Bill Maher on Tavis Smiley, Christianity, Socialism, and Me

I just caught Bill Maher on Tavis Smiley tonight.

I remember when used to like Maher... when he didn't seem to have any particular political loyalty, and didn't feel a need to ridicule Christians.

Bill reminds me of myself when I was 12 years old.
I decided that Christianity was too weird, with the whole 'myth' of a guy that I couldn't see or touch. I knew how everyone else had clearly been duped into buying into that whole religion thing.
To me, there was little difference between Santa Claus and religion. Only I understood that there was no such thing as Jesus, and it hadn't occurred to anyone else who was Christian. It was clear to me that Christians felt a need to believe in something to comfort themselves from the idea of being mortal.

Not too ironically, I ended up joining a Christian Youth group. Not because I was religious, but because I was joining all kinds of groups in high school looking for a place that I could belong. The Chess club was fun, but I wasn't good enough to mount a challenge to the Grand Masters of chess. I was in musical theater, but I wasn't that musical. I was pretty shy. But in the youth group, I kinda fit in. Except for, you know, believing in Christ and stuff.
The Christians I met were good people. Most of them didn't do drugs. That suited me because I didn't either. They believed in the helping others, and they were, as a group, sensitive people. There was a lot of love to go around.

When I think about it now, I find it ironic that I felt so superior to them. Because in some ways, I was jealous of them for having the one thing that I didn't: blind faith in something greater.

When I first joined the youth group, I found myself occasionally trying to point out the holes in Christianity. I thought that if I merely pointed out what didn't fit, the smarter people would give in to the simplicity of logic and I'd 'convert' them.
What I discovered was that there were a lot of smart people who had blind faith... and that 'converting' people into my lack of belief was not a worthy goal.

At some point, it occurred to me: what was I trying to win?
If I succeeded in turning those people into agnostics like me, then what did I gain? Okay... so someone would think like me. But what if I'm the guy who is wrong, and they were right all along?
Moreover, what would they gain?
I realized that a lot of people dedicated their lives to doing good deeds through their religion. That they help people out, avoid anger and confrontation, and sacrifice material gain because of their faith.
What did they gain if I somehow managed to take that away? If I managed to talk them out of their religion?
It seemed like I was just trying to selfishly prove myself right.

When I watched Bill Maher on Tavis Smiley, he reminded me of that 12-year-old version of me.
Maher ridiculed the concept of Faith as a lack of critical thinking: believing in something that you have no knowledge of.
But then he contradicted himself with his own act of faith:
Maher said that he "had a feeling that Obama's" belief system was closer to Bill's.

Obviously, he has no rational basis for this.
Obama has said constantly and repeatedly that his religion and belief in Christ is important to him.
Yet, Maher calls Obama a 'rational thinker.'

Thus the disconnect. The rules are always different with Obama. When other people profess a belief in a higher power, they are delusional for believing in a myth. When Obama does it, we 'all understand' that he 'doesn't really mean it', and we forgive him for lying to get elected.

But that wasn't all.
Bill Maher defended the idea of taking over the banking system and nationalizing it.
He said that Obama should just call it something besides socialism, and take over the banks anyway in a few years.
I just watched him say that, and I still can't believe it.

When it came to more socialism, Maher said:
"I think the model we need to look for is Vladimir Putin"
He argued that Putin took money back from those who had reaped untold profits: "We need that money, so someone needs to go and do a Putin."

Finally, he said that Obama is the first president with a real sense of humor since Kennedy:
"This is the first president who has genuine wit, and its very real"

Again, I used to like Bill Maher. That was sometime before he spent his nights at the Playboy mansion while trying to suggest that he knows how to take care of the little guy. It was before he got into the mode that its okay to take money if you need it.

I don't know exactly when Bill Maher lost his soul. I just relish the irony that he's angry at people who think his needs saving.

By the way, I'm still agnostic. I still have trouble with a belief in God, and Christ, and the bible. But I'm not as bitter as I used to be, and I've met a lot of very smart people who believe in God.
I know that one of us is wrong. I just don't have the evidence to prove that believers are the ones who are incorrect, and that I'm right.

Obama administration's Scott Shepard

He just joined the Kerry administration as a speechwriter. So you might want to know about him. Here are a few of his former articles:
Obama brain trust short on drama, just the way the candidate wants it

Zogby Poll Says Obama Holds Large Lead In Latest Electoral College Count

Stevie Wonder “Signed, Sealed, Delivered” for Obama

Obama vs. Clinton: Who’s got game?

Obama poised to make history

Obama a product of rugged Chicago politics

Democratic convention kicks off with Michelle Obama and salute to Kennedy

Just so you know where he came from.

Obama defends Bush?

The Obama administration, siding with former President George W. Bush, is trying to kill a lawsuit that seeks to recover what could be millions of missing White House e-mails.

In this article on MyWay news, you have to ask yourself, why is Obama doing this unless he thinks he'll be held to the same standard.

And I plan to eat less pizza

Headline from the Washington Post:
Obama's First Budget Seeks To Trim Deficit
Keep in mind, this guy just passed a $800 BILLION dollar stimulus bill.
What the heck? Isn't anyone at the WP awake?
This is their second paragraph:

In addition to tackling a deficit swollen by the $787 billion stimulus package and other efforts to ease the nation's economic crisis, the budget blueprint will press aggressively for progress on the domestic agenda Obama outlined during the presidential campaign. This would include key changes to environmental policies and a major expansion of health coverage that he hopes to enact later this year.

But outside of that, they're going to trim the deficit?
What the fuck?

Huffington Post gets story wrong

The Huffington Post fell for a hoax that made it appear as though Fox had made racist comments against Obama.
According to Conde Nast, Someone sent them a YouTube video, and the idiots posted it without question.

Reporters flock to Obama. No, fer real this time!

We all know that George Stephanopoulous used to work for the Democratic party as Clinton's spokesperson, and that now he works for "This Week," in ABC's news program.

You may not know that Obama's new UN ambassador, Susan Rice, is married to the executive producer of "This Week" as I mentioned in This Post.

What you probably don't know is that a bunch of reporters have gone to work for Obama.
I don't mean in the traditional way that reporters have worked for Obama (Hello, Jennifer Loven from AP). This time, the Obama administration is actually paying them.
According to Politico:

In three months since Election Day, at least a half-dozen prominent journalists have taken jobs working for the federal government.

Who are the reporters?

Jill Zuckman of the Chicago Tribune

Is going to work for Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood.
Let's check out some recent samples of her work. Shall we?

As trumpets played and drums rolled, Barack Obama walked smiling out of the Capitol and into the winter sun to take his oath of office, stopping to embrace an icon of the civil rights movement, Rep. John Lewis, and another icon's son, Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr.

Yeah, I know. It was Barack's inaugeration, and we can't judge her on one article.
So let's find another. This one reflects on how some bitter Republicans are handling Barack's victory:
But for some Republicans, a Democrat in the White House and expanded Democratic majorities in Congress will be just too much.

"I imagine some folks will be sitting in dark rooms drinking whiskey," said a congressional GOP staffer who spoke on condition that he not be named.

Again, one article. How about this one regarding the 'failed Bush presidencies'?

"At one point, Bush talked about his father, and he said 'Sip, my man, don't underestimate what you can learn from a failed presidency,' " recalled Wayne Slater, a political reporter for The Dallas Morning News and one of Bush's earliest biographers.

With that harsh assessment long before he took office as the 43rd president of the United States, Bush had decided he would do things differently from his father. But as he prepares to leave office after eight years, there are many similarities he might have wished to avoid as part of just the second father-son presidential duo in history.

You can read about how the Obama administration wanted to decrease impact on the environment...

Two Green Inaugural Balls are planned, including one featuring a green carpet made from—what else?—a recycled rug. Official invitations to the Jan. 20 inauguration are being printed on recycled paper. The homeless will be handed furs.

Or you can read this earlier article about how conservatives don't like McCain.

You can always read this piece that Jill wrote on Cindy McCain:

An icy wind whips through it as she tromps across hillsides still slick from snow on the Albanian border, wearing well-worn hiking boots and carrying her Prada purse. She's looking out at mine fields and visiting schools where children must thread their way around left-over munitions.

Here's an article that Jill wrote about Obama in 2007, about how he wanted to make American cars more energy efficient. How did that work out?
Its ironic that now Jill is working for the transportation department.

But by far, this is my favorite article by Jill. It was written in 2004, about the 2004 campaign.
Note the headline:

As end nears, it's security vs. hope

Hilarious. Where have I heard that before?

This is a complete list of Jill's stories in the trib. I put them here for reference, and in the interest of openess and, uh, transparency.

Eric Holder's Comments

I've been trying to hold back from commenting on Eric Holder's statements.

For those of you who don't know, he said some dumbass things during his speech for Black History Month. Mainly that our country was "a nation of cowards".
I'm always skeptical when someone says something that stupid, that they almost had to be taken out of context. In the interest of fairness, I present his full speech.

At least a good portion of it.
You'll note that his statement is couched in the terms of addressing race. Still, its a pretty big thing to say that we are a nation of cowards when a good portion of the electorate voted in a black man regardless of his lack of experience.
Oh wait... maybe that's what Eric meant?

Yes, our country doesn't talk about race, Mr. Holder. But its difficult to dismiss this as mere cowardice considering the rest of your speech.
You said that you wanted to use the justice department as a bully pulpit to address why we don't talk about race. The JUSTICE department. The very same department that puts people in jail. The very same department that has the power to fine someone if they are suspected of not hiring someone - or not renting to them - because of their race. How can people be expected to talk openly about race when if they are even suspected of being racist, they can lose their business?

The head of the justice department asking us all to discuss race openly
=
Hitler saying that Jews should be proud to announce their nationality

Yes, there is always the outside chance that you won't be thrown into the concentration camp. -Or fined. -Or lose your job. But who wants to take that chance???

Let's all remember that Eric Holder works for the guy who hired a racist preacher as his spiritual adviser. And when confronted with the fact that his preacher was an out and out racist, Obama demurred that it was a good chance to talk about race?

I'm not dumb. I see a double standard when its being thrown at me.

I think we'd all like to sit down and discuss race openly. I hope it happens one day. But it won't happen when the penalties for improper speech (or improper thoughts) is this high.
No one is going to jump into that fire.

A tea party I'd drink to

On CNBC, one of their reporters went a little bit nuts over the bailout plans and stimulus bill.
He was on the trading floor at the time, and some of the traders seemed to be happy to hear someone finally saying what they were all thinking. Watch the video, and enjoy the tea party.

There is some hope out there

Students in Arizona were watching Obama's appearance... and they sounded skeptical:

Some of the students attentively watched the speech, giving questioning looks and comments, shaking their heads and laughing at some of Obama’s words. Other students listened, occasionally glancing up to watch, while texting on their cell phones, reading a book or finishing school work.

Every once in a while I catch myself making fun of the younger generation as people who just celebrate celebrity and live on emotion. It sounds like at least a few of these kids were credulous about Obama's claims. Good for them.

Sure enough... Obama's press conference had picked reporters beforehand

I reported earlier that I thought I had seen Barack choose reporters from a list that was on his podium. According to the WSJ:

About half-way through President Obama's press conference Monday night, he had an unscripted question of his own. "All, Chuck Todd," the President said, referring to NBC's White House correspondent. "Where's Chuck?" He had the same strange question about Fox News's Major Garrett: "Where's Major?"

The problem wasn't the lighting in the East Room. The President was running down a list of reporters preselected to ask questions. The White House had decided in advance who would be allowed to question the President and who was left out.

Yep.

The most transparent administration ever.

Is anyone still buying that load of shit?

Transparency? WTF?

From the "Change" website:

Shine Light on Earmarks and Pork Barrel Spending: Obama's Transparency and Integrity in Earmarks Act will shed light on all earmarks by disclosing the name of the legislator who asked for each earmark, along with a written justification, 72 hours before they can be approved by the full Senate.

Yeah... right.
Here's my other favorite part...

• Sunlight Before Signing: Too often bills are rushed through Congress and to the president before the public has the opportunity to review them. As president, Obama will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days.

Fuck you, Obama.
Fuck you and your rush to get this pork through before we can look at it.

Democrats push pork bill through without letting the vetting

There will be no vetting process for the pork bill.
The dems have seen to that.
Instead of the 48 hours that they promised to let everyone look at the bill, they are just pushing it through.
This is what Human Events said about the bill:

“The American people have a right to know what’s in this bill,” Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind) told HUMAN EVENTS after the press conference. “Every member of Congress -- Republicans and Democrats -- voted to post this bill on the internet for 48 hours, 48 hours ago. We’ll see if the Democrats keep their word.”

Actually -- as of 5:15 pm, the Democrats had broken their word. The stimulus bill -- which we still haven’t seen -- will be released late tonight and will be brought up on the House floor at 9 am tomorrow.

Keep in mind, this is the most transparent government ever?
The Democrats need to be called out by the press for this. If they aren't then the press is completely up the ass of the left.

The Democrats, and Town hall complaints

It seems like every time the democrats have a town hall meeting now-a-days, there is some person who gets up to complain about how bad their lives are.
Yet, when they are investigated by the press, we find out that they aren't as bad off as they claim.

Enter Henrietta Hughes, a woman who complained during Obama's town hall about how she couldn't make expenses.
Are we really surprised to find out that she wasn't as bad off as she made things out to be?

State Representative Nick Thompson and his wife Chene are standing by the Henrietta and her son, Corey. They spoke out against the allegations Henrietta is milking the system, even when confronted with the fact WINK News found out the Hughes' sold property, back in 2005. Henrietta and her son sold the land for $47,000 dollars. But Chene Thompson says that was all the money they had for several years and it's gone.

Okay... if you go through 47k in 4 years, beyond your normal $800 a month income, you're doing something wrong. I say that as a guy who has lived on less then $20k a year.
What's she spending her money on?

Hughes owes money on a loan, has her car insurance payment, a monthly storage bill and says she couldn't afford the rent.

So she not only owns a car (my guess is that's where the 47k went), but she has a storage facility. But she can't afford rent???
Folks; this is where the world has gone wrong. People who don't know how to prioritize. She's storing stuff, but can't afford her rent.
I don't know what she's storing... but if she sold some of it, she might have rent. It drives me crazy when people do this.

48% think that government spending hurts economy

According to the poll, taken by Rasmussen:

Forty-eight percent (48%) of U.S. voters say that, generally speaking, increased government spending is bad for the economy.

Thirty-five percent (35%) believe more government spending will help the economy, and seven percent (7%) say it’s likely to have no impact, according to the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.

I take back all of those nasty things that I've said about "the people" not understanding the basics of economics.

Apparently, 48% do.

35% are clueless 'tards who think that somehow, the government can spend their money more efficiently and wisely then they can.

-And 7% of "the people", as usual, do not want to commit to an actual opinion.

Oh, that clumsy Barack!

First, he couldn't find the door to the WH. (True story. He mistook a long window for a door.)
Now, bO hits his head on the helicopter doorway.

Just so that I'm not misunderstood... yes, it happens to everyone.
But the fact is, every time that Bush did something silly, it was news. When Barack does something silly, it 'just illustrates how human he his.'
Ugh.

Fantastic comment on Little Green Footballs

With credit given to "Swamprat," who posted this in an open thread on LGF, one of my favorite websites. This is about Obama, and his Pork bill that happens to have some stimulus in it:

...I see this as him getting to try all those socialist ideas he thinks are so grand....I don't want to be experimented on... Finland and Sweden are, yes I know, socialist posterboys...but so are many more failures and dumps. We aren't cut out to be socialists. We are the people who couldn't be constrained by Europe. We are the malcontents, idealists, speculators, dreamers, inventors, debtors and criminals who would not be chained. We don't play well with others, we are brash, outlandish and cunning. Let us do what we do best Mr President, let us be Americans; Leave the socialism to Europe.

That's fantastic, and so completely true.

You are getting conned

Here is one version of how the press is talking about the stimulus bill. It tells us that money is going to education and students:

Students are big winners. Both the House and Senate bills call for the largest-ever funding increase for Pell Grants, the government's chief college aid program for low-income students.

That's true. And its hard to argue that giving money to students so that they can go to college is a bad thing.
However, this is a stimulus bill!
I can't point that out enough times.
Its the same as putting food stamps in a defense bill.

Anyway, Obama will have none of the discussion about it:

President Barack Obama's first prime-time press conference was most remarkable for how he borrowed a page from his predecessor, refusing to accept follow-up questions. It might seem like a petty issue, but it was significant and telling that George W. Bush would not allow follow-up questions in his sessions with reporters.

For those of you who noticed, Obama read off of a list of pre-approved reporters that was on his podium.

Obama's press conference last night

Politico mentioned that Ed Schwartz, a liberal radio talk show host, was literally given a front row seat in Obama's first press conference.

The first thing that I noticed was when Obama called on Jennifer Loven, who is an AP writer who consistently writes dreamily about the president.

It reminded me of what Michelle Malkin said in her post a while back:

She’s got her front-row seat in the Obama White House briefing room guaranteed.

Yep. Not quite "Ed Schwartz" good, but still pretty good.

-Of course, that didn't shock me as much as when I heard him call on a member of the Huffington Post.

Remember when Jeff Gannon infiltrated the White House press corps? And how the reporters felt it was in bad taste to have someone there who so clearly supported George W. Bush?

I guess the reporters are okay with it now.

By the way... I haven't heard anyone mention this yet, but Obama was clearly reading from a list on the podium of reporters to call on.
Did anyone else notice this?

$1,430 for every man, woman, and child

Bloomberg has an excellent article on the pork bill that has a little bit of stimulus in it:

The $9.7 trillion in pledges would be enough to send a $1,430 check to every man, woman and child alive in the world. It’s 13 times what the U.S. has spent so far on wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to Congressional Budget Office data, and is almost enough to pay off every home mortgage loan in the U.S., calculated at $10.5 trillion by the Federal Reserve.

It makes you wonder why they don't just cut a check for $1,430 for everyone.
I'm kidding, of course. The government doesn't trust you to know what to do with money.

Obama plunges into unwinnable war

I don't like to cop the lead story to an article, but this one pretty much sums it up:

After campaigning on the promise to end one war, President Barack Obama is preparing to escalate another.

I think its important to point out two things:

1. This is exactly what Obama promised to do
2. The left completely ignored that this is what Obama promised to do

Yet, now, the left is annoyed that Obama is going to do it.

By the way, for the record, I don't think that Afghanistan is 'unwinnable'. Particularly since its the left who will be going in. They won't be demanding a timetable for withdraw, and they won't downplay our successes while we are there.

CBO says that the Stimulus plan might hurt economy

Tell me something that I don't know? According to the Washington Times:

CBO, the official scorekeepers for legislation, said the House and Senate bills will help in the short term but result in so much government debt that within a few years they would crowd out private investment, actually leading to a lower Gross Domestic Product over the next 10 years than if the government had done nothing.

For those of you who are wondering exactly what the CBO wrote:

In contrast to its positive near-term macroeconomic effects, the Senate legislation would reduce output slightly in the long run, CBO estimates, as would other similar proposals. The principal channel for this effect is that the legislation would result in an increase in government debt. To the extent that people hold their wealth in the form of government bonds rather than in a form that can be used to finance private investment, the increased government debt would tend to “crowd out” private investment—thus reducing the stock of private capital and the long-term potential output of the economy.

This is just basic economics, folks. If you spend government money, you are increasing debt and increasing inflation. This isn't a mystery to anyone who took a course in high school.

Which leads to the obvious question: why is Obama pushing this if he knows that it will, in the long term, hurt the economy???

Using fear to pass the stimulus bill

President Barack Obama warned on Thursday that failure to act on an economic recovery package could plunge the nation into a long-lasting recession that might prove irreversible, a fresh call to a recalcitrant Congress to move quickly.

What???
That's what AP said. So I went to the source, Obama's editorial in the Washington Post. (For those of you who don't know, that's Barack's Pravda)

Because each day we wait to begin the work of turning our economy around, more people lose their jobs, their savings and their homes. And if nothing is done, this recession might linger for years. Our economy will lose 5 million more jobs. Unemployment will approach double digits. Our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse.

What???
To the point where we can't REVERSE it? You mean we'd be in a permanant recession? Something that could never be changed?
What the fuck?
That's a whole new level of rhetoric.

Imagine a George Bush or a John McCain trying to shovel that shit. It wouldn't happen.

Everyone should read this post by the Coyote blog. He takes this argument apart for the crap that it is. I hope this will get you interested in reading it:

By the way, speaking of bait and switch, these solutions Obama focuses on - health information, energy projects, school rebuilding, and highways - account for at most 6.5% of the total tax cuts and spending programmed by the stimulus bill for the first 2 years (34.1 of 525.5 billion, which is a bit outdated because it is based on a CBO report of last week, and has not kept up with the new pork added by Congress since then).

I've said this before, and I need to repeat it: this isn't a Stimulus bill that includes a little bit of pork. This is a Pork bill, that includes a little bit of stimulus.

AP almost admits that Obama is arrogant

But then they kinda back off.

The new president, seen by some as arrogant, was anything but on Tuesday.

"I screwed up," Obama said repeatedly during a series of TV interviews. "I take responsibility for this mistake."

It was a frank admission from an Oval Office where "mistakes were made" has often been the preferred dodge.

What was Obama's 'mistake'? That part, the article never gets into.

Pepsi joins the pod people

Its official.
I'm in a science fiction movie right now, and most of the people around me have become zombies.

If you click on this website, you'll find yourself at a soft drink website. The soft drink website is celebrating our current president.
I'd like to repeat that.
A soft drink company is endorsing the actions of our current president.

Its hard to tell whether Pepsi stole Obama's logo, or Obama stole from Pepsi. Whatever. The point is that they are far too alike, and both are using vapid sloganeering to sell their product.

I find it ironic that the very same people who would denounce a soft drink company seem to be okay with it now that its behind Obama. Wait... ironic isn't the right word. Scary is.

Anyway, that same company held the 'refresh' symposium... a series of lectures that featured some very left leaning people.

I'm not into boycotts. I don't like the idea of choosing one product over another because the CEO might have belonged to the ________ party. But the next time I buy soft drinks, I'm going to remember this post from the Age Of Hooper, which sums up a bunch of Pepsi ads that were in a subway.

Its getting scarier every day.