Obama accepts $1M donation from Bill Maher while condemning Rush Limbaugh

[Lord_Steve]

Yeah...he really meant to write a check to the GOP.

i would say writing a huge check to a centrist is a pretty good sign that someone isn't a liberal actually!

 

[TexasWife25]

what KR said. he's a staunch, apologetically bourgeois capitalist who veers dangerously close to libertarian ideology re: his attitudes towards the poor and who has always had a really shitty attitude towards women and people of color.


unfunny rants about how bush was literally hitler does not a liberal make. he's just very loud and therefore very much in the public eye as a representative of the "true liberal"

I admit to not being an.. expert on Bill Maher. I dont watch his show .. however the things I've seen/heard him say, were all very VERY liberal, and not anywhere near libertarian. But, maybe I just caught him when he was in a liberal mood.

 

[Sean Renaud]

My guess would be you aren't aware of the difference between liberal and libertarian. He's kinda halfway between anyway but he's in that crowd that is pissed off that Obama's not a liberal.

 

[mark_j]

FCC licenses are way below market value.

And you are basing this on what? The value of the license itself? Or the the value of the radio station associated with that license?

Competitive bid doesn't mean shit.

Again, how so?

It's the same with leasing land to oil companies. It's a give away of resources to corporations.

Not really, you are contracting with said corporations to develop a potential resource. They pay you for the use of the land, front the capitol required to drill the well and take the risk if they hit a dry hole. You get paid for the use of the land whether they extract anything from it or not.

I know if I owned a gold mine or an oil well I sure as hell wouldn't lease it to somebody.

Then a lease would be moot, since you had the capitol to develop or continue to extract a known resource.

I would get a fixed percentage of gross profit of what anybody extracts from that land.

That is generally how it works. Unless you were an idiot when you signed the lease.

You're living in LaLa Land if you think the huge amounts of cash and lobbyists going back and forth between corporations and government agencies hasn't corrupted the system.

I'm well aware of the "payola" that has influenced the system. However that sort of thing is supposed to be illegal. The intent of the regulation is to make it a fair process for all involved. Just because you think the licensing process is corrupt doesn't necessarily make it so.

 

[Type_O_Negative]

What did obama do with that 1 mill that he was handed when they gave him the nobel peace prize?

The nobel peace prize isn't worth anything anymore

 

[TexasWife25]

My guess would be you aren't aware of the difference between liberal and libertarian. He's kinda halfway between anyway but he's in that crowd that is pissed off that Obama's not a liberal.

See, Ive heard him rant about Obama being too conservative, and Ive never gotten the impression that he wants smaller government.

 

[Sean Renaud]

I don't think he cares about the size of government. I think he's like me and he wants an effective government. Big, small it makes no difference so long as the job gets done and currently his opinion (and mine) is that the job is not getting done.

 

[Kruge]

I disagree.

Bill Maher is a gadfly, who has little to no input on Democratic policy.

Rush Limbaugh is the 800-pound Gorilla of Republican policy, he is intimately involved on a near-daily basis with the shaping of Republican policy and the manufacture of selective outrage.

In my mind, anyway, there is no similarity whatsover between the two.

I understand Bill does not have much influence on policy. His show, however, is very slanted towards supporting Democrats and bashing the Republicans. Granted his fan base is not as large as Rush's, but he is still a useful tool for Obama and the Democats.

I still believe neither party's leadership gives a damn about someone being called a "slut". They care about how they can take any issue and use it to make the other party look bad. Next week, there will be a whole different issue and most people will grow tired of this one and move on.

 

[Drixxx]

And you are basing this on what? The value of the license itself? Or the the value of the radio station associated with that license?



Again, how so?



Not really, you are contracting with said corporations to develop a potential resource. They pay you for the use of the land, front the capitol required to drill the well and take the risk if they hit a dry hole. You get paid for the use of the land whether they extract anything from it or not.



Then a lease would be moot, since you had the capitol to develop or continue to extract a known resource.



That is generally how it works. Unless you were an idiot when you signed the lease.



I'm well aware of the "payola" that has influenced the system. However that sort of thing is supposed to be illegal. The intent of the regulation is to make it a fair process for all involved. Just because you think the licensing process is corrupt doesn't necessarily make it so.

I'm not an apologist for the corporate class. If you don't know that the corporate money funneled into government through campaign financing has gamed the system in their favor you're not paying attention. You can ask all the open ended, rhetorical questions you want. The answer will always be "follow the money".

 

[mark_j]

I'm not an apologist for the corporate class. If you don't know that the corporate money funneled into government through campaign financing has gamed the system in their favor you're not paying attention. You can ask all the open ended, rhetorical questions you want. The answer will always be "follow the money".

Aside from the assumption that I'm not aware of this, that has been the way of politics for centuries. Neither I nor you believe that people go into politics with some half baked idea of "civic duty" especially when you get to the upper levels of state or federal government. There is always the idea of "what can you do for me" when some group, corporation, or individual dumps a bunch of money into a politician's campaign.

 

[Drixxx]

Aside from the assumption that I'm not aware of this, that has been the way of politics for centuries. Neither I nor you believe that people go into politics with some half baked idea of "civic duty" especially when you get to the upper levels of state or federal government. There is always the idea of "what can you do for me" when some group, corporation, or individual dumps a bunch of money into a politician's campaign.

What happened to all that happy talk about competitive bids and radio station value? After millions of dollars has exchanged hands and industry insiders sit in the highest positions of power in the FCC are you going sit there and claim that license fees are based purely on fair market value?

 

[mark_j]

What happened to all that happy talk about competitive bids and radio station value?

You never answered any of my questions. You say it is based totally on insider payola. I was agreeing that some politicos have been influenced this way. In theory, it's not supposed to work that way, thus my citing of FCC policy and my questioning of how you came to your conclusions.

You offer no proof other than the rhetoric of "follow the money" or "all government is corrupt".

After millions of dollars has exchanged hands and industry insiders sit in the highest positions of power in the FCC are you going sit there and claim that license fees are based purely on fair market value?

That is the way it is supposed to work. Can you prove otherwise?

 

[patrick1]

Hello from across the pond.

Me I'm for freedom of speech - even if it offends me - and I'm for the public vilifying of misogynists whether they're Rush Limbaugh or Bill Maher. Misogyny doesn't respect partisan boundaries.

I'm against the requirement that someone has to pass a public morality test before they can make a political donation. We would all fail such a test wouldn't we? Hell's teeth. Next you'll be saying that mining companies engaged in fracking or warmongers making fortunes from military supplies can't pay their hard-earned dollars to candidates.

Mind you, to the outside observer, your PACs are in danger of making a mad money-driven folly of the election process, the public arena drowning in populist negative remarks about every candidate.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

As Johnny pointed out to you, we spend more on dog food than elections.

What you see are negative political ads, and you see them because they work.



Do you actually think we hear good things out of your politics?

 

[Drixxx]

You never answered any of my questions. You say it is based totally on insider payola. I was agreeing that some politicos have been influenced this way. In theory, it's not supposed to work that way, thus my citing of FCC policy and my questioning of how you came to your conclusions.

You offer no proof other than the rhetoric of "follow the money" or "all government is corrupt".



That is the way it is supposed to work. Can you prove otherwise?

You admit that millions of dollars exchange hands and industry insiders sit on the FCC and then ask for proof? How naive are you?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

When Government gets so powerful that its purchase price is cost effective, even imperative, to business, then business will purchase government indulgences.
A_J, the Stupid

 

[Liar]

When did Maher call Palin a cunt?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

There's dozens of links to it...

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bill-maher-calls-sarah-palin-the-c-word-during-his-stand-up-act/

She was called just as bad, if not worse here...

http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=611105
http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=614058
http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=614066
http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=614841

But, you see, it's okay to say things like that about conservative women, you should see some the the things they say about Michelle Malkin here on Lit...

Things they hear other people in their lives say, and let's face it, Conservatives want to force their values on everyone, so they have to be isolated, ridiculed and suffer the imposition of more enlightened values on their way of life, and calling them bad names is one of the tools of the trade.

Have you forgotten some of the things said about the Palin children?

Contemporary leftists, on the other hand, view their opponents as people you send off to the Gulag, unworthy of any respect, deserving of any kind of low blow, no matter how foul. So you accuse Goldwater of insanity, slander Justice Thomas as a sexual monster, casually publish plays, books, and films calling for the assassination of President Bush, and assault the first serious Republican female candidate at her weakest point -- her family. And of course, you scream to high heaven if any form of turnabout occurs in your direction, as in the case of the Obama family, which was declared "off limits" early in the presidential campaign, at the same time that Palin's family was being stretched on the media rack.

This style of political loathing has become effectively innate. It has been systemized to such a degree as to become integral. Modern liberalism cannot do without it. An entire structure has been erected on the basis of political hatred, and from that structure a whole new strategy has arisen.
J.R. Dunn

 

[mercury14]

There's a difference between calling a public political figure a name and using public airwaves to defame a private citizen. This has even been established in judicial law and highlighted earlier in this thread.

But here you are insisting on your fallacy of false equivalency Mr. Logic Cop.

 

[Liar]

There's dozens of links to it...

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bill-maher-calls-sarah-palin-the-c-word-during-his-stand-up-act/

Ok, thanks. So, a year ago.

[Wall of text assuming, for some imexplickable reason, that I support what Maher and other liberals said.]

Uh, yeah, you really need to chill out. I asked when the cunt thing happened. That is all.

 

[mercury14]

Ok, thanks.

Uh, yeah, you really need to chill out. I asked when the cunt thing happened. That is all.

You should also know that it happened on a late night comedy talk show on a private cable network that one has to pay to access.

Rush's comments used the public airwaves in the middle of the afternoon.

 

[ksmybuttons]

You are all arguing who is worse, Limbaugh or Maher. The lie in the room is that maher gave money to Obama. He didn't. He gave money to a super PAC.

Miles lied. He twisted the truth. Maher said things and it's Obama's fault. Limbaugh said things and it's Limbaugh's fault. There's the difference.

 

[koalabear]

In a cover story for The Hollywood Reporter, Bill Maher claimed he’s not giving out any more million-dollar checks like the one he gave Obama’s super PAC. "I don't want to do anything that would hurt his re-election chances…and it could because I'm the most 'out there' host. You can go on any other show, and they wouldn't hold it against you because those people don't say the things that I say.” But he also boasts "I am so much more edgy" than the other late-night comedians.

Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/bill-mahe...hing-would-hurt-his-re-election#ixzz1ooStEN1n

After making a point of standing up for women during the Rush Limbaugh controversy, President Obama is taking flak from one corner for not speaking out against “vile misogynist” and liberal Obama supporter Bill Maher.

Maher, a comedian who specializes in politics, is also a $1 million contributor to Priorities USA Action, a super PAC that supports Obama’s reelection.

“President Obama cannot put forth the eloquent position he announced on Tuesday, while sending administration officials out to raise money for an organization that not only counts a vile misogynist as its largest single donor, but whose executives actively boast about that vile misogynist’s support,” Nance wrote in her letter to Lew.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politic...esses-obama-on-limbaughmaher-double-standard/

 

[busybody..]

You are all arguing who is worse, Limbaugh or Maher. The lie in the room is that maher gave money to Obama. He didn't. He gave money to a super PAC.

Miles lied. He twisted the truth. Maher said things and it's Obama's fault. Limbaugh said things and it's Limbaugh's fault. There's the difference.

you are A PATHETIC SLUT

 

[busybody..]

you are A PATHETIC SLUT

The SAME CUNT that said Bush was responsible for ENRON called he said KENNY BOY

The same CUNT that STOOD by while the NIGGERS accused Bush of dragging a BLACK GUY to his death

SO FUCK OFF, SLUT