I think Hitch is incredibly well-read but he too is terribly insecure....notice how defensive he becomes at the littlest provocation. Also his arguments tend to be suffice with information yet lack a central theme or focus....he's a factotum that tends to be thesistically ambiguous at time.
The thing I love most about Hitchens is the way he charismatically, intellectually, and boldly addresses his sentences and almost has a lovable smug tone over the top. He's a fucking beast. Get well soon Hitch.
Hitchens is great. I like Dave Barry and Mary Lou, but they are out of their element(s). imo Bill invited too many guests at one time. still 'like' it.
Its embarrassing when Hitchens comes on because he is so overmatched over everyone else. Its like having a 100 meter race between Usain Bolt and some overweight 8 year old girls. This must be episode must be real close to Politically Incorrect getting blackballed off ABC. Who is that loser beside Hitchens?
I hate to mention it, but according to the FBI web site, bin Laden is wanted for the USS Cole, the East African bombings, but they cannot connect him to 9-11.
I'm surprised that won an award for children's literature. Damn good book, but easily 400+ pages long and it has all manner of violence in it. And moreover, it can be pretty depressing stuff; what with rabbits being prey animals who still get oppressed by other more powerful rabbits. And mankind is portrayed as inscrutably alien Lovecraftian abominations.
its been 4 months but anyone who that calls harry potter horseshit when comparing it to LOTR obviously only wacthed the LOTR movies and not read the books. LOTR should of been a musical with all the singing in it. Im glad they didn't have Aragorn singing about the Kings Weed as he strolled around healing people on the battle field. Despite all that i like both book series but they dont hold a candle to George RR Martins Song of Ice and Fire series.
The guy on the right of Hitchens is pretty intimidated you can tell, I would be too. But he didn't have to accuse Hitchens of thinkin he's smarter than him because of his accent.
Hey. On the potter- lord of the rings debate, your talking apples and oranges. Both were amazing. LOTR was deeper and more serious while HP was more lighthearted and easier to connect to. Its really personal opinion. Anyone who says that Harry Potter was written for kids obviously reads like a kid (or worse). I'm confident that both will be passed down and read for hundreds of years, just like homer, virgil, fitsgerald, etc. Seriously, this isn't something you can really debate.
@iron100159 you think harry potter will be passed down for 100's of years like homer's Iliad. Are you kidding me. It was a kids book but Rowling, in answer to critics on her writing, started to up her game and write for a larger audience..i.e adults. They read very poorly. her writing style is poorly descriptive and the pace far too slow. the first book is a gem, the rest are not. Yes, an opinion, but her books are not literary genius, not like Dostoyevsky's The Brothers Karamazov.
@deegan45 That's true in a sense that the Right has been polarized. But today, and when he did this show, he wasn't so certain about his atheism. He wasn't as anti-war, and anti-gun etc.
Henner: "I wouldn't want my children to be on that jury, I would be afraid of terrorists getting revenge!" Wow, Americans were scared as hell back then. Where was our pride in our justice system?
@mouse743 it really is... J K Rowling is a billionaire for a reason, the genre and demographic do not mean a thing, the literature can still be genius...You need to look up the definition of genius if you still disagree.
@LowleyUK Rowling is a billionaire is because she used a formula which appeals to a very wide audience. That is the only 'genius' thing about the harry potter series. Her actual writing is anything but.
@mouse743 Nonsense, if that were the case all childrens authors would use a formula to become billionaires. It's well known that Harry Potter is a phenomenon, even adults like it because it's so well written.
@LowleyUK Just because something is a best selling phenomenon does not mean it is of good quality. Teen pop stars consistently top music charts, yet anyone that has any taste will tell you there music has no substance.
@mouse743 Nice try but Harry Potter is off the scale, you can't compare it to tacky pop music that will last only an instant, Harry Potter is one of the greatest childrens books of all time, whether you like it or not it is now part of history. No doubt you will say yes even if you haven't, but have you actually read all 7 books?
@LowleyUK Indeed I have, and I wasn't comparing HP to pop music. I was merely saying that quantity (of sales) is not correlated to quality. The christian bible is the best selling book of all time yet you would be hard pressed to find anyone willing to make the claim that it was good literature.
@LiBlub1 I've read Lord of the rings, the hobbit, the silmarilion and Im a big fan, However there is no doubt in my mind that J K Rowling is a better writer.
@LiBlub1 Yes I've read both and I own almost every Tolkien book, I don't see how you can say that though? Have you read all the Harry Potter books? Its also worth remembering that Christopher Tolkien has had a lot of impact on those books.
I think kids need to be required to read things that make them question ideas for the most part. Farenheit 451, 1984, or even Dr. Suess's Butter Battle or Star Belly Sneeches. Whatever would interest that age group. As far as these military courts, idea has already been used by who? Nazi Germany. You'll find we get alot from them. Paramilitary, homeland security, Patriot Act, Kangaroo courts, torturing prisons, and for all you conspiracy idealists, killing their own citizens as cause for war
I used to like Bill Maher and thought he was occasionally funny but his obsession with being an apologist for all things of the Democratic Party and his knee jerk reaction to excoriate everything from the Republicans is turning him into a non funny dick.
Larry Klayman. What a joke! He represents Judicial Watch but has no problem with extra-judicial kidnapping, torture and execution without due process. And why? Because 'these are war criminals they're not American citizens. And they want to see us dead'? Jeez! Whatever happened to the notion that you're innocent until proven guilty? Even today the CIA refuses to accuse Bin Laden of involvement in 9/11 due, presumably, to lack of evidence.
@mygeneration01 He does tend to do that a lot. Well, Maher is often right but being a comedian he often goes for the laugh, exaggerating his comments. Hitchens just speaks his mind and he won't let anyone intimidate him.
This guy is wrong, no one elected Bush for national security, that candidate back in 2000 was John McCain, Bush was your Pat Buchanan/ Ron Paul ignorant redneck isolationist theocratic candidate, he only became a sane actor after 9-11 when it became impossible to maintain his former views.
Bill Clinton was a Hawk compared to pre 9-11 George Bush.
While the part about Bush supporting the ignorant isolationist view of the time might be true, however it doesn't disprove the point that other people would have voted for him on the notion of national security.
It's the same problem with Obama, people attribute whatever they want to see to a candidate simply because they are a conservative or liberal, that they're somehow a saviour.
Cristopher Hitchens point that making it (harry potter) required reading will probebly turn people off from it i think is a good point, and i recognize this from my own education and my classmates. Although you may get more people to read it, the appreciation of people reading it will probebly be diminished.
What's your point? You think this country is a Democracy?
Why don't you recite the Pledge of Allegiance.
"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the ****REPUBLIC**** for which it stands: one Nation under God, indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all." There were several versions but REPUBLIC was always present.
No amigo. It's U who needs to understand the differences between the 2 and how they are NOT compatible. LOOK UP wikipedia for what they are. Then do a Google to find what are the Differences between the 2. One is "mob" ruled and the other is "individual" rights rule above mob. One gives you Communist Russia, Communist China, Hitler's Germany, and Mussolini's Italy. & the other gives U Pre-Lincoln United States which is actually called a sovereign Republic where individual states create a union
Might I add that although the Pledge of Allegiance recognizes that we are a Republic, which is why I made mention of it, it was NOT written by 1 of our founding fathers, it was authored by Francis Bellamy, a defrocked Baptist minister who identified himself as a "Christian Socialist" The pledge was authored in the late 19th century by this socialist who designed it as a propaganda tool with which to brainwash children into the supposed virtues of the monopolistic, consolidated, Lincolnite state.
thus, United States is actually a sovereign Republic where "individual" states create a "Union" NOT a Nation, hence the name of our country UNITED STATES with "individual" state rights. A nation it is not and that is where the pledge of allegiance by the author, the socialist, Bellamy makes the intended error of calling it a Nationa "one Nation, under God" But as I explained it was a brainwashing propaganda tool. Read "Lincoln Unmasked" by T. DiLorenzo and "Syndrome of Control" by L. Williams
Actually, I'm sorry I have to break it to you. But 90% of the western world are, in fact, fascist states. Look up the definition on the web or in a dictionary. "Fascism, comprises a radical and authoritarian nationalist political ideology and a corporatist economic ideology" Basically, when the coorporations, banks and arms manufacturers take over control over the goverment, that is no longer a democracy or a constitutional republic, but a fascist state.
Nice try, but most Western countries aren't authoritarian, nationalistic, or radical. Any conspiracy theorist who thinks otherwise is out of their mind and simply picking and choosing from post-war history.
Right, now think this over. Let's take USA for exmple.
1. "aren't authoritarian" - Patriot act
2. "nationalistic" - "This is the greatest country in the world" and other bullshit, not to mention that any country that dares to go against USAs buisness interests is declared a terrorist satte and bombed to the stone age.
3. "or radical" - up untill the last election you had fundamentalist christians in office, people that belive that the Bible is the EXACT word of God. And belived *God put them in power*, if that's not radical I don't know what is
Every country is nationalistic to some degree. But I don't know why is nationalism considered something negative. People mistake it for shovinism and xenophobia. A nationalist (in my oppinion) is a person that loves his country and it's people and doesn't care either way about other countries. But doesn't hate them.
And this is not conspiracy theory, there is no *theory* involved. Those are FACTS. America and the western world are run by coorporations, by using lobyists and coorporate media. The Iraq war wasn't declared by USA, UK and so on, it was declared by Blackwater, Exxon, Shell, and so on and so on. Just look at the recent bank bailouts on Wallstreet, the US goverment gave them 700 billion (with a B) dollars! And check this... they don't know where 350 billion of it went.
I don't think it is as simple as that, but you do make very good points about corporations running many things in the Western world. But that doesn't mean they are fascist. Corporatism HAPPENS to be part of fascist doctrine, but it doesn't mean that the West consists of fascist, authoritarian states. I think doing so trivializes the results of fascism in the 20th Century--namely 60 million dead in World War II.
How does his statement about corporatism relate to and trivialize the deaths in WWII again? Honestly you sound like Bill O'Reily who can do nothing other than call out the names of the innocents killed on Sep 11th every time he's backed into a corner on a specific point...I don't think that relates at all and you have evoked no sympathy from me.
Well, I think sending troops to Afghanistan on a mission to eliminate al-Qaeda was justified, but we shouldn't have undertook the uneviable task of nation-building, especially in that region. That's not our place. I agreed with sending troops to Afghanistan but not Iraq; now I support the opposite because the situations have changed.
I agree with that. Time and again individuals defend our positions in the middle east currently with Hitler's rise to power (which I also agree with). We can't stand by when such atrocities are being committed in such blatant disregard for human life. However, I think that at this point us being in their country only serves to fuel the fervor which led to terrorist acts in the first place (Note that terrorism has escalated, not reduced since we stuck our noses in).
Yeah, that's why I think we should pull out of Afghanistan. Personally, I think we should stay in Iraq because there is hope there, as the population is educated and really doesn't want extremists bombing them or taking power. I really think we shouldn't capitulate to extremists and fight back, but we also need to address serious policy errors in the Middle East.
I agree with that as well; such an approach could actually reciprocate success, finally, in my opinion. However, an extensive military presence in their country and the tactical bombings of their homes isn't the way to do it. Yes, we should protect their people until they can do WHATEVER they may want (whether it be a democracy or full blown communism), but we shouldn't mandate a certain result (and be determined to stay until said result is achieved). It's their country, not ours.
Anyway, his statement about corporatism was that the West was fascist. That's quite a stretch to say, and like I said, anyone who makes that argument clearly picks and chooses from mistakes in the history of our foreign and domestic policy. Do you honestly think the West equates to Fascist Germany and Italy?
When you say the us government gave $700 BILLION! away in bank bailouts and $350 BILLION went missing, I have to add that it was the previous political party that chose to give the banks the first $350 billion with no strings attached. And that this first $350 billion is what went missing. I only point this out because people always have an uncanny ability to re-write history in their own minds.
So if it's the previous administration it somehow doesn't count? Ok, let's get recent. Where's that drastic healthcare revolution Obama was promissing. Where's the single payer option. No where in sight. Why? Because that would make coorporate America cry. The ONLY ones that would be loosing from the single payer option are the coorporate insurance companies, no matter what the braindead hard liners say. And somehow Obama forgot about it.
no i never said it doesn't count the only reason i pointed it out was because people always forget history and then fill in the blanks in their own mind. I agree Obama's administration hasn't brought in any of the policy's they said they would which is pathetic. And you are right the only ones who will lose out on a single payer option are corporations which is why i and pretty much everyone i know in my country (australia) don't understand how anyone who doesn't work for AETNA, HUMANA,
Did I not just say that people who say such things about the West are picking and choosing from post-war history.
"aren't authoritarian"--are you told what you can and can't say, what you can and can't do (within the boundaries of the law), and are dissenters continually thrown in prison? No. Again, taking one or two examples from post-war history does not work as an argument.
Check out the details of the "patriot act" and listen to some of the horror stories involving it. Did you know that the librarians HAVE to give your records to the authorities, so they can see if you have been reading naughty things. And if they refuse they can be arrested. In the legendary words of the late great Bill Hicks: "You are free to do as we tell you".
"nationalism"--I think you're thinking of patriotism. A nationalist is a chauvenist in every sense of the word. But a nationalist population must OVERWHELMINGLY believe that they have a destiny and they can do whatever they want to achieve that destiny. I would say most Americans don't believe that, and the right wingers who do are not taken seriously (esp after Bush)
I would say that though most Americans wouldn't openly state that they can do whatever they want without expecting reciprocal consequences. However, I do believe that most Americans don't "really" care about what their government which they have elected does in other countries; look at Afghanistan, where we were harassing their country for years and years. What happened? September 11th. How did we respond? It's not that we had been doing something wrong, but that they were evil...
I don't think most Americans would say that anyway. And weren't harassing Afghanistan for years. In fact, we did the opposite (which turned out to be just as bad).
I think you're referring to the aid we supplied in training the soldiers to defend against the Russians. Yes, we did help in that instance, which has allowed such a situation to escalate to such a degree as quickly as it has (money does wonders in an evil world). However, after that time, support was removed but there still existed a massive unwanted US presence in Afghanistan (which was used, prior to 2001, to combat "terror").
I know. Now he is just dedicated to political hit jobs and ra ra ra ing for the left... he sometimes doesn't even have Conservatives on his show, and when he does they're almost always there just to be fodder for all the other far-leftist people on the panel.
@IAMtheNewWorldOrder I think times have changed and so have the issues. He's the same yet more relaxed though. I just wish the audience would stop applauding every time he speaks, its annoying
Eh, Real Time is about as far left as you can get. Maybe one token moderate republican, but its never a debate. Its usually 3 liberals, or far lefts yelling at maybe one conservative, if not 4 libs yelling about how they all agree with one another. You can't condemn fox news and hannity and colmes for being biased and then praise Real Time for being a good show. Its like hating Rush but loving Moore...they are the same thing just with different opinions.
You don't actually think that any of the crap on fox news is supposed to be a news show either, right? Its all bullshit propaganda. Glad to see that you agree more often with Maher and Real Time, but to deride fox news or rush limbaugh for their techniques is ridiculous. Maher and MSNBC pull the same crap, they just use different arguments. But they are frequenlty just as suspect when it comes to actual facts. Thats why I don't really care for either source.
I'm good at reading between the lines. TV news became a show long b4 FOX or Rush started kvetching about media bias, as if they weren't examples of it too. Maher certainly is no savant, but his shows actually are pretty good pop culture forums, certainly better than anything FOX ever did. I listen to AM a lot driving & the simplistic, dishonest crap that comes out of the average talk host's mouth floors me. Like Savage raving about mental diseases & vermin in the media when he's #1 in both!
Christopher Hitchens is BRILLIANT here, and I'm glad Maher finally got the beat-down he deserves from his usual ridiculous crap of kissing Clinton's ass and making excuses like James Carville or Geraldouche. But this other guy saying his daughter is 21 months old and reads classic lit in original Russian--- YEAH FUCKIN' RIGHT!
"Harry Potter is brilliant literature!" says Marilou Henner.
With a hardcover copy of Moby Dick, I could club this stupid bitch like a baby seal. I completely reject the "devil worship" hysteria, but everything Harold Bloom has said about the Potter books is true (and, yes, I did read one of them). They are insipid, flippantly written pap for small children and brainless adults.
Democrats are obsessed with whomever their candidate is. They're sheep without a shred of original thought. The same goes for lay neocons. Neocons are actually socialists, anyhow. Just birdbrains of a feather, flocking together.
no free health care for it's citizens like most developed nations and this weird fear of any socialism, while the banks screw the poor and then are protected with tax payers money form their own greed????
bc malloy, where ever you are from, it is certainly not free health care, it is paid for by taxpayers and mismangaged as badly as the US medicare and medicade. The weird fear of socialism has a history that even the most laid-back armchair historian will recognize as legitimate. Socialism is what allowed bankers to fuel their greed and what allows them to be rewarded for it now. If only greed were the problem, instead it is sloppy thinking like yours.
So greed is not the problem? Could have fooled me. More accurately lack of financial regulation.
Many people in the usa are very quick to label something like universal heath care which is good for everyone and simply common sense, as socialist and therefore bad. Of course the rights of the individual are important but like it or not you do live in a society. Works here in Australia I'm happy and proud to pay a few % tax for myself and my fellow Aussies, it really is an issue of human dignity
You strike me as a person who just walked into the room on the universal HC issue. If it were good for everyone there would be no problem. Free food for everyone would be even better. How about free houses for everyone. Greed is not the problem,everyone is greedy, the question is who is giving them or allowing them access to money. In the bankers case, like all others, it is goverment or as you like to call it financial regulation. It is great evil cloaked in good intentions. I am canadian btw.
To survive in our society you need a bank account to get paid in most cases, making a bank account something you generally have to have therefore it must be regulated.
Perhaps people should be paid in cash by law to solve this problem of needing to use a bank?
You truly do not understand the world we live in I am sorry to say. Reverting back to cash on hand is basically the barter system and a massive step backwards.
Do you think the banks are all bad becasue of this situation? Like someone who wants to ban cars after they see a accedent not knowing how much good cars have done to improve lives on a daily basis. BTW why must something you "have to have" be regulated? Have you heard of Russia? How old are you?
Never mind i checked your profile. You should dislike Goverment intervention for almost the exact same reasons you dislike religion. They are the same evil. I don't understand why so many Athiest are Socialists? I agree with the Conservative view right up untill Jesus enters the picture. Both want control over your mind and pocket book and both say they do it for you. What's the deal with that? I really want to know. I love CH right up until he praises the disasterous civil rights movement. Help
My point is we are forced to use banks which are a business, no one should be forced to use a bank to be paid. There's an unhealthy double standard with banks yes they are a business and can make a profit but when they go down there's a rush to give them public money who's the socialist here? The world economy failing due to the actions of some banks is good reason to reexamine these ideas.
If savings did not go into a bank it would be the same as using coccel shells.
"There's an unhealthy double standard with banks yes they are a business and can make a profit but when they go down there's a rush to give them public money who's the socialist here?"
The goverment obviously, you answered your own question. What double standard do you speak of? If a bank recieves public money because it fails, that is socialism. But they failed, in this case, because of the goverment.
No, its an issue of force. I'm currently 27 and without health care by choice. Why should I have to pay higher taxes to have health insurance if I don't need or want it? The problem is when the majority starts trying to tell people what they MUST have because its good for them. Sorry, I don't need big brother telling me what I can and can't do. I can figure out for myself whats best for me, and to think otherwise is arrogance.
Funny how Dave Barry kept going back to Bin Laden when trying to debate Christopher Fucking Hitchens on military tribunals. The issue entailed a bit more than what to do with the Big O once the American military juggernaut nabbed him Dave. I read the Harry Potter books and missed any references to a man with a pitchfork ruling over a flaming prison for souls. Stupid christians.
IT WAS GEORGE DUBYA !!
Rossclairborne 2 months ago
I think Hitch is incredibly well-read but he too is terribly insecure....notice how defensive he becomes at the littlest provocation. Also his arguments tend to be suffice with information yet lack a central theme or focus....he's a factotum that tends to be thesistically ambiguous at time.
quidseeker 3 months ago
Comment removed
quidseeker 3 months ago
The thing I love most about Hitchens is the way he charismatically, intellectually, and boldly addresses his sentences and almost has a lovable smug tone over the top. He's a fucking beast. Get well soon Hitch.
greeneyesmax 4 months ago
Hitchens is great. I like Dave Barry and Mary Lou, but they are out of their element(s). imo Bill invited too many guests at one time. still 'like' it.
csnowutube 7 months ago
Larry Klayman to be kind is either delusional or a liar.
HugoBossUnzipped 7 months ago
Its embarrassing when Hitchens comes on because he is so overmatched over everyone else. Its like having a 100 meter race between Usain Bolt and some overweight 8 year old girls. This must be episode must be real close to Politically Incorrect getting blackballed off ABC. Who is that loser beside Hitchens?
RightWingHunter666 10 months ago
I hate to mention it, but according to the FBI web site, bin Laden is wanted for the USS Cole, the East African bombings, but they cannot connect him to 9-11.
gamesbok 10 months ago
Hell, let's talk Watership Down.
I'm surprised that won an award for children's literature. Damn good book, but easily 400+ pages long and it has all manner of violence in it. And moreover, it can be pretty depressing stuff; what with rabbits being prey animals who still get oppressed by other more powerful rabbits. And mankind is portrayed as inscrutably alien Lovecraftian abominations.
Best children's book. Ever.
dhx84 10 months ago
Meh, Harry Potter is far from classic.
Get some fucking low-fantasy pulp in there. Conan. Fafhard and Grey-Mouser. Jack Vance.
dhx84 10 months ago
Pretty much the first thing that comes out of that women's mouth is...
"...as a mother...."
I refer you to stand-up comic Bill Bailey as to why this is funny.
MrLittletomdj 10 months ago
I love the Harry Potter books.
Keim4ever 10 months ago
its been 4 months but anyone who that calls harry potter horseshit when comparing it to LOTR obviously only wacthed the LOTR movies and not read the books. LOTR should of been a musical with all the singing in it. Im glad they didn't have Aragorn singing about the Kings Weed as he strolled around healing people on the battle field. Despite all that i like both book series but they dont hold a candle to George RR Martins Song of Ice and Fire series.
Xantheus07 10 months ago
The guy on the right of Hitchens is pretty intimidated you can tell, I would be too. But he didn't have to accuse Hitchens of thinkin he's smarter than him because of his accent.
datazndood 11 months ago
@datazndood
Oh give the guy *some* credit. He was trying to lighten the mood. Hitchens took it for the joke that it was.
dhx84 10 months ago
Schools need to make Hitchens book on the Clintons required reading.
leon999 11 months ago
Hey. On the potter- lord of the rings debate, your talking apples and oranges. Both were amazing. LOTR was deeper and more serious while HP was more lighthearted and easier to connect to. Its really personal opinion. Anyone who says that Harry Potter was written for kids obviously reads like a kid (or worse). I'm confident that both will be passed down and read for hundreds of years, just like homer, virgil, fitsgerald, etc. Seriously, this isn't something you can really debate.
iron100159 11 months ago
@iron100159 you think harry potter will be passed down for 100's of years like homer's Iliad. Are you kidding me. It was a kids book but Rowling, in answer to critics on her writing, started to up her game and write for a larger audience..i.e adults. They read very poorly. her writing style is poorly descriptive and the pace far too slow. the first book is a gem, the rest are not. Yes, an opinion, but her books are not literary genius, not like Dostoyevsky's The Brothers Karamazov.
guild1981 10 months ago
@deegan45 That's true in a sense that the Right has been polarized. But today, and when he did this show, he wasn't so certain about his atheism. He wasn't as anti-war, and anti-gun etc.
LiBlub1 1 year ago
Henner: "I wouldn't want my children to be on that jury, I would be afraid of terrorists getting revenge!" Wow, Americans were scared as hell back then. Where was our pride in our justice system?
andyrosebrook 1 year ago
Its funny they think that Clinton was so bad and then "Dubya" turned up. :D
mattyrm 1 year ago
@mattyrm Well, Clinton was pretty bad. And the same thing will probably happen with Obama. All outgoing presidents get the axe.
soapfiction 1 year ago
Harry potter is genius.
LowleyUK 1 year ago
@LowleyUK it really isn't...
mouse743 1 year ago
@mouse743 it really is... J K Rowling is a billionaire for a reason, the genre and demographic do not mean a thing, the literature can still be genius...You need to look up the definition of genius if you still disagree.
LowleyUK 1 year ago
@LowleyUK Rowling is a billionaire is because she used a formula which appeals to a very wide audience. That is the only 'genius' thing about the harry potter series. Her actual writing is anything but.
mouse743 1 year ago
@mouse743 Nonsense, if that were the case all childrens authors would use a formula to become billionaires. It's well known that Harry Potter is a phenomenon, even adults like it because it's so well written.
LowleyUK 1 year ago
@LowleyUK Just because something is a best selling phenomenon does not mean it is of good quality. Teen pop stars consistently top music charts, yet anyone that has any taste will tell you there music has no substance.
mouse743 1 year ago
@mouse743 Nice try but Harry Potter is off the scale, you can't compare it to tacky pop music that will last only an instant, Harry Potter is one of the greatest childrens books of all time, whether you like it or not it is now part of history. No doubt you will say yes even if you haven't, but have you actually read all 7 books?
LowleyUK 1 year ago
@LowleyUK Indeed I have, and I wasn't comparing HP to pop music. I was merely saying that quantity (of sales) is not correlated to quality. The christian bible is the best selling book of all time yet you would be hard pressed to find anyone willing to make the claim that it was good literature.
mouse743 1 year ago
@mouse743 Here is a defintion of genius "exceptional creative ability". If you're saying she is not a genius then you are simply wrong.
LowleyUK 1 year ago
@LowleyUK If you think Harry Potter is exceptionally creative then it simply means you haven't read much else, and the discussion ends there.
mouse743 1 year ago
@mouse743 I've read more books than I can remember so you're talking shit, and judging by the comments on your profile, it's not the first time.
LowleyUK 1 year ago
@LowleyUK Tolkiens collected fverks are well written. Harry Potter is horseshit.
LiBlub1 1 year ago
@LiBlub1 I've read Lord of the rings, the hobbit, the silmarilion and Im a big fan, However there is no doubt in my mind that J K Rowling is a better writer.
LowleyUK 1 year ago
@LowleyUK Have you read Children of Húrin or Unfinished Tales? Those are by far better written than Harry Potter.
LiBlub1 1 year ago
@LiBlub1 Yes I've read both and I own almost every Tolkien book, I don't see how you can say that though? Have you read all the Harry Potter books? Its also worth remembering that Christopher Tolkien has had a lot of impact on those books.
LowleyUK 1 year ago
Hitchens talking about Harry Potter... ah the good old days.
ScottKeith7025 1 year ago
could it be that Hitchens is kind of pretty?
btq28 1 year ago
I think kids need to be required to read things that make them question ideas for the most part. Farenheit 451, 1984, or even Dr. Suess's Butter Battle or Star Belly Sneeches. Whatever would interest that age group. As far as these military courts, idea has already been used by who? Nazi Germany. You'll find we get alot from them. Paramilitary, homeland security, Patriot Act, Kangaroo courts, torturing prisons, and for all you conspiracy idealists, killing their own citizens as cause for war
CrossCreed4800 1 year ago
I used to like Bill Maher and thought he was occasionally funny but his obsession with being an apologist for all things of the Democratic Party and his knee jerk reaction to excoriate everything from the Republicans is turning him into a non funny dick.
equsnarnd 1 year ago 2
interment was terrible in ni soo america following the same kinda thing was a terrible stupid thing....
johnnyd101 1 year ago
"Bill clinton did nothing for 8 months" How bout you guys try 8 years.
HIMYNAMEISEVAN 1 year ago
scary how right-wing these ppl were back then.
sonofsarek 1 year ago
i had to read lord of the rings back in high school!
Jsworld1980 1 year ago
Politically Incorrect = Loud Jerry Springer-esque verbal brawl.
Real Time = Intelligent discussion of important topics.
tusagnamaster 1 year ago
Not enough Hitchens. Boo.
HardforJesus 1 year ago
Larry Klayman. What a joke! He represents Judicial Watch but has no problem with extra-judicial kidnapping, torture and execution without due process. And why? Because 'these are war criminals they're not American citizens. And they want to see us dead'? Jeez! Whatever happened to the notion that you're innocent until proven guilty? Even today the CIA refuses to accuse Bin Laden of involvement in 9/11 due, presumably, to lack of evidence.
Cabronosidad 1 year ago
Comment removed
Cabronosidad 1 year ago
goddamnit does hitchens do something that few people do: make sense!
they all got hitch slapped!
mygeneration01 1 year ago 27
@mygeneration01 Hitchens is a bitch
clickswitchh 9 months ago
Its not very nice outside. I think it may rain tonight. Make sure you bring in the cloths before you leave. I love you.
scotttebben 9 months ago
@mygeneration01 He does tend to do that a lot. Well, Maher is often right but being a comedian he often goes for the laugh, exaggerating his comments. Hitchens just speaks his mind and he won't let anyone intimidate him.
Azakhiel 3 months ago
02:15 I believe Barry and Hitchens are wearing the EXACT same outfit....
LUIGI989 1 year ago
Wow, that guy next to Hitchens gives me douche-chills. Talk about insecure
MisterAtoms 1 year ago 12
9 years later same arguement over military tribunals.
AlicexMarilyn 2 years ago
i was thinking the same thing... cycle goes round and round
linzzyy 1 year ago
Political correctness comes at the expense of truth most of the time.
holio84 2 years ago
politically incorrect. if we were all politically correct we would be living in a no free speech world
IIIArrow711 2 years ago
>> if we were all politically correct we would be living in a no free speech world.
Yeah, but it's a very limited "free speech".
Maher and Imus did get fired for things they said.
GaryNull 2 years ago
This guy is wrong, no one elected Bush for national security, that candidate back in 2000 was John McCain, Bush was your Pat Buchanan/ Ron Paul ignorant redneck isolationist theocratic candidate, he only became a sane actor after 9-11 when it became impossible to maintain his former views.
Bill Clinton was a Hawk compared to pre 9-11 George Bush.
GaiusIuliusTaberna 2 years ago
@GaiusIuliusTaberna:
While the part about Bush supporting the ignorant isolationist view of the time might be true, however it doesn't disprove the point that other people would have voted for him on the notion of national security.
It's the same problem with Obama, people attribute whatever they want to see to a candidate simply because they are a conservative or liberal, that they're somehow a saviour.
RationalismWins 2 years ago
Harry Potter, a brilliant piece of literature? Who is this crazy woman?
ruinedbyidiots 2 years ago
Dave Barry is an idiot.
MrLatta 2 years ago 3
They need to fire that piece of shit bill maher & give this show to Christopher Hitchens.
KenMacMillan 2 years ago
Larry Klayman rocks!!! way to fight for the USA!
foodconsult 2 years ago
@foodconsult Klayman is a dumbass
Fighting31406 2 years ago
Cristopher Hitchens point that making it (harry potter) required reading will probebly turn people off from it i think is a good point, and i recognize this from my own education and my classmates. Although you may get more people to read it, the appreciation of people reading it will probebly be diminished.
gulllars 2 years ago
Maher got his ass handed to him by Klayman and Hitchens.
PatMarine 2 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
This show makes me ashamed to be american but then I guess it is made by jews for jews so that I don't get it should not be a shock.
FrankinHolland 2 years ago
That's funny, cause that comment makes me, as a Dutchman, ashamed that you have my country in your username.
werecow2003 2 years ago 8
Well said.
Freshhhhh1982 2 years ago
@werecow2003 Whose comment?
writersblock26 11 months ago
@writersblock26 FrankinHolland's.
werecow2003 11 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"Politically Incorrect" is Newspeak for sure.
FrankinHolland 2 years ago
What a stupid show. Hitchens never should have lowered himself to go on it.
FrankinHolland 2 years ago
Why? Would you like him to go on Rush's show instead?
MongoloidBabyUSA 2 years ago
We are NOT a Democracy!!!!!!!! Get it straight...we are a Constitutional REPUBLIC!!!! MORON!!!!
robotsworld1 2 years ago 4
Go to your dictionary and read the definition of Democracy...
Bielocke 2 years ago
What's your point? You think this country is a Democracy?
Why don't you recite the Pledge of Allegiance.
"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the ****REPUBLIC**** for which it stands: one Nation under God, indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all." There were several versions but REPUBLIC was always present.
robotsworld1 2 years ago
Guess u don't understand that Republic and Democracy go very well together...See my point now?
Bielocke 2 years ago
No amigo. It's U who needs to understand the differences between the 2 and how they are NOT compatible. LOOK UP wikipedia for what they are. Then do a Google to find what are the Differences between the 2. One is "mob" ruled and the other is "individual" rights rule above mob. One gives you Communist Russia, Communist China, Hitler's Germany, and Mussolini's Italy. & the other gives U Pre-Lincoln United States which is actually called a sovereign Republic where individual states create a union
robotsworld1 2 years ago
Are you telling me that Nazi Germany or fascist Italy or the USSR were real democracies? How about use 'democratic republic' then shut up?
MongoloidBabyUSA 2 years ago
Might I add that although the Pledge of Allegiance recognizes that we are a Republic, which is why I made mention of it, it was NOT written by 1 of our founding fathers, it was authored by Francis Bellamy, a defrocked Baptist minister who identified himself as a "Christian Socialist" The pledge was authored in the late 19th century by this socialist who designed it as a propaganda tool with which to brainwash children into the supposed virtues of the monopolistic, consolidated, Lincolnite state.
robotsworld1 2 years ago
thus, United States is actually a sovereign Republic where "individual" states create a "Union" NOT a Nation, hence the name of our country UNITED STATES with "individual" state rights. A nation it is not and that is where the pledge of allegiance by the author, the socialist, Bellamy makes the intended error of calling it a Nationa "one Nation, under God" But as I explained it was a brainwashing propaganda tool. Read "Lincoln Unmasked" by T. DiLorenzo and "Syndrome of Control" by L. Williams
robotsworld1 2 years ago
If only people realized this and got over their statist Oedipus complex.
fomastephanovitch 2 years ago
Quit playing juvenile word games, that is a bone head comment.
MongoloidBabyUSA 2 years ago
Actually, I'm sorry I have to break it to you. But 90% of the western world are, in fact, fascist states. Look up the definition on the web or in a dictionary. "Fascism, comprises a radical and authoritarian nationalist political ideology and a corporatist economic ideology" Basically, when the coorporations, banks and arms manufacturers take over control over the goverment, that is no longer a democracy or a constitutional republic, but a fascist state.
Prka01 2 years ago
I don't disagree with your statement.
robotsworld1 2 years ago
Germany lost WW2, fascism won.
mcnesta80 2 years ago 2
My point exactly.
Prka01 2 years ago
Nice try, but most Western countries aren't authoritarian, nationalistic, or radical. Any conspiracy theorist who thinks otherwise is out of their mind and simply picking and choosing from post-war history.
husky720 2 years ago
Right, now think this over. Let's take USA for exmple.
1. "aren't authoritarian" - Patriot act
2. "nationalistic" - "This is the greatest country in the world" and other bullshit, not to mention that any country that dares to go against USAs buisness interests is declared a terrorist satte and bombed to the stone age.
.
Prka01 2 years ago
3. "or radical" - up untill the last election you had fundamentalist christians in office, people that belive that the Bible is the EXACT word of God. And belived *God put them in power*, if that's not radical I don't know what is
Prka01 2 years ago
Every country is nationalistic to some degree. But I don't know why is nationalism considered something negative. People mistake it for shovinism and xenophobia. A nationalist (in my oppinion) is a person that loves his country and it's people and doesn't care either way about other countries. But doesn't hate them.
Prka01 2 years ago
And this is not conspiracy theory, there is no *theory* involved. Those are FACTS. America and the western world are run by coorporations, by using lobyists and coorporate media. The Iraq war wasn't declared by USA, UK and so on, it was declared by Blackwater, Exxon, Shell, and so on and so on. Just look at the recent bank bailouts on Wallstreet, the US goverment gave them 700 billion (with a B) dollars! And check this... they don't know where 350 billion of it went.
Prka01 2 years ago
I don't think it is as simple as that, but you do make very good points about corporations running many things in the Western world. But that doesn't mean they are fascist. Corporatism HAPPENS to be part of fascist doctrine, but it doesn't mean that the West consists of fascist, authoritarian states. I think doing so trivializes the results of fascism in the 20th Century--namely 60 million dead in World War II.
husky720 2 years ago
How does his statement about corporatism relate to and trivialize the deaths in WWII again? Honestly you sound like Bill O'Reily who can do nothing other than call out the names of the innocents killed on Sep 11th every time he's backed into a corner on a specific point...I don't think that relates at all and you have evoked no sympathy from me.
michahsimmons 2 years ago
Well, I think sending troops to Afghanistan on a mission to eliminate al-Qaeda was justified, but we shouldn't have undertook the uneviable task of nation-building, especially in that region. That's not our place. I agreed with sending troops to Afghanistan but not Iraq; now I support the opposite because the situations have changed.
husky720 2 years ago
I agree with that. Time and again individuals defend our positions in the middle east currently with Hitler's rise to power (which I also agree with). We can't stand by when such atrocities are being committed in such blatant disregard for human life. However, I think that at this point us being in their country only serves to fuel the fervor which led to terrorist acts in the first place (Note that terrorism has escalated, not reduced since we stuck our noses in).
michahsimmons 2 years ago
Yeah, that's why I think we should pull out of Afghanistan. Personally, I think we should stay in Iraq because there is hope there, as the population is educated and really doesn't want extremists bombing them or taking power. I really think we shouldn't capitulate to extremists and fight back, but we also need to address serious policy errors in the Middle East.
husky720 2 years ago
I agree with that as well; such an approach could actually reciprocate success, finally, in my opinion. However, an extensive military presence in their country and the tactical bombings of their homes isn't the way to do it. Yes, we should protect their people until they can do WHATEVER they may want (whether it be a democracy or full blown communism), but we shouldn't mandate a certain result (and be determined to stay until said result is achieved). It's their country, not ours.
michahsimmons 2 years ago
Anyway, his statement about corporatism was that the West was fascist. That's quite a stretch to say, and like I said, anyone who makes that argument clearly picks and chooses from mistakes in the history of our foreign and domestic policy. Do you honestly think the West equates to Fascist Germany and Italy?
husky720 2 years ago
When you say the us government gave $700 BILLION! away in bank bailouts and $350 BILLION went missing, I have to add that it was the previous political party that chose to give the banks the first $350 billion with no strings attached. And that this first $350 billion is what went missing. I only point this out because people always have an uncanny ability to re-write history in their own minds.
bmarlow2 2 years ago
So if it's the previous administration it somehow doesn't count? Ok, let's get recent. Where's that drastic healthcare revolution Obama was promissing. Where's the single payer option. No where in sight. Why? Because that would make coorporate America cry. The ONLY ones that would be loosing from the single payer option are the coorporate insurance companies, no matter what the braindead hard liners say. And somehow Obama forgot about it.
Prka01 2 years ago
no i never said it doesn't count the only reason i pointed it out was because people always forget history and then fill in the blanks in their own mind. I agree Obama's administration hasn't brought in any of the policy's they said they would which is pathetic. And you are right the only ones who will lose out on a single payer option are corporations which is why i and pretty much everyone i know in my country (australia) don't understand how anyone who doesn't work for AETNA, HUMANA,
bmarlow2 2 years ago
GOLDMAN SACHS. could possibly be against single payer healthcare.
bmarlow2 2 years ago
Did I not just say that people who say such things about the West are picking and choosing from post-war history.
"aren't authoritarian"--are you told what you can and can't say, what you can and can't do (within the boundaries of the law), and are dissenters continually thrown in prison? No. Again, taking one or two examples from post-war history does not work as an argument.
husky720 2 years ago
Check out the details of the "patriot act" and listen to some of the horror stories involving it. Did you know that the librarians HAVE to give your records to the authorities, so they can see if you have been reading naughty things. And if they refuse they can be arrested. In the legendary words of the late great Bill Hicks: "You are free to do as we tell you".
Prka01 2 years ago
"nationalism"--I think you're thinking of patriotism. A nationalist is a chauvenist in every sense of the word. But a nationalist population must OVERWHELMINGLY believe that they have a destiny and they can do whatever they want to achieve that destiny. I would say most Americans don't believe that, and the right wingers who do are not taken seriously (esp after Bush)
husky720 2 years ago
I would say that though most Americans wouldn't openly state that they can do whatever they want without expecting reciprocal consequences. However, I do believe that most Americans don't "really" care about what their government which they have elected does in other countries; look at Afghanistan, where we were harassing their country for years and years. What happened? September 11th. How did we respond? It's not that we had been doing something wrong, but that they were evil...
michahsimmons 2 years ago
I don't think most Americans would say that anyway. And weren't harassing Afghanistan for years. In fact, we did the opposite (which turned out to be just as bad).
husky720 2 years ago
I think you're referring to the aid we supplied in training the soldiers to defend against the Russians. Yes, we did help in that instance, which has allowed such a situation to escalate to such a degree as quickly as it has (money does wonders in an evil world). However, after that time, support was removed but there still existed a massive unwanted US presence in Afghanistan (which was used, prior to 2001, to combat "terror").
michahsimmons 2 years ago
Comment removed
terrariums 2 years ago
Barry: "People shouldn`t think Chris is more intelligent than me because of his British accent".
Hitchens: "They shouldn`t do that - but not because of that reason". LOL!
mycal64 2 years ago 2
no one looks gayer than bill mahar
WonderBread006 2 years ago
Bill Maher was so much more reasonable back then. He's so inflammatory now.
jamesk48 2 years ago 11
@jamesk48
I know. Now he is just dedicated to political hit jobs and ra ra ra ing for the left... he sometimes doesn't even have Conservatives on his show, and when he does they're almost always there just to be fodder for all the other far-leftist people on the panel.
tubub 1 year ago
@jamesk48 There's way more to get inflamed about, in my opinion
182tonym 1 year ago
@jamesk48 I agree, I think he comes off much more intelligent in these older shows.
jerryhello100 1 year ago
@jerryhello100
I disagree.
If anything, I think he hits & misses. But in general I think he missed more on Politically Incorrect and hits more on Real Time.
IAMtheNewWorldOrder 1 year ago
@IAMtheNewWorldOrder I think times have changed and so have the issues. He's the same yet more relaxed though. I just wish the audience would stop applauding every time he speaks, its annoying
eddo1983 1 year ago
Oh goodness Bill Maher has bad opinions but he runs a good show. Or at least he did 8 years ago. These days it is really bad.
TonkarzOfSolSystem 2 years ago 3
are you joking? Real Time is on HBO, it's a full hour, and his guests are all well informed...unlike PI where the panel has a lot of small thinkers.
kushtravels23 2 years ago 2
Hitchins is a small thinker.
Yeah.........right.
sixmagpies 2 years ago 3
even Bill has admitted that PI had a lot of small thinkers. Hitchens is also a regular on Real Time, obv not talking about him.
kushtravels23 2 years ago 2
Eh, Real Time is about as far left as you can get. Maybe one token moderate republican, but its never a debate. Its usually 3 liberals, or far lefts yelling at maybe one conservative, if not 4 libs yelling about how they all agree with one another. You can't condemn fox news and hannity and colmes for being biased and then praise Real Time for being a good show. Its like hating Rush but loving Moore...they are the same thing just with different opinions.
kbonez2 2 years ago 2
Hear hear!
fomastephanovitch 2 years ago 2
It is a lot more intelligent and thoughtful than any garbage that Limbo or FOX serves up. BTW, it is not a news show
MongoloidBabyUSA 2 years ago
You don't actually think that any of the crap on fox news is supposed to be a news show either, right? Its all bullshit propaganda. Glad to see that you agree more often with Maher and Real Time, but to deride fox news or rush limbaugh for their techniques is ridiculous. Maher and MSNBC pull the same crap, they just use different arguments. But they are frequenlty just as suspect when it comes to actual facts. Thats why I don't really care for either source.
kbonez2 2 years ago
I'm good at reading between the lines. TV news became a show long b4 FOX or Rush started kvetching about media bias, as if they weren't examples of it too. Maher certainly is no savant, but his shows actually are pretty good pop culture forums, certainly better than anything FOX ever did. I listen to AM a lot driving & the simplistic, dishonest crap that comes out of the average talk host's mouth floors me. Like Savage raving about mental diseases & vermin in the media when he's #1 in both!
MongoloidBabyUSA 2 years ago
Christopher Hitchens is BRILLIANT here, and I'm glad Maher finally got the beat-down he deserves from his usual ridiculous crap of kissing Clinton's ass and making excuses like James Carville or Geraldouche. But this other guy saying his daughter is 21 months old and reads classic lit in original Russian--- YEAH FUCKIN' RIGHT!
kungfu2u2 3 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Hitchens='The weaker the wiser'
He is an idiot ..
rockthejungle 3 years ago
"And one of those would be Geraldo"
Look at Hitchens just roll his eyes after that. I love how he holds most people in utter contempt.
kbonez2 3 years ago
Bush was talking to the Taliban in Houston in early 2001...They wanted
a pipeline from Kazak. to Pakistan---Enron
& Unocal paid the Taliban hundreds of
millions in 2000 and 2001...Google it...
starshiptrooper7 3 years ago
Thank you for posting this, it's interesting to look back at commentary from years ago to see how much we changed
crithon 3 years ago
i'm quite interested in marilu henner's take on this incendiary topic. no doubt she has some incisive things to say.
blatspanner 3 years ago
lol...........Why bother turning up?
QwidgyboMan 3 years ago
Where is there Satanism in the Harry Potter novels?
mark48302 3 years ago
Marilu Henner has so much to say... lol
shubidubar 3 years ago
Henner and Hitchens are both idiots.
SyvetheShairks 3 years ago
Hitchens is a pretty fucking good writer though, you gotta admit.
brandonihidalgo892 3 years ago
So is Peter Benchley, but he REALLY screwed the pooch with Jaws, as far as reality goes.
I'll allow Hitchens is an OK fantasy writer, but he's a sesos de albondigas in real life.
So's Mahr, for that matter. Acting like an asshole does NOT make one a genius.
SyvetheShairks 3 years ago
lol wtf was with that other author's comment about his daughter. It was completely out of nowhere. How uncalled for.
Fortozero 3 years ago
"Harry Potter is brilliant literature!" says Marilou Henner.
With a hardcover copy of Moby Dick, I could club this stupid bitch like a baby seal. I completely reject the "devil worship" hysteria, but everything Harold Bloom has said about the Potter books is true (and, yes, I did read one of them). They are insipid, flippantly written pap for small children and brainless adults.
thejackal7137 3 years ago 3
Exactly,banal "NU" fantasy and nothing more.
toecutterr6 3 years ago
This was very interesting... the woman was pathetic though... christ...
AshillaBeige 3 years ago
I love how liberals sell their soul for Bill Clinton. He's not really that liberal...I think democrats are obsessed with Clinton.
NefeshChaim 3 years ago
Democrats are obsessed with whomever their candidate is. They're sheep without a shred of original thought. The same goes for lay neocons. Neocons are actually socialists, anyhow. Just birdbrains of a feather, flocking together.
SyvetheShairks 3 years ago
your country sucks, homeless everywhere
no free health care for it's citizens like most developed nations and this weird fear of any socialism, while the banks screw the poor and then are protected with tax payers money form their own greed????
bcmalloy 3 years ago
bc malloy, where ever you are from, it is certainly not free health care, it is paid for by taxpayers and mismangaged as badly as the US medicare and medicade. The weird fear of socialism has a history that even the most laid-back armchair historian will recognize as legitimate. Socialism is what allowed bankers to fuel their greed and what allows them to be rewarded for it now. If only greed were the problem, instead it is sloppy thinking like yours.
magega 3 years ago
So greed is not the problem? Could have fooled me. More accurately lack of financial regulation.
Many people in the usa are very quick to label something like universal heath care which is good for everyone and simply common sense, as socialist and therefore bad. Of course the rights of the individual are important but like it or not you do live in a society. Works here in Australia I'm happy and proud to pay a few % tax for myself and my fellow Aussies, it really is an issue of human dignity
bcmalloy 3 years ago
You strike me as a person who just walked into the room on the universal HC issue. If it were good for everyone there would be no problem. Free food for everyone would be even better. How about free houses for everyone. Greed is not the problem,everyone is greedy, the question is who is giving them or allowing them access to money. In the bankers case, like all others, it is goverment or as you like to call it financial regulation. It is great evil cloaked in good intentions. I am canadian btw.
magega 2 years ago
To survive in our society you need a bank account to get paid in most cases, making a bank account something you generally have to have therefore it must be regulated.
Perhaps people should be paid in cash by law to solve this problem of needing to use a bank?
bcmalloy 2 years ago
You truly do not understand the world we live in I am sorry to say. Reverting back to cash on hand is basically the barter system and a massive step backwards.
Do you think the banks are all bad becasue of this situation? Like someone who wants to ban cars after they see a accedent not knowing how much good cars have done to improve lives on a daily basis. BTW why must something you "have to have" be regulated? Have you heard of Russia? How old are you?
magega 2 years ago
Never mind i checked your profile. You should dislike Goverment intervention for almost the exact same reasons you dislike religion. They are the same evil. I don't understand why so many Athiest are Socialists? I agree with the Conservative view right up untill Jesus enters the picture. Both want control over your mind and pocket book and both say they do it for you. What's the deal with that? I really want to know. I love CH right up until he praises the disasterous civil rights movement. Help
magega 2 years ago
government and religion are the same?
I think you need to rethink your position,
My point is we are forced to use banks which are a business, no one should be forced to use a bank to be paid. There's an unhealthy double standard with banks yes they are a business and can make a profit but when they go down there's a rush to give them public money who's the socialist here? The world economy failing due to the actions of some banks is good reason to reexamine these ideas.
bcmalloy 2 years ago
I mean paid with cash instead of paid into a bank account forgoing the need for one. Not paid in coccel shells
bcmalloy 2 years ago
If savings did not go into a bank it would be the same as using coccel shells.
"There's an unhealthy double standard with banks yes they are a business and can make a profit but when they go down there's a rush to give them public money who's the socialist here?"
The goverment obviously, you answered your own question. What double standard do you speak of? If a bank recieves public money because it fails, that is socialism. But they failed, in this case, because of the goverment.
magega 2 years ago
No, its an issue of force. I'm currently 27 and without health care by choice. Why should I have to pay higher taxes to have health insurance if I don't need or want it? The problem is when the majority starts trying to tell people what they MUST have because its good for them. Sorry, I don't need big brother telling me what I can and can't do. I can figure out for myself whats best for me, and to think otherwise is arrogance.
kbonez2 2 years ago
And why should you pay taxes for fire-fighters who will go to your, or anyone else's, house when it's burning down whether you want them to or not?
MrSalamander7 2 years ago
Yeah, cause Democrats were obsessed with John Kerry...lol.
thefloacist 3 years ago
Michael Parenti said the exact same thing.
DaHonestAbe 3 years ago
Funny how Dave Barry kept going back to Bin Laden when trying to debate Christopher Fucking Hitchens on military tribunals. The issue entailed a bit more than what to do with the Big O once the American military juggernaut nabbed him Dave. I read the Harry Potter books and missed any references to a man with a pitchfork ruling over a flaming prison for souls. Stupid christians.
farneyblakeley 3 years ago
Is Judicial Watch eating humble pie or what?
DT570 3 years ago
Dave B and the Hitch....now that's a deadly logical tag team if there ever was one
bdl218 3 years ago
Shut your mouth. Harry Potter is too cool for school.
devourerofbabies 3 years ago
I HAVEN'T READ HARRY POTTER BUT IT'S ALL ABOUT SATAN WORSHIP. What a goon.
devourerofbabies 3 years ago