October 21, 2007

Bravo to Bill Maher

He assisted his show's security personnel in removing a bunch of 9-11 Truthers who had infiltrated the show's audience and disrupted the show.

I don't necessarily agree with Noel Sheppard's analysis that Maher sort of "deserves" this; I think he's been pretty consistent that 9-11 Truthers are a bunch of total loons (hear that, Liz Allen?). The fact that Maher is hostile to many (most) of President Bush's policies doesn't conflict with his anti-9/11 Truther position, nor does it mean he deserves these boneheads disrupting his broadcast.

Posted by Hube at October 21, 2007 08:36 AM | TrackBack

Comments  (We reserve the right to edit and/or delete any comments. If your comment is blocked or won't post, e-mail us and we'll post it for you.)

"The fact that Maher is hostile to many (most) of President Bush's policies doesn't conflict with his anti-9/11 Truther position"

I could not have better pointed out the disease of kool-aid politics. The issue of right/left, conservative/liberal, D/R has become so charged that the whole myth of each of these has to be bought lock, stock, and barrel to be part of that "team".

For instance, if you're conservative, you must be for restriction of abortion, anti gay marrige, and Christian. If you're liberal, you must believe in human-caused global warming, welfare, and socialized healthcare. The faithful of either side don't seem to value or even tolerate independent thought anymore. You have to accept the creed or be labeled as an enemy.

If I meet anyone that has come to a conclusion that differs from mine, I have no choice to respect it as long as they came by it through a decent amount of consideration and study. To me, that's honest. Conversely, I have nothing but contempt for a person who screams their opinion if they don't have rational thought to back it up, even if I agree with their views.

Now, if only I can learn to be more tactful in my contempt...

Posted by: Joe M at October 21, 2007 05:41 PM

Credit were credit is dude. I disparaged your top two posts but I read further and agree with you 100% on this. I'm a Maher fan (which I'm guessing you're not) but I'm not big on the "conspiracy" theories, especially this 9/11 one.

This is another reason I'm shocked that many conservatives label global warming based on human activity a hoax. So this is all just a natural cycle of the earth and 95% of the world's scientists are engaged in some high-level colusion? I guess it's akin to the other big scientific hoax, evolution by natural selection.

Posted by: dorian gray at October 22, 2007 12:48 PM

gray: I, nor many others, do not call it a "hoax." Just "chicken littleing," let's say. Look, face it -- as you all like to say, scientists who are "against" the conventional wisdom on GW are somehow "bought" by Big Oil or have some "other" axe to grind; just keep in mind that scientists get their best research funding when there's a "crisis." And what bigger "crisis" is there now but GW?

I like to liken the screaming about GW to what Gallileo faced when he had the audacity to claim the Earth revolved around the Sun.

Posted by: Hube at October 22, 2007 04:33 PM