Bill Maher Reads Quote On “Lazy Black People” From….Michelle Obama

RawStory.com:

Real Time host Bill Maher went to bat to a degree for Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) by comparing his recently-criticized remarks about “inner city men” to an excerpt from a May 2013 speech by First Lady Michelle Obama.

Maher — who noted the “hushed silence” from the crowd regarding Obama’s remarks — specifically quoted from her commencement speech at Bowie State University, in which she said too many young Black people “can’t be bothered” to get a job.

“Instead of walking miles every day to school, they’re sitting on couches for hours playing video games, watching TV,” she said at the time. “Instead of dreaming of being a teacher or a lawyer or a business leader, they’re fantasizing about being a baller or a rapper.”

“I just read this, and you thought it was Paul Ryan,” Maher told comedian W. Kamau Bell.

“Because you told me it was,” Bell replied.

“For a reason,” Maher said. “I’m just asking: Is something less true if a white person says it about black people?”

Maher then said it sounded like Obama agreed with Ryan.

“This sounds even more like, ‘Hey Black people, don’t be lazy,’” Maher said. 

“She’s talking to Black people,” Bell retorted. “We talk to each other differently than we talk to you.”

But Ryan, Center for American Progress president Neera Tanden told Maher, was blaming the Black and Latino communities for their problems. 

“When you look at his budget, what does his budget do?” Tanden said. “Cuts all the programs in these communities — programs that have helped create jobs — and takes it and, until now, his budget has given massive tax cuts to the wealthy.”

Former Rep. Rick Lazio (R-NY) then accused Democrats of squandering the chance to ameliorate the problems when they were in charge of “most of these inner cities,” on top of having a sitting Democratic president in office and a recent majority in Congress.

“They don’t vote,” Maher said of city voters. “They don’t think it makes a difference.”

“Paul Ryan, I would say, made an awkward statement,” Lazio said, as Tanden looked on in apparent disbelief. “At least that guy’s out there talking about poverty. And what happens when Republicans or conservatives pop their head up and start talking about poverty, is that they get smacked down and called a racist.”

RELATED: Michelle Obama Discusses Education Among Blacks and Acting White

Politiks As Usual: In The News 2/2/14

Ann Coulter to Fox & Friends: My Friend’s Sister Died Because of Obamacare

The Republican Suicide Strategy On Immigration

Beyonce By The Book: Rutgers Offers Course On Star 

Obama Doubles Down On Destroying The Economy

US West Faces 'Worst Drought in 500 Years'

Bill Maher: Conservatives to Have Mass Shooting at Country Music Awards

GMA Hypes Christie’s ‘Very Personal Attack’ Against Former Staffer

Parents Warned: Big Brother Owns Your Children

Report: Syria Still Has 96% of Its Chemical Weapons; 83 Killed In Latest Attack

U.S. Taxpayers Fund $52K Study of 16 Schizophrenic LGBT Canadians

2014 Grammys: The Latest Attempt to Push the Liberal Agenda

Maine Supreme Court Locks in Transgender Student Bathroom Rights

5 Wacky Things Liberal Feminists Believe

Black Baltimore Orioles Outfielder Adam Jones Has A Banana Thrown At Him

Far-right, conservative pundits like Michelle Malkin, who reacted with unmasked glee upon hearing the George Zimmerman verdict, should be aware of a recent incident involving Baltimore Orioles star outfielder Adam Jones who took to Twitter after Sunday's 10-2 win in San Francisco to complain about a fan tossing a banana onto the field. While at first there was no record of the racist incident, Giants fan, Alexander Poulides, 42, would later admit to throwing the banana near Jones out of disgust over his team's loss.

While the Jones incident is nowhere near as unfortunate and tragic as the Trayvon Martin case was, conservatives like Malkin, who have long given up on the black vote, do the entire movement a disservice by pretending that racism no longer exists:

A day after posting a tweet saying a banana was thrown toward him during Sunday’s game in San Francisco, Orioles center fielder Adam Jones tried to move on from the incident.

In the bottom of the ninth inning of the Orioles' 10-2 win over the Giants at AT&T Park, Jones said a banana was on the ground in center field near him. Witnesses said Jones calmly picked up the banana and laid it over the center field fence.

Monday, Jones wouldn’t specifically say he thought the act was racially motivated — there have been incidents at sporting events where bananas were thrown at black athletes on the field, which is considered a racist act, particularly in European soccer matches — but he said there was no place in the game for it.

“I’m one of the nicest guys out there,” Jones said as the Orioles prepared to play the Arizona Diamondbacks. “I get an attitude here and there, but [throwing items on the field are] just actions that don’t ever need to happen in sports. It’s unfortunate that things happen like that, but it ain’t gonna stop me, myself and the Orioles. We have games to win. It’s mid-August. I’ve got a bigger concern on my head than someone’s ignorance or act of whatever.”

Jones said he worried about it more as a player safety issue. Earlier this year, a can was thrown toward left fielder Nate McLouth during a game in Toronto.

“I personally don’t have no hard feelings about it. It’s just an unfortunate thing that happened,” Jones said. “You never know what kind of things can be thrown at a player. Our backs are turned. You never know what can be thrown in our direction. I just look at it as a safety issue. When my back is turned, I don’t know what is going on there, so we just look at it as a liability. Whatever certain object it was, I could care less.”

Asked whether Jones had ever been subjected to such an act before, Jones quickly said, “I’m from San Diego, man. You don’t see that kind of stuff.”

RELATED:  Malkin Rips ‘Department Of Social Justice’ Head Holder For ‘Pandering’ To Trayvon Martin Supporters

Wayne Brady Calls Out Bill Maher: ‘I Will Beat Your Ass In Public’ For Questioning My Black Cred

Mediaite.com:

Comedian Wayne Brady‘s animosity towards Bill Maher has not softened since he said last June he wanted to “slap the shit out of” the Real Time host for jokes he had made about him. Speaking to Marc Lamont Hill on HuffPost Live Monday, Brady reaffirmed his desire to “beat [Maher's] ass in public” for saying President Obama, like Wayne Brady, is not a “real black” man. 

Maher first explained his desire for Obama to be a “real black president” who “lifts up his shirt so they can see the gun in his pants” during a monologue in 2010. Subsequently, Maher referred to Obama as “your Wayne Brady,” a characterization that put into question the African-American credentials of both Obama and Brady. 

“I’ve respected him as a comedian, and what he does on HBO is great,” Brady told Hill. “But when he starts to drag me in, to use me as the cultural linchpin of his not-black-enough argument, that’s bullshit.” Turning the argument around, Brady questioned Maher’s credentials to discuss the black experience. When he meets Maher again, Brady said, he’ll be that “stereotypical black dude” for him “and I will beat your ass in public.” 

“Be careful when you make statements like that,” Brady warned Maher, because it will allow his viewers to make the same stereotypical assumptions about black people. 

RELATED: Maher To Greenwald & Reid: Would Kidnapped Ohio Women Been Found Earlier ‘If They Were In A Richer Neighborhood’?

Politiks As Usual: In The News 3/18/13

 Pope Wades Into Crowds, Shocks Bystanders In Rome

Atheism Is A Religion Too

Sacred Mystery: Blockbuster Ratings for ‘The Bible’ Confound Hollywood

Dr. Ben Carson: Obama Trying to 'Destroy This Country'

Government Steering Americans Toward a Tele-Work, Tele-Shop, Mass-Transit Future

GOP Plans Fewer Debates, More Community Outreach

Ed Schultz: ‘I Don’t Think MSNBC Has Slighted Me’

Bill Maher Defends Iraq War, Bush: ‘It’s A Country That’s Standing, I Thought It Wouldn’t Be’

Karl Rove Slams Sarah Palin for CPAC Remarks

Do Women Belong In Racing?

Ann Coulter Blasts Chris Christie, Says He’s ‘Off My List’ For 2016 In Fiery CPAC Speech

Ann Coulter On Lawrence O’Donnell And Bill Maher: They ‘Date Black Gals So They Think They’re Freedom Riders’

Mediaite.com:

On Tuesday, Fox & Friends host Steve Doocy interviewed author and columnist Ann Coulter about her new book, Mugged, which takes a look at the racial politics of the left.

He kicked things off by playing a clip of MSNBC’s Chris Matthews defending his previous comments about the GOP essentially “stoking racism” for political gain to HBO’s Bill Maher last Friday.

Coulter said that the Democratic party has tried to take credit for things like, say, signing the Civil Rights Act, although “it was actually Eisenhower who got the ball rolling.” She alter added that she found it curious that Matthews “cites all the black people coming up to him and cites black people in other countries whom he refers to as ‘African Americans.’” This is because, she ventured, “here in America, he doesn’t have any black friends. He doesn’t have any black neighbors,” and a picture of his son’s wedding reveals “not a black face in the group.” If he’d been Republican, she added, he “would be convicted of racism in two seconds.”

Coulter also described why it is that she believes Democrats “use” racism for political advantage. Step one, she said, is “tell black people that Republicans hate them for 100 years. Actually only since, I guess, the Democrats finally started to come on around the mid ’60s. Once the civil rights battles were won, you have liberals playacting against nonexistent racism and telling the world that Republicans and Tea Partiers are racist.” Step two, she continued, is to “taunt Republicans for not having more blacks in their party.”

She said that, through writing the book, she was surprised to find all the time that the President directly engages in “race baiting.” Coulter also accuses the left of being quick to label their opponents racist for such things as opposing ObamaCare, being a Tea Party member, or — and here she cited a conversation with Alan Colmes — for saying “the blacks” rather than “blacks” or “black people.”

Coulter later claimed that liberals — specifically Rachel Maddow — introduce black guests and being extremely special or “wicked smart,” while “poor nerd white guest” Chris Hayes simply gets a dry, straightforward intro.

She also joked that some liberals, Lawrence O’Donnell and Bill Maher among them, think of themselves as “freedom riders” because they date “black gals.” 

RELATED: Ann Coulter Gets Into Heated Battle On The View, Whoopi Goldberg Gets Bleeped

Wayne Brady Would ‘Gladly Slap The Sh*t Out Of Bill Maher’ In Front Of His Prostitutes

Always funny when smug, white liberals like Bill Maher and Lawrence O'Donnell create litmus tests on a black man's blackness and get away with it without a word from the usual race baiters on the Left. Good thing Wayne Brady is here to save the day (tho I wish he would've also dropped the name "Superhead"--the most infamous slut within Bill Maher's stable of black ho's) and tell us what he'd do to Maher if he had the guts to diss him to his face:

Bill Maher has made clear for some time now that President Obama is not sufficiently “black” for his tastes, because President Obama doesn’t walk around with a large gun in his pants, or something (Bill Maher expects his audience to accept him as ultimate arbiter of what “real black people” are, and they do). In those comparisons, he often cites comedian Wayne Brady as the antithesis of all that is black– and this week, Brady shot back on Aisha Tyler‘s broadcast, asserting that “the black man part of me” would “gladly slap the shit out of Bill Maher.”


“I’ve had Bill Maher twice now when referencing Obama, [sic] he’s like ‘yeah, with your Wayne Brady’ — it’s a diss to Obama to be called me,” Brady explained to Tyler on her podcast this week, noting that Maher wanted a “brother brother.” Accusing Maher of only having the “particular black experience” of “fuck[ing] black hookers,” he explained that he did not confront Maher usually because “if I would have gone on his show or even doing it online, I’m not going to win, he still has his platform.”

But Brady explained that Maher was wrong to think of Brady as somehow not “black enough.” “I’m not saying I’m really badass but, if Bill Maher has his perception of what’s black wrapped up, I would gladly slap the shit out of Bill Maher in the middle of the street, and then I want to see what Bill Maher would do.” He explained that he wouldn’t actually do this “because I’d get sued and lose my house and its not worth it for me, but the black man part of me would be so satisfied to slap the shit out of him in front of Coco and Ebony and Fox, the three ladies of the night that he has hired.”

Tyler saw the bright side to being constantly attacked by Bill Maher in that way, though: “what’s exciting about it is your name and your persona and your identity has become such a cultural touchstone.” “Hallelujah!” Brady replied.

RELATED: Bill Maher Disappointed Obama Isn’t A ‘Real Black President’ With A Gun In His Pants

Compulsive Liar Rachel Maddow When Cornered Pretends She's a Private Person With No Opinions

When you're a morally bankrupt, gay activist pretending to be journalist, this is how you react when you're cornered outside of the safe haven within the studio that's inside the offices of the failing, hack, partisan network you work for:

You don't know me, Rachel Maddow complained  -- twice -- to Reason magazine editor Nick Gillespie in her hissy fit Friday night on HBO's "Real Time With Bill Maher."

Yet again, Maddow gets it wrong. By the incisive questions he asked, and Maddow's reluctance to answer them, Gillespie showed he knows her all too well.

Seguing from a discussion of the Fast & Furious scandal, Gillespie condemned Attorney General Eric Holder for his role in the war on drugs --

What a shock, the opinions held by Maher and Maddow have remained frozen in amber for two decades. Saves them all that trouble of thinking things through ever again.

Maddow's "you don't even know me" defense was strange enough the first time. (A friend told me it was Maddow's version of "Don't you know who I am?!"). The second time Maddow resorted to it was outright bizarre, several minutes later during a discussion of the health care law enacted in Massachusetts while Mitt Romney was governor -- aka, Romneycare -- leading to the federal Affordable Care Act in 2010, aka, Obamacare --

Followed by that rarity from a Maher audience -- a moment of tomb-like silence as the sheer hilarity of what Maddow just claimed sank in, before Maher uttered a feeble "oh" and an audience filled with Maddow fans as shown by their boisterous applause earlier when she was introduced began belatedly cheering for her again, lest their continued awkward silence make for a YouTube video that might doom Maddow's career.
There it was again -- "You don't know anything about me" -- as if Maddow has more in common with Emily Dickinson than Joan Rivers.

As if this ambitious media climber was actually a timorous wallflower suddenly thrust into the media spotlight amid all these brutish men with their impertinent questions, over and over and over! (wave arms for emphasis).

To make matters worse, Maddow followed this with a claim that initially silenced even a partisan audience  -- "My job is to cover these things, not to tell you how I like them or not."

Which is the opposite of what Maddow does every weeknight on MSNBC, as anyone who has spent even random seconds watching her show while channel surfing is aware. The program is officially titled "The Rachel Maddow Show" but would be more accurately subtitled, "Liberal politics I like, conservative politics I loathe."

It's a formula Maddow followed at left-wing Air America Radio, then during guest spots and filling in for former MSNBC anchor Keith Olbermann, and when she was given her own cable show three years ago.

Maddow doesn't limit herself to opining there, but also does so in venues such as, ahem, the Maher show, regular appearances on "Meet the Press," her Twitter feed, chummy chats with David Letterman and Jay Leno, her book that was published this year, "Drift," and frequent fawning interviews in the media.

Maddow does not remain so engaged to tell us the news, which was invariably reported long before she got to it. She lives and breathes to opine on this, that and everything else -- and denying it shows that Maddow knows less about herself than does her new acquaintance, Nick Gillespie.

RELATED: Maher, Maddow Deny Being Partisan; Can't Name Republican They Agree With

Kirsten Powers Blasts ‘Disturbing’ Bill Maher NYT Profile: He ‘Says The Most Vile Things’

Mediaite.com:

Perennial offender Bill Maher was the topic of conversation on today’s Fox News Watch today, this time for rejecting American exceptionalism. The conversation took a turn when the point was made that, despite his behavior, Maher received a positive profile in the New York Times this week, one Kirsten Powers described as “disturbing” and describing “a person who does not exist.”


“HBO gives him that show, freedom of speech allows him to say all that, but why give him the platform?” host Jon Scott asked, to which Jim Pinkerton responded, “money,” adding that there was “an audience for it” in Los Angeles, which “does say something about where you can make a living in this country.” Scott responded with the point that replacing America with Iran and the Latter-Day Saints Church with Islam would post a much bigger problem for the media, in his opinion, and the panel agreed. Richard Grenell noted that “he’s making these statements in Los Angeles, he’s not making these statements in Cairo” and called his rejection of American exceptionalism “ludicrous.”


The conversation then turned to the fact that Maher had bought a stake in the New York Mets and received what Scott described as a “glowing” piece in the New York Times. Powers was even less charitable, calling it “delusional” and describing “a person that does not exist,” a libertarian for whom atheism was not of the utmost importance. “He’s an Obama supporter– I thought maybe the meant ‘libertine,’” she joked, concluded that given that “he says the most vile things… the idea that he would get a glowing profile is disturbing.”

RELATED: Bill Maher finds six black men to deem Matt Drudge racist [VIDEO]

Mitt Romney Learns From John McCain, Not Playing The Hypocritical Liberal Repudiation Game

Of course if the Left was really concerned about Mitt Romney's association with Donald Trump they'd call on Barack Obama to give back that $1M donation he got from vile, disgusting, misogynist Bill Maher some time back. But not only are they not concerned about Romney's best interests, they also have no interest in talking about the issues that really matter to most Americans and Mitt Romney knows it:

Mitt Romney's refusal to repudiate Donald Trump sends a signal, both to Democrats and the voting public: With the nation's future at stake in this November's election, Romney will not accommodate calls that he disown supporters who make ill-considered, unpopular, or sometimes outrageous statements on matters not fundamental to the campaign.

Romney aides believe that cooperating with Democrats and media figures who are demanding a Trump disavowal would most certainly lead to more calls for more disavowals of other figures in the future -- leaving Romney spending as much time apologizing for his supporters as campaigning for president.  Team Romney views it as a silly and one-sided game designed to distract voters from the central issue of the race, which they remain convinced will be President Obama's handling of the economy.

By one-sided, they mean not only that Obama has not disavowed SuperPAC contributor Bill Maher for a number of Maher's statements that were particularly insulting to Republican women.  They also mean the press, with, as Team Romney sees it, questionable associations of its own. Has David Gregory, moderator of NBC's "Meet the Press," repudiated his colleague Al Sharpton, the MSNBC host with a decades-long record of incendiary statements and actions?  And has, say, the New York Times columnist Gail Collins repudiated her colleague Charles Blow, who once wrote to Romney, "Stick that in your magic underwear"?  Romney, his team believes, understands that the calls for him to repudiate Trump over the issue of birtherism -- and future calls to repudiate this or that supporter next week or next month over some other issue -- are at the core all about politics.

Another reason Romney is wary of such concessions is that John McCain tried them, and they didn't do him any good.  For example, in February 2008, a local Ohio radio host, Bill Cunningham, introduced McCain at a rally in Cincinnati.  In the introduction, Cunningham referred to Obama three times by his full name, which at the time some Republicans feared would open them up to unspecified accusations of intolerance. "At one point, the media will quit taking sides in this thing," Cunningham said, "and start covering Barack Hussein Obama."  McCain immediately apologized and disavowed Cunningham's remarks.  Eleven months later, of course, Obama took the oath of office, beginning, "I, Barack Hussein Obama…"  In retrospect, the Cunningham episode looked ridiculous.  But at the time, it contributed to an image of McCain in retreat.

So the bottom line is, Romney is determined to stay away from anything that distracts him from the main issue of the campaign.  In the end, the thinking goes, the heart of the campaign will always be the economy and Barack Obama's stewardship of it.  Repudiating, or not repudiating, Donald Trump won't change that.

RELATED: Romney clinches GOP nomination with Texas win

I'm amazed that I'm writing this, but I actually agree with Andrew Sullivan and Bill Maher here and I couldn't have explained this better myself. Maybe someone out there should send this piece to No. 1 far-Left gay advocate Ellen Degerenes (who is the person who made Tyler Clementi out to be a martyr in the first place) so she could see two far-Left loons state passionately that being stupid and mean doesn't mean you deserve 10 years in prison:

On tonight’s episode of Real Time with Bill Maher, the host and gay columnist Andrew Sullivan spoke out strongly against hate crimes legislation, branding it as the government trying to regulate people’s thoughts. Sullivan argued that in an ideal society based on the rule of law, a person should be judged on their actions, not their thoughts. Maher and Sullivan also agreed that the roommate of Tyler Clementi, the gay Rutgers student who committed suicide after said roommate pranked him, should not be charged with bias intimidation.


Fellow panelist Wendy Schiller disagreed with Maher and Sullivan’s arguments, saying that “an inclination to hate causes destruction,” and said that certain mental states may lead a person to commit a violent crime in the future. Sullivan shot back that people hate and resent other people for a number of reasons, including class resentment or personal animosity, and there are no hate crimes laws that encompass those mindsets.


On the other hand, Maher also brought up crimes of passion, where people tend to get lesser sentences because of their emotional state, and said that the law should just tell people it’s not okay to kill someone no matter your personal emotional state. Sullivan made it clear that neither he nor Maher are “standing up for hate,” but that they were trying to be intellectually consistent when it comes to defending the rights of all people, including homophobes.


“The right of a bigot to walk down the street is the same right of a drag queen to walk down the street. You attack it for one group, every group will suffer.”


Maher shifted the discussion to Dharun Ravi, the roommate of Tyler Clemente, who was found guilty of all charges and may face 10 years in prison. Ravi did spy on Clemente, and Maher didn’t doubt “he was a mean kid” but he said that Ravi shouldn’t face that much jail time for being “mean.” Sullivan agreed, saying that most people who are the subject of pranks that border on horrible don’t end up committing suicide, and said that if everyone who’s ever pulled a prank on someone and hurt them, whether homosexuality was an issue or not, “half the country would be locked up.”


Schiller tried to argue that Ravi specifically targeted Clementi because he was gay, but Maher disputed that notion, calling him a “kid in a dorm” who did something stupid, and said that pushing for hate crimes legislation “gives liberals a bad name.” Sullivan pointed out that Ravi vigorously denied that he was homophobic, and argued that the justice system was trying to decide what was inside his mind and his heart for him.

RELATED: Chris Cuomo Grills Tyler Clementi Roommate Dharun Ravi: Did You Frighten Him?

Barack Obama's War On Women

RELATED: Friday night news dump: Obama Administration to move forward with and expand contraception mandate

Hypocrite Obama Communications Director David Axelrod: Bill Maher Doesn’t Play Same Role As GOP ‘De Facto Boss’ Rush Limbaugh

To think this is CNN, of all places, pointing out liberal hypocrisy:

On Thursday, CNN’s Erin Burnett spoke with David Axelrod, the communications director for President Obama’s re-election campaign, about his recently-canceled plans to appear on controversial host Bill Maher‘s HBO program.


Burnett brought up Axelrod’s condemnation of conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh for having called Georgetown student and activist Sandra Fluke a “slut” and a “prostitute” — a condemnation that proved problematic in light of his decision to appear on Maher’s show given the comedian’s own history of referring to women — mainly, but not solely, conservative women in the public eye, like Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann — by derogatory names.


Burnett then asked Axelrod if Maher’s recent million dollar donation to a pro-Obama Super PAC should be returned in light of his comments.


Well, first of all, let me say there’s been a coarsening of our political culture. I don’t think that language is appropriate, no matter who uses it. And I think whoever you are in politics, you ought to be willing to say so. I was disappointed that Governor Romney didn’t stand up more forcefully when Rush Limbaugh said what he said.


But understand that these words that Maher has used in his standup act are a little bit different than — not excusable in any way — but different than a guy with 23 million radio listeners using his broadcast platform to malign a young woman for speaking her mind in the most inappropriate, grotesque ways.


Nor does Bill Maher play the role in the Democratic party that Rush Limbaugh plays in the Republican party, where he’s really the de facto boss of the party. Everybody responds to him, which is the reason why I think Governor Romney was afraid to take him on.


When Burnett noted that, as a public figure herself, she wouldn’t appreciate being called a “c-word” by anyone, Axelrod reiterated that he isn’t trying to “excuse” anyone.


“I do not excuse those kinds of characterizations of women,” he said. “I don’t think those kind of gratuitous, nasty words — about anyone — is appropriate in the public sphere. I’m not excusing anyone. But I think what– what Limbaugh did was was particularly egregious. And it wasn’t just once. He built on it and built on it to the point where he built into a sort of perverse soliloquy at the end about, you know, whether she post her…. relationships online.”


“I can respect that,” replied Burnett, agreeing that Limbaugh’s comments about Fluke had been “disgusting.”


As for the whether the Priorities USA Super PAC should or will return Maher’s hefty donation, Axelrod stressed that it would be illegal of him to become involved in the group’s decisions, but “as a general rule, I don’t think those words belong in the public space.”


Later, Burnett reported that Maher’s contribution makes up 15 percent of the Super PAC’s total contributions since it was established.


CNN contributor John Avlon described Axelrod’s response as a “dodge,” noting that a pervading problem in politics is people’s willingness to defend those on “their side,” while condemning those on the other for the same or similar actions.

RELATED: David Axelrod Cancels Bill Maher Appearance

Politiks As Usual: 3/12/12

U.S. Soldier Accused Of Afghan Killing Spree

Georgia Charter School Decision Could Set National Precedent

What's Wrong With What Kirk Cameron Said?

The Anti-Romney Vote

Defining Deviancy Down

"Game Change" Is Everything Conservatives Feared It Would Be

Lawsuit: NASA Specialist Was Axed Over Intelligent Design

‘GCB’ - Desperately Un-Christian Housewives, Newt Slams It

NY Times Praises 'ABC's Gay Wednesdays'

Schumer, Obama Won't Return Maher's $1 Million After Palin Insults

WH Office Now 'Faith-Based Farce'

Campus President Rebukes Limbaugh-Supporting Professor

Kirsten Powers on Rush and Sandra Fluke: Where’s The Outrage At Misogynistic Liberal Men?

HotAir.com:

If you missed her widely linked Daily Beast item this weekend, read it now. Then read Treacher’s long look back at Our Moral Superiors’ most morally superior moments. The most interesting bit here is when Megyn Kelly asks whether she thinks liberals are genuinely offended by Rush but debilitated by a blind spot about their own side or whether they’re affecting outrageous outrage to put points on the partisan scoreboard. KP thinks it’s the former; I think the truth is in between. They are genuinely offended — not by the rhetoric, though, but by conservative opposition to abortion and support for prioritizing religious conscience above contraception coverage. That’s what makes Rush “anti-woman”; the “slut” name-calling is, supposedly, a window onto that deeper animus. Because Maher and Olbermann and Taibbi are, ahem, “pro-woman” on policy, they can be as personally nasty as they want and it’s not a window onto anything. The quintessential example of this is of course Ted Kennedy, whose career stands for the proposition that you can allegedly assault women and even leave a woman to die and be reelected for eternity so long as you vote the right way.


That is to say, for all of the left’s bleeding-heart smugness about “good intentions,” they’re remarkably bottom-line on this: So long as you support abortion and the rest of their packet on social issues, your actual intent when calling a woman a “mashed-up bag of meat with lipstick” is irrelevant. It’s an irrebuttable presumption of feminism, a de facto “get out of misogyny free” card. As a thought experiment, imagine, say, Maher suddenly declaring himself pro-life (that’s a mighty tough experiment, I know) and then calling a woman a “c*nt.” Think there’d be a response from the left then? I wonder, in fact, to what extent KP’s sensitivity to this is shaped by the fact that she’s pro-life herself. Must get tiresome for her to be accused of being a “self-hating woman” or whatever while left-wing heroes go around accusing their female critics of looking like pre-op transsexuals.


Apropos of nothing, my favorite comment on the endless Rush/Fluke saga comes from the Political Math guy, who points to this petition at the White House website calling on Panetta to drop Rush from Armed Forces Radio and quips, “Liberals have ‘moral objection’ to Rush, don’t want tax money paying him #SelfAwarenessFail”. Exit question via Guy Benson: Since we’re now all about organizations distancing themselves from media types who use “slut” rhetoric, when does Obama’s Super PAC plan on forfeiting Bill Maher’s $1 million donation?

RELATED: Rush Limbaugh not the only culprit, left guilty of misogyny too

Kirsten Powers Takes On Male Liberal Misogynists In The Media

TheDailyBeast.com:

Did you know there is a war on women?


Yes, it’s true. Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Bill Maher, Matt Taibbi, and Ed Schultz have been waging it for years with their misogynist outbursts. There have been boycotts by people on the left who are outraged that these guys still have jobs. Oh, wait. Sorry, that never happened.


Boycotts are reserved for people on the right like Rush Limbaugh, who finally apologized Saturday for calling a 30-year-old Georgetown Law student, Sandra Fluke, a “slut” after she testified before congress about contraception. Limbaugh’s apology was likely extracted to stop the departure of any more advertisers, who were rightly under pressure from liberal groups outraged by the comments.


Let it be shouted from the rooftops that Rush Limbaugh should not have called Ms. Fluke a slut or, as he added later, a “prostitute” who should post her sex tapes. It’s unlikely that his apology will assuage the people on a warpath for his scalp, and after all, why should it? He spent days attacking a woman as a slut and prostitute and refused to relent. Now because he doesn’t want to lose advertisers, he apologizes. What’s in order is something more like groveling—and of course a phone call to Ms. Fluke—if you ask me.


But if Limbaugh’s actions demand a boycott—and they do—then what about the army of swine on the left?


During the 2008 election Ed Schultz said on his radio show that Sarah Palin set off a “bimbo alert.” He called Laura Ingraham a “right-wing slut.” (He later apologized.) He once even took to his blog to call yours truly a “bimbo” for the offense of quoting him accurately in a New York Post column.


Keith Olbermann has said that conservative commentator S.E. Cupp should have been aborted by her parents, apparently because he finds her having opinions offensive. He called Michelle Malkin a “mashed-up bag of meat with lipstick.” He found it newsworthy to discuss Carrie Prejean’s breasts on his MSNBC show. His solution for dealing with Hillary Clinton, who he thought should drop out of the presidential race, was to find “somebody who can take her into a room and only he comes out.” Olbermann now works for über-leftist and former Democratic vice president Al Gore at Current TV.


Left-wing darling Matt Taibbi wrote on his blog in 2009, “When I read [Malkin’s] stuff, I imagine her narrating her text, book-on-tape style, with a big, hairy set of balls in her mouth.” In a Rolling Stone article about Secretary of State Clinton, he referred to her “flabby arms.” When feminist writer Erica Jong criticized him for it, he responded by referring to Jong as an “800-year old sex novelist.” (Jong is almost 70, which apparently makes her an irrelevant human being.) In Taibbi’s profile of Congresswoman and presidential candidate Michele Bachmann he labeled her “batshit crazy.” (Oh, those “crazy” women with their hormones and all.)


Chris Matthews’s sickening misogyny was made famous in 2008, when he obsessively tore down Hillary Clinton for standing between Barack Obama and the presidency, something that Matthews could not abide. Over the years he has referred to the former first lady, senator and presidential candidate and current secretary of state as a “she-devil,” “Nurse Ratched,” and “Madame Defarge.” Matthews has also called Clinton “witchy,” “anti-male,” and “uppity” and once claimed she won her Senate seat only because her “husband messed around.” He asked a guest if “being surrounded by women” makes “a case for commander in chief—or does it make a case against it?” At some point Matthews was shamed into sort of half apologizing to Clinton, but then just picked up again with his sexist ramblings.


Matthews has wondered aloud whether Sarah Palin is even “capable of thinking” and has called Bachmann a “balloon head” and said she was “lucky we still don’t have literacy tests out there.” Democratic strategist Jehmu Greene, who is the former president of the Women’s Media Center, told Fox News’ Megyn Kelly in 2011 that Matthews
“is a bully, and his favorite target is women.” So why does he still have a show? What if his favorite target was Jews? Or African-Americans?


But the grand pooh-bah of media misogyny is without a doubt Bill Maher—who also happens to be a favorite of liberals—who has given $1 million to President Obama’s super PAC. Maher has called Palin a “dumb twat” and dropped the C-word in describing the former Alaska governor. He called Palin and Congresswoman Bachmann “boobs” and “two bimbos.” He said of the former vice-presidential candidate, “She is not a mean girl. She is a crazy girl with mean ideas.” He recently made a joke about Rick Santorum’s wife using a vibrator. Imagine now the same joke during the 2008 primary with Michelle Obama’s name in it, and tell me that he would still have a job. Maher said of a woman who was harassed while breast-feeding at an Applebee’s, “Don't show me your tits!” as though a woman feeding her child is trying to flash Maher. (Here’s a way to solve his problem: don’t stare at a strangers’ breasts). Then, his coup de grâce: “And by the way, there is a place where breasts and food do go together. It’s called Hooters!”


Liberals—you know, the people who say they “fight for women”—comprise Maher’s audience, and a parade of high-profile liberals make up his guest list. Yet have any of them confronted him? Nope. That was left to Ann Coulter, who actually called Maher a misogynist to his face, an opportunity that feminist icon Gloria Steinem failed to take when she appeared on his show in 2011.


This is not to suggest that liberals—or feminists—never complain about misogyny. Many feminist blogs now document attacks on women on the left and the right, including Jezebel, Shakesville, and the Women’s Media Center (which was cofounded by Steinem). But when it comes to high-profile campaigns to hold these men accountable—such as that waged against Limbaugh—the real fury seems reserved only for conservatives, while the men on the left get a wink and a nod as long as they are carrying water for the liberal cause.

RELATED: Rush Limbaugh Apologizes For Calling Sandra Fluke A ‘Slut’

Stupid Man Bill Maher Lies And Says Senate 'Never Used To Have' The Filibuster

This angry, cantankerous and Godless man is a major voice of the Left:

NewsBusters readers know there's almost nothing I like doing more on a Saturday than exposing the ignorance of Bill Maher.


On HBO's "Real Time" Friday, the host came through like he always does showing his total lack of knowledge concerning how bills move through the Senate as he told the American Spectator's John Fund "they never used to have" the filibuster.


Yes, he really did say the Vice President would have to vote if there was a 50 to 49 "deadlock."


And this man has his own nationally televised show each week.


I guess it's beyond his intellectual capacity to realize that 50 to 49 isn't a deadlock, and that the Vice President is only called in to decide a tie.


After all the nonsense that's come out of this man's mouth over the years, why should we expect him to understand something that simple?


But it gets better:


MAHER: There has been a quiet coup in this country where you now need 60 votes. We never voted on this idea that you need six. Why should this? This is not.


JOHN FUND, AMERICAN SPECTATOR: Bill, how many times, the Constitution..


MAHER: Yeah, the Constitution says a simple majority in the Senate. That's not what we have anymore.


Minutes later as the debate about this issue raged on:


Maher: First of all, you're talking as if the U.S. Constitution and this particular bill are the same thing.


FUND: You said it would pass. It wouldn't have.


MAHER: Well, I’m not so sure it wouldn’t. The fact it didn't pass, Harry Reid changed his vote. It becomes a procedural matter at some point. Yes, it would have passed if they did not have that filibuster hanging over their head which they never used to have hanging over their head.


Never? Really?


What liberals like Maher - who of course hate the filibuster when they're in the majority - but love it when they're not! - refuse to accept is that this procedure has been in existence since our nation was founded.


As the Senate's own website explains:


Using the filibuster to delay or block legislative action has a long history. The term filibuster -- from a Dutch word meaning "pirate" -- became popular in the 1850s, when it was applied to efforts to hold the Senate floor in order to prevent a vote on a bill.


In the early years of Congress, representatives as well as senators could filibuster. As the House of Representatives grew in numbers, however, revisions to the House rules limited debate. In the smaller Senate, unlimited debate continued on the grounds that any senator should have the right to speak as long as necessary on any issue.


In 1841, when the Democratic minority hoped to block a bank bill promoted by Kentucky Senator Henry Clay, he threatened to change Senate rules to allow the majority to close debate. Missouri Senator Thomas Hart Benton rebuked Clay for trying to stifle the Senate's right to unlimited debate.


Three quarters of a century later, in 1917, senators adopted a rule (Rule 22), at the urging of President Woodrow Wilson, that allowed the Senate to end a debate with a two-thirds majority vote, a device known as "cloture." The new Senate rule was first put to the test in 1919, when the Senate invoked cloture to end a filibuster against the Treaty of Versailles. Even with the new cloture rule, filibusters remained an effective means to block legislation, since a two-thirds vote is difficult to obtain. Over the next five decades, the Senate occasionally tried to invoke cloture, but usually failed to gain the necessary two-thirds vote. Filibusters were particularly useful to Southern senators who sought to block civil rights legislation, including anti-lynching legislation, until cloture was invoked after a 57 day filibuster against the Civil Right Act of 1964. In 1975, the Senate reduced the number of votes required for cloture from two-thirds to three-fifths, or 60 of the current one hundred senators.


Many Americans are familiar with the filibuster conducted by Jimmy Stewart, playing Senator Jefferson Smith in Frank Capra's film Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, but there have been some famous filibusters in the real-life Senate as well. During the 1930s, Senator Huey P. Long effectively used the filibuster against bills that he thought favored the rich over the poor. The Louisiana senator frustrated his colleagues while entertaining spectators with his recitations of Shakespeare and his reading of recipes for "pot-likkers." Long once held the Senate floor for 15 hours. The record for the longest individual speech goes to South Carolina's J. Strom Thurmond who filibustered for 24 hours and 18 minutes against the Civil Rights Act of 1957.


As such, and quite contrary to what most liberals like Maher believe, it's not the filibuster that's "new." It's the ability to end it via a cloture vote that was first enacted in 1917 and amended in 1975.


And yes, also quite contrary to what this nincompoop said, both changes were voted on.

Greg Gutfeld Calls Bill Maher A "Coward"

Normally I think it's best for conservatives to put the likes of vile, leftwing cretins like Bill Maher on "Ignore", only because Maher's diatribes only speak to people who think like him (i.e. the "flapping, approval-seeking seals" in Maher's audience). But hey, at the end of the day we're all human and thus, sometimes fire just needs to be fought with fire:

While every week provides something to be outraged at, last Friday’s edition of Real Time went beyond the pale, even for Bill Maher. Maher went on a tirade against the Palins, calling them “inbred weirdos,” while his guests talked about Rep. Michele Bachmann’s sex life. On today’s The Five, the panel debated whether the phrase was an insulting reference to Trig Palin’s condition, and whether the media had ignored the show’s reprehensible commentary.


Greg Gutfeld opened the floor on the matter with a scathing monologue attempting to figure out what Maher was up to with his comments. “I’m sure that slur is a lurid explanation for a family with a disabled child,” he noted, though argued that Maher would never admit it– as he has similarly done with other comments. If Maher contends that his opinion’s aren’t sexist, he asked, “are they just hate?” Gutfeld left that question unanswered, but went further to examine Maher’s character. “So what do you make of a guy who says wrong things and then runs scampering from them?” he asked.


His initial answer was “a coward,” but he passed that label on to his audience for listening to his say what he said without protest– in fact, with applause. For them he had his harshest words: “After all, his awful statements fester unchallenged in an echo chamber, and effusive slophouse of flapping, approval-seeking seals. So let’s keep him there, just to remind us that they still exist.”


Gutfeld found no disagreement on the panel– in fact, as the clip of Maher ran, Dana Perino appears to have uttered some profanities at Maher off-microphone. Whatever she said could likely have not been more insulting that what she did say on-air: “I don’t know who stuffed this guy in a locker in high school, but this guy is such a loser,” she ranted, “I can’t imagine any woman…” The panel laughed, but did not disagree. In fact, the only discord on the panel on this point was from Bob Beckel, but not in defense of Maher– he was offended that Andrea Tantaros had equated Maher with the garden-variety liberal. “Don’t equate the rest of us with Bill Maher,” he cried.

Far-Left Gay Activist Dan Savage Says Of Congressional Republicans ‘I Wish They All Were F**kin’ Dead’ On Real Time With Bill Maher

Mediaite.com:

Real Time host Bill Maher thought he had a good soundbite when he compared Congressional Republicans to late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, but was quickly one-upped by “It gets better” LGBT activist Dan Savage, who said “Unfortunately not exactly like him. I wish they were all f**kin’ dead.”


Dan Savage’s “It gets better” campaign has been hugely successful, even embraced by the President, and what people often lose sight of is the fact that those messages resonate with all kids, not just LGBT youth. All kinds of kids suffer, and die, from the kind of bullying that “It gets better” strives to put into perspective.


If that makes Savage angry, he’s not alone, but anger isn’t the problem. Properly focused anger can be a powerful motivator, and a spark to real change. The campaign to smear Obama administration safe schools czar Kevin Jennings made me very angry, but it didn’t make me wish Sean Hannity dead, it made me wish him honest, and made me wish his viewers smarter.


It is Savage’s correct life-or-death view of LGBT issues that motivated the campaign, but also that motivates him to do things which undermine that campaign, and its message. Whether it’s wishing all of the Republicans in Congress were dead, or wiping flu boogers on phones as an undercover volunteer at a Republican campaign headquarters, when that view transforms from anger to hatred that Savage undercuts his ability to be an effective messenger, at least to those not already in the choir.


Even anger can trip you up, though. Friday night’s Real Time was marked, not only by controversial statements, but by a weird hostility toward panelist Mark Cuban, who got attacked several times before he could make what were excellent points. The best of these was the fact that taxes, increased or cut, have little or no impact on job creation. Like Thom Hartmann has said many times, it is demand that creates jobs, and as Cuban said last night, it is innovation that creates demand.

Of course, Mediaite forgot to mention that Dan Savage also recently came out, in a New York Times piece, openly supporting adultery while admitting to being in a "monogamish" (i.e. "open") relationship with his "husband"--this while recent reports show that gay men are far more promiscuous and more likely to catch HIV/AIDS than their lesbian counterparts. Mind you Savage is also the same hypocritical (imagine how much his panties would get all in a bunch if a Conservative ever said they "wish all gays were dead") loon who the likes of MSNBC, Olbermann and other leftwing bigots take seriously as an "expert" on politics. Indeed, Dan Savage is the face of the morally bankrupt Left.

Professional Psychiatrist Keith Ablow Confirms That Bill Maher Hates Women

Nice to see a professional verify what conservatives have long known about the misogynist that is Bill Maher:

Today on Fox & Friends, Fox News contributor and professional psychiatrist Keith Ablow gave his assessment of HBO’s Bill Maher based on his recent rant about Bristol Palin. Maher, you’ll recall, went after the younger Palin for a passage in her new book, Not Afraid of Life, where she describes losing her virginity to Levi Johnston, her then-boyfriend and father of her child. During his show, Maher asked Bristol to simply admit that that she was “horny” and shared that “Bristol Palin has to admit that the reason she fucked Levi over and over until a baby fell out is because she liked it.”


Ablow wonders whether Maher’s diatribe stems from an overarching hatred of women.


This guy needs his head examined, so it’s good that you called me in. Bottom line is, here’s a guy… You have to understand, her book is called Not Afraid of Life. Here’s a guy who never saw a life he didn’t question. For euthanasia. For the death penalty. For abortion. This is somebody who’s not affiliated with life at all. No children. So you have to look at him and say, “You know what, why is he so hostile toward women?” He has a deep-seated, it seems, hatred, to some extent, of women. Frequents the Playboy Mansion. All the girls that he dates – the women he dates – they have to be supermodels.


Bottom line is, you really have to wonder: Is he projecting onto her?


Ablow also notes that Maher “is very much divorced” from the “beauty” of birth, as evidenced by his comment about a baby “falling out” of Bristol, and that he seems to want to believe that “all women are sluts,” and so wouldn’t be able to believe that Bristol slept with her boyfriend out of anything other than lust.