The Wisdom of Bill Maher

I don’t know about the rest of you but I think Bill Maher is one of the most insightful and intelligent people when he speaks about politics. Here are some recent comments (July 22) by Maher when he was interviewed by Larry King:

MAHER: I watched the news all day today and there was surprisingly little mention of the fact that President Bush opposed this report(9/11 commission). I think that’s the key.

KING: He didn’t want to have the commission? MAHER: He stonewalled it every inch of the way. Graydon Carter wrote about it in “Vanity Fair” this week. He outlined every step of the way. And it’s true. This president did not want this report out there. And you know, for people who are, you know, I’m not Republican or Democrat, but I’m not making a secret I don’t want this president reelected. But I think for people who do, for people who are Bush supporters, they really need to look in the mirror and ask themselves, because they consider themselves more patriotic usually, the Republicans, was that the patriotic thing to do? Who do you love more? George Bush or your country? If you love your country more, wouldn’t you say that the president should have wanted this report?

Cableguy responds: Excellent point, Bill. Why are the Republicans so intent on keeping in office a man who clearly didn’t want the facts to come out about one of the worst days in American history? How can anyone who loves America vote for Bush? The mind boggles.

Maher on the distraction with Sandy Berger:

MAHER: Right. Because he couldn’t do all the cramming at the government building, he had to take it home at night. So the question becomes not, gee, was Iran the right country to attack? I mean, Iraq or Iran? Or the question becomes what does Sandy Berger have in his pants?

You know, it’s – it’s a way to distract us. And that’s what they’re very good at. I mean, they did it with John Kerry. John Kerry who, you know, is a legitimate war hero. Somehow it became, you know, John Kerry threw his medals away. Is John Kerry a coward because he had the nerve to come back from Vietnam alive? They’re able to make the argument look like it’s on a level playing field when it’s not. John Kerry was the guy whose Swift boat was on the Mekong Delta and he had literally charged the shore and killed the guy in the spider hole. George Bush is the guy who when the aide says, sir, the country is under attack, sits there for seven minutes, frozen. He choked. That’s what’s called choking in sports. When you can’t move."

Cableguy says: Again, excellent comments, Bill. Kerry went to war for his country and Bush used his connections to not have to do the same. Which man should be in charge of the USA? It’s clear to me so why do the Republicans have such a difficult time seeing it? Kerry fought while Bush stayed home and, oh, er, um, what exactly was Bush doing while Kerry was fighting? Someone should check the whorehouses on the Mexico/Texas border. Perhaps there are some Bushy looking Mexicans living near there.

I can’t wait until November when Bush goes back to Texas and Kerry/Edwards start to clean up the mess Bush made.

Bill Maher does not see how it is important that a highly-partisan Clinton appointee is caught leaving with sensitive documents stuffed in his pants that he had no right to remove and then later these documents “disappeared.” That is not relevant? Why did he remove them? He more than anyone should have known that was illegal and unethical and then to “lose” or “misplace” them. Give me a break? Bill Maher can make any humorous point he wishes to but those of us with brains (unlike some posters) can still see that this is a very serious matter.


Maher’s point was that the Berger thing was a distraction started by the Republicans to take away the heat from Bush. Berger took some documents, which he should not have done, but which has never been shown that his doing so was anything more than a mistake. It certainly wasn’t the “evil” deed of the century that the Republicans tried to make it out to be in order to cast a diversion away from what Bush did, or more importantly, didn’t do prior to and right after 9/11.

Fred, if what Berger did was such an absolutely “serious matter” as you believe it was, then why did the story die so quickly away? Could it be that the press could see exactly what the Republicans were trying to do and they weren’t interested in playing along? Even Bill O’Reilly, the Bush spokesman who masquerades as a journalist, let the story fade into the background as quickly as it appeared on the scene. Why did he do that? Because there was nothing to the story at all and he knew it.

Too bad, Fred, that you can’t see the much more serous mistake Bush made by sending troops to invade Iraq while at the same time allowing bin Lauden to escape punishment. Why are you and so many other right-wingers unable to see that Bush has been a nightmare for America and the world?

Geez, I know some of you Republicans have received good educations at some of the finer universities in the world, and yet when it comes to Bush, many of you appear to have mental disabilities. I just can’t figure it out.

The whole “documents down his pants” thing in a typical Republican smear tactic. It’s not true, but gets repeated again and again.

Um Richardm prove that he did not put those documents down his pants. Why is it that the “disappeared” as to the media not playing this up are you kidding? Sort of like the media playing up Joe Wilson but failing to mention that he lied was inaccurate and could not possibly have said/done the things that he claimed. Er whoops. Give me a break. Selective media coverage and outrage as usual.

And yes, I did go to many of the top universities in the world. Gosh what is it that I have learned to like about Bush and how did I learn to like those qualities? I mean how can intelligent people like me like Bush? If you cannot figure that out, then perhaps the question is not one of my intelligence but rather yours? hee hee

Did not he and his attorney admit to him stuffing documents in his pants and socks?

I’d hardly call that a smear tactic as carried out by the Republicans.

If you use the word, stuff.

I went to 7-11 to buy some gum. I stuffed it in my mouth. The clerk observed me stuffing the change into my pants.

Nice try Richardm but no cigar. He was stuffing documents in his pants. Why? Why not just walk out with them “accidentally” why “intentionally” hide them?

Was he putting them in his pocket, or stuffing them into his underwear like Fawn Hall?
Maybe those little nuances are lost on the right. Words like
war - peace
prosperity - debt
WMD - sand
Dick Cheney’s friends - price gouging weasles

Hahah Richardm:

I do declare. You may be developing a sense of humor. I thought it was usually misguided mindless lockstep leftie doublespeak that kept them in line but it is nice to see humor also has a role to play in voting for someone as laughable as John Kerry.

I seem to recall that his attourney said it was rubbish and challenged who ever made the claim to come forward with a source. I believe the challenge was never answered.

Lines from an upcoming Newt Gingrich screenplay to be made into a movie financed by Phil Gramm, with a post-op Linda Tripp in the role of “archive employee”:

archive employee: “Excuse me, are those sensitive documents in your pants?”

Sandy Berger: “It’s sensitive but it ain’t no document…”

archive employee: “Sir, I must insist that you let me check.”

Berger: “Well… OK.” (unzips fly)

[cue 70s-style funky “BMM”]

archive employee: “Oooh, but your calves are so large that you must have documents stored there! You’ll have to take your pants all the way down…”

Sorry but you are wrong

Berger and his lawyer said Monday night he knowingly removed the handwritten notes by placing them in his jacket, pants and socks, and also inadvertently took copies of actual classified documents in a leather portfolio.,2933,126249,00.html

Fred, why do you say “Monday night” there was an admission and then link to a FoxNews piece from last July 20th? Why are you presenting old (and inaccurate) information as if it is something new?

Contemporary and subsequent articles have made it pretty clear that Berger and his lawyer have not admitted to any such nonsense. It would be nice if Republicans could start with facts once in a while…

[quote=“fred smith”]Sorry but you are wrong

Berger and his lawyer said Monday night he knowingly removed the handwritten notes by placing them in his jacket, pants and socks, and also inadvertently took copies of actual classified documents in a leather portfolio.,2933,126249,00.html[/quote]

Sorry, I got it a bit wrong. It was the bit about the socks that they asked for a source on. You notice that Fox doesn’t quote either directly on the issue. Your source is dated 20th July. MSNBC reported on the 21st July that Lanny Breuer, Berger


As usual your ineptness gets the better of you. I have supplied a quote from Fox News. I did not say anything about “Monday.” Try reading a bit more carefully. Will follow up with additional quotes on Monday (my words this time). haha