Awww... Bill Maher a little late to the personal responsibilty party

Bill Maher on the New York City soda ban and why “liberal fascism” is not at all contradictory but actually quite complimentary.

"I am for overturning this ban," HBO host Bill Maher said about New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's soda ban. "I think this is what makes liberals look bad. This is what makes liberals look like elitist bullies who think they know everything and can tell people what to do."

"Again, it is what makes liberals look bad. They never met a regulation they didn't like. Of course, we should do something about this problem, but what if I want to have that one Big Gulp once a week? I should be able to," he added.

"You shouldn't have to clear what you eat with the municipal government," Maher also said.

While we whole-heartedly agree with the creepy little misogynist, the current trajectory of healthcare in this country necessarily dictates that the government gets more involved with what you eat and drink.

Since we are rapidly approaching the “we’re all in this together” state of being with government-managed healthcare trending towards a single-payer system, the government and it’s tax-paying citizens are vested parties in your healthcare and will most likely want a say in what you are shoveling down your pie hole.

So, isn’t that terrific: We are now in a political environment where we go from being completely hands-off libertarians with respect to what other people eat, drink and, in general, what they do to their bodies, to finger-wagging nanny-scolds. If there is anything that points to the wrongness of government-managed healthcare, it is that.

If you wish to make poor life decision, dietary or otherwise, no person nor governmental entity should stand in your way of doing so. Of course, you are on the hook for the consequences of behaving badly also, right? Unfortunately, this simple life rule of sleeping in the bed one makes that we all learned back in kindergarten has been blown to smithereens with the encroaching entitlement/welfare state over the decades, culminating now with the passage of ObamaCare some 3 years ago.


So...

A message of warning to our plentiful smoking friends: we are going to be absolutely insufferable nags from here on out. Hey, it may be your body but it’s our bucks.


.

We've found the answer(s) to all our economic woes

We have shamelessly swiped from KT a video clip from a recent Bill Maher episode where he, Maxine Waters (D-CA), Tina Brown and another unidentified lady are talking about the national debt and what to do about it.

Teaser: Admissions from the liberal-Left that we are actually in debt is readily acknowledged when the source of income from which we are to remove ourselves from that debt are targeted identified.





Gotta love how Maxine Waters eyes light up with that insane glee when Maher starts in on the evil rich.

And no mention whatsoever from Maher as to the biggest corporatist President of them all who currently resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

With respect to Maher's thinly-veiled threat of taking money from the rich if they do not create jobs, precisely what is it about the economic climate today that is conducive to jobs creation? And regarding Brown's psycho-babble on "ethical culture", under what moral obligation are the evil rich that they should be compelled to do anything with their money? It's theirs is it not? Not if you have an ear towards this pack of jackals, apparently.

Back to Maher: How does Maher propose to get at this idled money? It gets taxed once it gets active and creates jobs and now Maher wants to confiscate it when it's inactive as well. Now, there's a business model favorable to creating jobs and getting the economy rolling.

And someone please ask Tina Brown for an operational definition of "doing good stuff" in the context of rich people's money.

As ol' Maxine advises at the end of this clip to wild applause, it's all about blame-shifting away from the current ruinous regulatory regime and cheerleading for mindless class warfare thuggery. Glittering jewels of colossal ignorance... every last damn one of them.

Just say "no" to Che'

Reason.tv and their horrible set designs and even more-horrible wardrobes are back talking about the appeal (or lack thereof) of libertarianism and its future both here in California and the nation.

Here, Tim Kavanaugh talks to some dude named Starchild.



During the run-up to the '08 Presidential election, we recall the liberal-Left attempting to fashion some sort of fusionism of their own with libertarians. Obviously, this didn't pan out. As with Bill Maher attempting to rationalize being a "libertarian" while voting for Ralph Nader back in 2000, the nanny state kids desperately want to look cool and to be able to hang with the rockers in the slicked-back hair and leather jackets. Life just doesn't work that way.

But Kavanaugh does ask Starboy, "Why does the Left constantly provide less welcoming ground than the right?"

'child blames Ayn Rand's fascination with big business and her brand of scorched earth individualism for not providing the rounded edges that might be appealing to liberals.

Not sure that is going to work either. John Mackey, founder and CEO of Whole Foods, is a "soft-core libertarian" and after a buy-cott of the Whole Foods in LaJolla in October of '09 to support Mackey's rejection of ObamaCare here is what we wrote:

One of his criticisms of the freedom movement is that he believes it to be overly-provocative and he goes all the way back to Ayn Rand’s seminal Atlas Shrugged for deliberately conflating selfishness and self-interest and fast forwards to the 80s movie Wall Street and Gordon Gekko’s famous line, “Greed is Good”. He believes the freedom movement has allowed themselves to be painted into a corner as evil corporatists because of Rand’s original sin which was manifested in popular culture by Oliver Stone’s movie 30 years later.

We have used Gekko’s term on several occasions on these pages with relish. When we have used it, we hope that we have left a clear signal that our tongue is somewhat in cheek because our use of the term is more a reaction to the general disdain the liberal-Left has for anything worthwhile resulting from the “profit motive” rather than an actual belief in the “virtue of selfishness” that Rand believed. We understand Mackey’s point, though we aren’t dropping usage of the phrase solely because it’s so fun to say and it just totally cheeses-off the right people.

We linked to a paper written by Mackey where there is some touchy-feely sentiments that might appeal to libs but at his core, Mackey is a small government, free-market capitalist... who opposes ObamaCare. There are only so many gaps that can be bridged.

Reformed libertarian, B-Daddy had his thoughts on the matter, here.

While Starchild believes the libertarian movement could benefit from their own Che' Guevara (please, no), we'd simply start with libertarians not acting like the humourless and pretentious political snobs we find many of them to be.

Mission: Accomplished!

A couple weeks back the wheels officially came off Bill Maher's shabbily-crafted libertarian brand and last Friday, seemingly realizing it, he officially embraced his true liberal street cred by openly shilling for the statist agenda of the President and the Democrats.




For the transcript of this witty and insightful monologue go here to NewsBusters.

But let's go ahead and breakdown some of what Maher said:

Last week President Obama had the frankest town hall meeting I've ever seen, and a woman named Velma Hart took the mike and told the president, "I'm exhausted defending you." Well, if you're like Velma and you're tired of making excuses for Obama, just imagine how tired he is of making excuses for you.

If memory serves correctly, Ms. Hart was a former member of the armed forces and is a small business owner, not necessarily the type of person worthy of Maher's condescension. Maher cannot help himself however, as America the stupid or unworthy has been a constant of his schtick for years.

Now, I'm -- I am not here to carry water for this or any administration, but the facts of the coming election are Democrats have real accomplishments to run on.

Except that you are, you hack.

Like preventing a depression and forcing insurance companies to cover preexisting conditions.

(italics, ours)

Out: Stimulating the economy and keeping the unemployment rate under 8%.
In: We saved you all from a Depression, you ungrateful twits.

And Maher absolutely nails why it is, in part, health care costs will go up under ObamaCare. Thanks, Bill.

Obama has passed a credit card bill of rights, he restarted stem cell research, and got our ass out of Iraq, and signed a nuclear treaty with Russia - not to mention the intangible of having a president who can pronounce "nuclear."

Which explains why credit card rates have gone up. And he didn't restart stem cell research, he merely re-started funding of the ethically-challenged and questionably-effective embryonic stem cell research.

Obama merely honored an agreement hammered out between the Bush administration and the Iraq government with respect to troop withdrawal. A real profile in courage, that.

And, "nuclear"....?



Just sayin'.

Why can't the Democrats get props for what they've achieved? Oh, I know, I know. Obama is black. He's used to being denied credit.

We realize that being a funny man requires getting a few cheap laughs but if you want also to be respected as a serious commentator, please get your facts straight and realize that the key to the entire financial meltdown was blacks.... whites, Hispanics, Asians... everybody not being denied credit.

And there's nothing wrong with being hard on him. He is the president. It's our job to keep him honest. But when it comes to voting, when we only have two choices, you got to grow up and realize there's a big difference between a disappointing friend and a deadly enemy.

Deadly enemy... because those Republicans have nothing more to offer than fear-mongering.

Bill, we're just thankful you've dropped the libertarian facade (10 years was quite long enough) and have got on board for being a paid shill for the regime. Congrats!

And where the wheels officially come off Bill Maher's shabbily crafted brand

Bill Maher on his show "Real Time" is finally forced to concede at the needling of Andrew Breitbart that he is anything but a libertarian.


(if embed no worky, go here)



But we've known this for about a decade where during the run-up to the 2000 election, he let the world know, in the very same breath, that he was a "libertarian" and that he was voting for Mr. Nanny State, himself, Ralph Nader.

Does. not. compute.

And of course, no self-respecting libertarian or conservative could support ObamaCare as Maher does in the video clip.

Maher's fantasy of claiming to be a libertarian, we believe, stems from some sort of inferiortity complex in the political image world. Libertarians have always been kind of the cool kids of the cigarette pack rolled in the t-shirt sleave and slicked back hair variety. However, Maher's sneering libertine attitude towards sex and drug use couldn't compensate for his over-arching liberal/statist positions on everything else, so there he sits gazing longingly at the punks in the leather jackets while sitting in the knitting circle with the rest of his gal pals.

Exit question: Exactly how much of a gangster is Andrew Breitbart?

Is everybody done now?

With respect to Christine O'Donnell and the hand-wringing right, Professor William Jacobson of Legal Insurrection absolutely nails it:

The left is doing to O'Donnell exactly what they did to Sharron Angle -- swamp her with accusations and nonsense in the days after the primary to keep her from organizing her campaign. The Nevada primary was months ago, so Angle had a chance to recover. O'Donnell doesn't have that luxury of time given the late primary. She needs to integrate millions of dollars in new cash, gear up with staff, and plan her attack.

With each of your self-righteous columns and snide blog posts, you become part of the problem not part of the solution.

The woman (at the time, a young woman) went on MTV and Maher and who knows where else, and said some things that she would not say now. For that sin you are ready to toss her overboard so that you can declare yourselves to have been wiser than the unwashed voters who elected her in the primary?

And we call the Democrats elitist snobs? Stop being so damn selfish. November is not about who was right or wrong in the primaries. If Castle had won, O'Donnell supporters would have rallied around him, or at least kept their mouths shut.

Look, Christine O'Donnell is that cute but wacky girlfriend we all had once back in the day who did and said some goofy stuff that was all completely harmless when looked at in its proper context.



Delaware primary results: O'Donnell won, Castle lost. This is perhaps an election cycle unlike anything we have ever seen so if there was ever an opportunity for O'Donnell to win, this would be it. Everybody just needs to quit whining and get onboard.

Let's Roll.

Looking for some leadership

“New Rule: Just because a country elects a smart president doesn't make it a smart country. A few weeks ago I was asked by Wolf Blitzer if I thought Sarah Palin could get elected president, and I said I hope not, but I wouldn't put anything past this stupid country.”

- Bill Maher

Blogosphere Right is in full throat over the op-ed piece today by Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer in which they call the disruptions of the townhall meetings “un-American” or more precisely, “Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American”. We think our side is guilty of some broad-brushing as in reading the article, they did not expressly say that the protesters themselves were being un-American which brings us to the larger point of what Pelosi/Hoyer did say.

Now, whether or not this disruptive behavior is “un-American” is unclear to us but it is entirely beside the point. The sin Pelosi and Hoyer committed is symptomatic of what we have seen and heard recently from our nationally elected leaders and it is an ability to turn completely tone-deaf when trying to communicate the simplest of principles.

Rather than saying the arrest of Prof. Gates by Sgt. Crowder was being dealt with at the local level and there were not enough facts available to make a judgement call either way, the President barged head-long into a two-week controversy by saying the police acted “stupidly”. That was simply a ridiculous statement for a President to make.

And if Pelosi and Hoyer had said the disruptions were “not constructive”, “rude”, “uncivil”, then everything would’ve been peachy. But, no. These two idiots, with pen in hand and not being asked about it off-the-cuff at a presser, play the “un-American” card and thus alienate further a large section of the population who, even if they hadn’t attended a townhall protest, sympathise with the concerns of those who did.

Honestly, what are these people thinking?

B-Daddy and I were talking over the weekend about how discouraging the discourse regarding the healthcare debate has become. Not at the townhalls but at the national level. Instead of calling for civility and calm in light of these increasingly contentious townhall meetings where union thugs think nothing of kicking the crap out of someone because he was handing out “Don’t tread on me” stickers, our national leaders fan the flames of violence by likening the protesters to Nazis and calling their actions “un-American”. It pisses off one side and grants license to the other by legitimizing in their minds, violence upon others. See… were beating up Nazis.

And when the President has the opportunity to establish the baseline for discourse, what does he do? He tells people to get out of his way and sets up a snitch site.

More than anything else, though, this complete inability to communicate on a rational level with the American public is informed by the condescension contained in that quote by Bill Maher above.

We know who we are and we know who you are and you are simply not smart enough, America to be trusted on your own with anything as important as health care.

Observation of the Day

It’s come to our attention that elites really, really hate being called elite. If that’s the case then why the hell do they keep talking like this?

Radio KBwD is on the Air

Bill Maher hates Rock’n’Roll

Bill Maher is an idiot but you knew that already. Anyone who attempts to equate their “libertarian” status with a vote for Ralph Nader as Maher did on T.V. back in 2000 is an abject fool and is probably not worth the cyber-trees we’re felling to make mention of him.

But mention we must because Maher has a film that opens this weekend called, “Religulous”. Here’s a review that sums up Maher’s intent in the film:

Maher's “Religulous” isn't really a documentary so much as it's propaganda. Funny at times. Mocking often. Certainly clever. But in the end, his fervor unravels into a fire-and-brimstone conversion message for the other team.
“The plain fact is, religion must die for mankind to live,” Maher says in a melodramatic finish that is as smarmy as any late-night cable TV evangelist.

We could go on for days on just the 1st Amendment-shreddding aspects of this but for purposes of this post we will simply say that the elimination of religion (and we're not referring to "Buddhism") here in the U.S. also means an elimination of a large part of American culture which is steeped in “religion”…. or is in response to “religion”. Musical forms like jazz and rock’n’roll are/were a rebellion or at least perceived to be a rebellion against the moral status quo in the South. Its safe to say, then, without “religion”, two of America’s most recognizable cultural art forms would not exist.

Anyway, this is all just a long wind-up to throw you over to Justin’s place for some choir practice and some great religiously-inspired music that’s guaranteed to be enjoyed. So for Bill’s sake git on over there and enjoy some great stuff from a nation that has the most diverse forms of art, culture and music, precisely because of “religion”.