazy and not look
> enough at
> > her record. Please do.
>
> So can we all assume you've taken your own good
> advice?
I have tried to study the issues and candidates free of pre-conceptions. I'm an avid reader and follower of foreign and domestic political and economic events. I have lived and worked overseas during my career. I watch CSPAN and BBC as well as mainstream news, read foreign and domestic press, and told my friends and anyone who would listen not to vote for Bush in 2000 because he would start a war. I was the first person I knew in 2000 who found the Project for a New American Century website and recognized the true nature of the neo-con agenda and half the Bush cabinet that signed their declarations. I sat in my living room without the benefit of all the "briefings" in Congress and knew George Bush would not stop until he had war. If Hillary didn't, then she doesn't have good instincts, if she did, all the more reason to doubt her. Those in Congress who say they didn't were either new to Washington, or trying to be on the winning side if the war turned out to be a success.
It's easy being drawn to the idea of the first woman president. But the fake smile, the fake southern black accent (remember at the church?), and the fake liberal position are all calculated - not from the heart. What drew me to Edwards is that he spoke from the heart and wanted real change - for men AND women, and for Washington.
At my age, I've been exposed to a lot of good men, but also to many who fear any woman of strength. What amuses me is that Hillary cannot seem to run for office without Bill running too. I voted for him in the 90's, but his time has passed. She trots him out to be her attack dog. He just looks like a an old ham who can't hold back when handed a microphone. I really don't want that in the White House. Enough Bush, enough Clinton. T
This country needs something fresh and inspiring. The rest of the world is praying that the US will stop being the aggressor, and become a moral leader for peace again. We need someone who is not part of the self-serving ambiguity that has plagued Washington.
|
|
|
Posts:
1
Registered:
2/2/08
|
|
(1591 of 1687)
Feb 2, 2008 7:51 AM
|
|
Bill, YOU ARE NOW part of the problem. I am sad for you and sad for us. You have joined the Rupert Murdock crowd by snubbing Ron Paul. You bring up HIS talking points, but don't give him credit. You think Obama is change? He has sold his soul to lobbyists ON his staff.
|
|
|
Posts:
6
Registered:
2/2/08
|
|
(1590 of 1687)
Feb 2, 2008 4:56 AM
|
That must have taken some time to write.
And quite well said
--
Edited by SLRPhoto at 02/02/2008 1:57 AM
|
|
|
Posts:
2
Registered:
2/2/08
|
|
(1589 of 1687)
Feb 2, 2008 4:48 AM
|
Wow! I'm sorry, but whatever happened to syntax, context, grammer, even spelling? I'm not a neophyte blogger but I am new to this forum. Somehow, I'd expected more from this group.
I've grown accustomed to blogger typo's (I'm certainly guilty of my share), irrational anger and prejudices, but I actually expected to read some cogent discussion here. What's up folks? Is it the lateness of the hour, or can you really not speak English?
Proabably more to the point, can you not present an opinion without resorting to insult or "adult language?" On occasion, I can say "Fuck you!" with the best of them. However, I reserve that tactic for those rare times I can find no other way to cut through the bullshit of the moment.
Reason, prudence, civilty and decorum are, none of these, four-letter words. They make real communication possible. That is, they permit us to speak clearly and reasonably with each other and invite a similar response from our partners in the conversation.
Vitriol and invective are the crutches of childish minds that cannot abide ideas contrary to their own. "Debate" in this forum appears to have been reduced to name-calling and silly, perjorative slams against perceived "enemies." Honest, passionately held beliefs have given way to pointless invective and absolutely stupid references to sex organs and other anatomical structures. Holy shit! Are we really that bereft of imagination?
Can we not (Please!) raise the level of our discourse to something that approaches maturity? Can't we employ passion and reason in the same breath? Good grief! My 16-year-old daughter makes more sense, and speaks more eloquently, than half of the posts I've witnessed here.
If you truly wish to change another human's opinion, you must listen to them first, without bias or preconception. Then, you must look for some common thread you might agree upon and find a way to build on that.
On the other hand, if you don't give a damn about anything but your own perspective, go ahead and rant on. You'll successfully perpetuate the chaos that envelopes the current state of our world, and we will quite handily send all of us to hell in a handbasket.
My guess is that, as bloggers, most of us feel we are anonymous. As such, we can dish out our worst diatribes without fear of retribution. Like driving on the freeway, if someone pisses us off, we imagine we can flip them the finger without repercussion. But the reality is, sometimes, the "flipped-off" has a gun in the glovebox and is more than ready to react with a hairtrigger.
I don't care if we do it in person, nose-to-nose, or virtually on an Internet blog. The result is the same. When we have no care for the ideas or the feelings of those we attack, we are predictably alienated from them. What's the point of that? Do we imagine that the force of our mean-spirited argument will make any effective difference? Nonsense! We only isolate ourselves within the narrow, tiny room of our own ego. What a completely useless waste of energy!
How can I say this in a meaningful way? We must establish our position in verifiable fact. We must speak honestly about what we know to be true, not the rumours talking heads hope we will repeat. We must show appreciation and deference for the opinions of those who disagree with us. Then, armed with conviction, we can overcome them with the power and truth of our argument.
There's nothing wrong in fighting for what we believe. There's a great deal wrong with fighting dirty, fighting blindly, or fighting stupidly.
Minds and hearts are never won over by insult or brute force. They are won by compassion and the grace of understanding for our common experience as citizens of this nation and as human beings who share this planet.
Please, for all us, wake up and smell the coffee.
|
|
|
Posts:
5
Registered:
2/2/08
|
|
(1588 of 1687)
Feb 2, 2008 4:42 AM
|
Why is Hillary not liked?
Well, I htink it's pretty clear even if unjustified. It's not even her political views as much as these:
Alpha Male position
1) She tellegraphs the ravages of her life and losses in her manerisms and posture. I think that is the most obvious aspect that even make-up can't hide.
2) She has not yet learned the subtlte touch required in persuading the male ego.
3) That primal entity in men will always see her as a female, just a command away from being chained to the bed post.
4) There is the resentment that a woman dare even attempt to move in the ways of men.
Yeah... totally sexist... but men are men with hundreds of thousands of years of programing.
Female Position: There are probably more than 4 LOL
|
|
|
Posts:
6
Registered:
2/2/08
|
|
(1587 of 1687)
Feb 2, 2008 4:40 AM
|
> hey, Shakin all Over, i agree with most of the points
> you bring up but then you start abusing& putting down
> what some people have to say, what is up with that?
> it seems the whole premise of this site is to express
> ourselves in a safe environment?
> i do not agree with H. Clinton
> agree with H. Clinton on the Iraq war or her stand on
> illegal immigrants but why do so many people in this
> country hate her so much? is it that she is a
> powerful woman that might win the election? i am
> voting for Obama because i trust him more& many other
> reasons that touch me personally.
Just a thought, but maybe so many people hate her because of how outspoken she was in the beginning of her husbands first term as president. I can remember the jokes about president Clinton & her husband. Don't you remember those days.
|
|
|
Posts:
1
Registered:
2/2/08
|
|
(1586 of 1687)
Feb 2, 2008 4:35 AM
|
|
hey, Shakin all Over, i agree with most of the points you bring up but then you start abusing& putting down what some people have to say, what is up with that? it seems the whole premise of this site is to express ourselves in a safe environment? i do not agree with H. Clinton on the Iraq war or her stand on illegal immigrants but why do so many people in this country hate her so much? is it that she is a powerful woman that might win the election? i am voting for Obama because i trust him more& many other reasons that touch me personally.
|
|
|
Posts:
6
Registered:
2/2/08
|
|
(1585 of 1687)
Feb 2, 2008 3:59 AM
|
She did not cry. Not one tear formed. She only got a little glassy-eyed. Watch the footage.
OK let's split hairs, she got all choked up because if not elected, we the American people would not be able to benefit from her superior knowledge and leadership.
|
|
|
Posts:
1
Registered:
2/2/08
|
|
(1584 of 1687)
Feb 2, 2008 3:53 AM
|
Bill--- As someone "brand new" to this forum, but a LONGTIME fan of Realtime, I have a question I'm gonna guess I won't see discussed here (or anywhere else for that matter) -- I have a daughter currently @ Dartmouth (International Economics & Political Affairs) who, as a part of a 60 strong collegiate "interest group" needed to find a way to participate in this 2008 process, so they took on the issue of "QUESTIONS THE CANDIDATES, REGARDLESS OF AFFILIATION OR PARTY, will NEVER BE ALLOWED TO FIELD (or discuss) IN THE MSM " ! Submitted questions (now totalling more than 660,000) have been submitted to all candidate Headquarters, and as of AM today, anything even resembling caring, cogent responses are running @ a total of 29 ! WHEN ARE THE EDUCATED VOTERS AND CITIZENS OF THIS COUNTRY GOING TO START TAKING STOCK OF THE POWER THE MEDIA, LOBBYISTS AND [other] CORPORATE POWER BROKERS HAVE AMASSED, AND TAKE BACK OUR COUNTRY ? Yes Bill, you come closest to the mean definition of "Master of the Grand Expose", but when am I going to see a "RealTime Bill Maher American Summit on Democracy" w/ an airtime of say 8-hours, and a panel consisting of say Ted Rall, Keith Olberman, Chris Floyd, David Corn... and say Rand Beers ? I want to believe in "your 15 seconds" Bill -- How about showing me I REALLY can ? (Um, just as an aside, you might want to discuss why "black budget" appropriations (or rather the LACK of them) for '06 - end '08 will total more than 1.029T $$ (Yes, that's Trillion!) Trust me Bill, sometimes the only way to find a hoard of rats is to open the door to where they really live --- and sometimes that means putting EVERYTHING on the line to do it !
Do me a favor too will ya' ? --- make it a bit more visible as to "How to Post New Threads/Questions" ?
--
Edited by DartmouthDad at 02/02/2008 1:02 AM
|
|
|
Posts:
31
Registered:
2/2/08
|
|
(1583 of 1687)
Feb 2, 2008 3:41 AM
|
> #2, In my view, I think she loses credibility because
> she voted for the war. Also she was able to sway the
> vote in New Hampshire by crying. There's no strength
> in emotion or room for tears in foriegn policy. It's
> scary for me to think that our president could gain
> support for anything by sheading a few tears.
She did not cry. Not one tear formed. She only got a little glassy-eyed. Watch the footage.
|
|
|
|
|
