Bill Maher: Comparing the violence of Islam to Christianity is liberal bullshit

[EriktheRed]

Maher is a ******* left-wing hack. He is also a Jew, which is why he attacks Islam. I'm glad he does it, but he still supports Obama, who is a muslim-loving POS.

Maher was raised in his Irish American father's (William, Sr.) Catholic religion so does that mean he attacks Islam because he was raised Catholic?
Ironically, the guy who was defending Muslims (lamely, I believe) in that video, Brian Levin, was raised Jewish. So does he defend Islam because he's Jewish, asshole?

I could give a crap about Maher's upbringing, or the other asshole in the video, OR your opinion, punk.

Translation: Ok, I got caught being stupid, so I'm just gonna act like it doesn't matter that I got shit wrong...again.

 

[EriktheRed]

.

Should be interesting to see how long it's going to take for America to admit, as a whole, that radicalized Islam is a serious threat to the lives of our citizens from coast to coast. That won't happen, of course, until some folks stop trying to apologize for it, for them to stop pretending we're attacking the religion as a whole, for them to stop trying to divert from the subject, for them to admit that there is a difference between Islam and radicalized Islam. We're still mired in Political Correctness.

Sadly, I suspect it will take more attacks like this, perhaps many more.

.

How is it you can be so reasonable sometimes and then on a dime veer off into wingnut territory?

Especially with this line:

until some folks stop trying to apologize for it, for them to stop pretending we're attacking the religion as a whole

Who's "trying to apologize for it"? Who's this "we" you include yourself in?

 

[poet]

Nice to see someone speaking the truth from the other side of the aisle.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YG_mqZJKcM

Uh, he's not referring to "liberals".....he's referring to the hypocrisy of the right, invoking "liberal bs".

 

[Mac1958]

.

Should be interesting to see how long it's going to take for America to admit, as a whole, that radicalized Islam is a serious threat to the lives of our citizens from coast to coast. That won't happen, of course, until some folks stop trying to apologize for it, for them to stop pretending we're attacking the religion as a whole, for them to stop trying to divert from the subject, for them to admit that there is a difference between Islam and radicalized Islam. We're still mired in Political Correctness.

Sadly, I suspect it will take more attacks like this, perhaps many more.

.

How is it you can be so reasonable sometimes and then on a dime veer off into wingnut territory?

Especially with this line:

until some folks stop trying to apologize for it, for them to stop pretending we're attacking the religion as a whole

Who's "trying to apologize for it"? Who's this "we" you include yourself in?

I would guess you think I'm "veering off into wingnut territor" when I say something with which you disagree. That's okay, of course, I get that from both ends pretty regularly, and I'd have to agree it's entirely possible that I'm certifiable. That said:

I used "we" twice: "...top pretending we're attacking the religion as a whole" -- the "we" there would be anyone who points out that there is an Islamic component to many of these attacks -- and "we're still mired in Political Correctness" -- that "we" is our society as a whole.

And by "trying to apologize for it", I mean that when we attack someone for criticizing something, we place ourselves in the position (at least in perception) of supporting or apologizing for what is being criticized. And in this case, it concerns me greatly when radical Islamists may feel they're being provided some kind of cover for their actions. I have no doubt that they're looking for any possible weaknesses in our resolve, and that they consider this kind of thing just that.

When I see a conversation about an attack that at least probably had a Jihadist component to it diverted to a discussion about abortion clinic bombings, for example, I can't blame a reasonable person from wondering about the intent of the person doing the diverting.

.

 

[SAYIT]

Maher is a ******* left-wing hack. He is also a Jew, which is why he attacks Islam. I'm glad he does it, but he still supports Obama, who is a muslim-loving POS.

Maher was raised in his Irish American father's (William, Sr.) Catholic religion so does that mean he attacks Islam because he was raised Catholic?
Ironically, the guy who was defending Muslims (lamely, I believe) in that video, Brian Levin, was raised Jewish. So does he defend Islam because he's Jewish, asshole?

I could give a crap about Maher's upbringing, or the other asshole in the video, OR your opinion, punk.

If you didn't give a crap about Maher's religion you would not have made it central to your post ("He is also a Jew, which is why he attacks Islam").
We both know why it's so important to one such as you, asshole.

 

[SAYIT]

.

Should be interesting to see how long it's going to take for America to admit, as a whole, that radicalized Islam is a serious threat to the lives of our citizens from coast to coast. That won't happen, of course, until some folks stop trying to apologize for it, for them to stop pretending we're attacking the religion as a whole, for them to stop trying to divert from the subject, for them to admit that there is a difference between Islam and radicalized Islam. We're still mired in Political Correctness.

Sadly, I suspect it will take more attacks like this, perhaps many more.

.

How is it you can be so reasonable sometimes and then on a dime veer off into wingnut territory?

Especially with this line:

until some folks stop trying to apologize for it, for them to stop pretending we're attacking the religion as a whole

Who's "trying to apologize for it"? Who's this "we" you include yourself in?

I would guess you think I'm "veering off into wingnut territor" when I say something with which you disagree. That's okay, of course, I get that from both ends pretty regularly, and I'd have to agree it's entirely possible that I'm certifiable. That said:

I used "we" twice: "...top pretending we're attacking the religion as a whole" -- the "we" there would be anyone who points out that there is an Islamic component to many of these attacks -- and "we're still mired in Political Correctness" -- that "we" is our society as a whole.

And by "trying to apologize for it", I mean that when we attack someone for criticizing something, we place ourselves in the position (at least in perception) of supporting or apologizing for what is being criticized. And in this case, it concerns me greatly when radical Islamists may feel they're being provided some kind of cover for their actions. I have no doubt that they're looking for any possible weaknesses in our resolve, and that they consider this kind of thing just that.

When I see a conversation about an attack that at least probably had a Jihadist component to it diverted to a discussion about abortion clinic bombings, for example, I can't blame a reasonable person from wondering about the intent of the person doing the diverting.

I agree with both of you. Your meaning was clear about who "we" are and I took you at your word. You were logical, thoughtful, reasonable and rational.
Erik was also correct to point out that sometimes you are less than the aforementioned.
BTW, the part of apologist you refer to is currently being played by Dante who is desperately trying to minimize the risk that Islamists pose to America on the Canada Thwarts a Major Terrorist Attack thread.
In the end we must decide what we are willing to do in order to impede these attacks.
Israel built a security fence for which she has been roundly critcized. Whatever we do I hope we do it before the next attempt because it probably is being planned by angry, disillusioned, misguided, not-too-brights even as we speak.

 

[S.J.]

Maher was raised in his Irish American father's (William, Sr.) Catholic religion so does that mean he attacks Islam because he was raised Catholic?
Ironically, the guy who was defending Muslims (lamely, I believe) in that video, Brian Levin, was raised Jewish. So does he defend Islam because he's Jewish, asshole?

I could give a crap about Maher's upbringing, or the other asshole in the video, OR your opinion, punk.

If you didn't give a crap about Maher's religion you would not have made it central to your post ("He is also a Jew, which is why he attacks Islam").
We both know why it's so important to one such as you, asshole.

You posted what I wrote but you must have trouble reading it. I said "I could give a crap about his upbringing". That's not the same thing as religion. Being Jewish and anti-muslim is the only thing I like about Maher. Other than that, he's a piece of shit, like you.

 

[paulitician]

Bill Maher actually makes sense once and awhile. Left/Democrats have always had a weird obsession with hating Christians. They don't express that same hatred regarding other religions. It is a bit kooky. That being said, Bill Maher is still a very confused individual. He can't decide whether he's a Libertarian or Socialist/Progressive. He continues to waffle back & forth.

 

[poet]

Bill Maher actually makes sense once and awhile. Left/Democrats have always had a weird obsession with hating Christians. They don't express that same hatred regarding other religions. It is a bit kooky. That being said, Bill Maher is still a very confused individual. He can't decide whether he's a Libertarian or Socialist/Progressive. He continues to waffle back & forth.

Bald faced lie, when so many "Left/Democrats" are Christians, themselves.
Bill Maher is an astute pundit and a brilliant social commentator.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Left/Democrats have always had a weird obsession with hating Christians.

How "odd" that you White Wingers so-freely throw-around the word "hate"....when it's (primarily) you who use it so-often.​

 

[SAYIT]

I could give a crap about Maher's upbringing, or the other asshole in the video, OR your opinion, punk.

If you didn't give a crap about Maher's religion you would not have made it central to your post ("He is also a Jew, which is why he attacks Islam").
We both know why it's so important to one such as you, asshole.

You posted what I wrote but you must have trouble reading it. I said "I could give a crap about his upbringing". That's not the same thing as religion. Being Jewish and anti-muslim is the only thing I like about Maher. Other than that, he's a piece of shit, like you.

But then, he isn't Jewish - having been raised Catholic - nor does he claim to be (though you do). Evidently his religious background doesn't explain "why he attacks Islam" as you claim.

 

[SAYIT]

Bill Maher actually makes sense once and awhile. Left/Democrats have always had a weird obsession with hating Christians. They don't express that same hatred regarding other religions. It is a bit kooky. That being said, Bill Maher is still a very confused individual. He can't decide whether he's a Libertarian or Socialist/Progressive. He continues to waffle back & forth.

Bald faced lie, when so many "Left/Democrats" are Christians, themselves.
Bill Maher is an astute pundit and a brilliant social commentator.

I wouldn't go so far as to call him a brilliant anything but he seems to be open-minded enough to judge things on their merits rather than some silly ideological "us-verses-them" as so many here seem to do.

 

[EriktheRed]

.

Should be interesting to see how long it's going to take for America to admit, as a whole, that radicalized Islam is a serious threat to the lives of our citizens from coast to coast. That won't happen, of course, until some folks stop trying to apologize for it, for them to stop pretending we're attacking the religion as a whole, for them to stop trying to divert from the subject, for them to admit that there is a difference between Islam and radicalized Islam. We're still mired in Political Correctness.

Sadly, I suspect it will take more attacks like this, perhaps many more.

.

How is it you can be so reasonable sometimes and then on a dime veer off into wingnut territory?

Especially with this line:

until some folks stop trying to apologize for it, for them to stop pretending we're attacking the religion as a whole

Who's "trying to apologize for it"? Who's this "we" you include yourself in?

I would guess you think I'm "veering off into wingnut territor" when I say something with which you disagree. That's okay, of course, I get that from both ends pretty regularly, and I'd have to agree it's entirely possible that I'm certifiable. That said:

I used "we" twice: "...top pretending we're attacking the religion as a whole" -- the "we" there would be anyone who points out that there is an Islamic component to many of these attacks -- and "we're still mired in Political Correctness" -- that "we" is our society as a whole.

And by "trying to apologize for it", I mean that when we attack someone for criticizing something, we place ourselves in the position (at least in perception) of supporting or apologizing for what is being criticized. And in this case, it concerns me greatly when radical Islamists may feel they're being provided some kind of cover for their actions. I have no doubt that they're looking for any possible weaknesses in our resolve, and that they consider this kind of thing just that.

When I see a conversation about an attack that at least probably had a Jihadist component to it diverted to a discussion about abortion clinic bombings, for example, I can't blame a reasonable person from wondering about the intent of the person doing the diverting.

.

So would it be fair to say your post is kind of an amalgam of all the different arguments going on on both sides

 

[EriktheRed]

I could give a crap about Maher's upbringing, or the other asshole in the video, OR your opinion, punk.

If you didn't give a crap about Maher's religion you would not have made it central to your post ("He is also a Jew, which is why he attacks Islam").
We both know why it's so important to one such as you, asshole.

You posted what I wrote but you must have trouble reading it. I said "I could give a crap about his upbringing". That's not the same thing as religion. Being Jewish and anti-muslim is the only thing I like about Maher. Other than that, he's a piece of shit, like you.

And you're still wrong, dumbass. He's NOT Jewish.

 

[SAYIT]

If you didn't give a crap about Maher's religion you would not have made it central to your post ("He is also a Jew, which is why he attacks Islam").
We both know why it's so important to one such as you, asshole.

You posted what I wrote but you must have trouble reading it. I said "I could give a crap about his upbringing". That's not the same thing as religion. Being Jewish and anti-muslim is the only thing I like about Maher. Other than that, he's a piece of shit, like you.

And you're still wrong, dumbass. He's NOT Jewish.

SJ has that blind spot. He is impervious to facts.

 

[Mac1958]

How is it you can be so reasonable sometimes and then on a dime veer off into wingnut territory?

Especially with this line:




Who's "trying to apologize for it"? Who's this "we" you include yourself in?

I would guess you think I'm "veering off into wingnut territor" when I say something with which you disagree. That's okay, of course, I get that from both ends pretty regularly, and I'd have to agree it's entirely possible that I'm certifiable. That said:

I used "we" twice: "...top pretending we're attacking the religion as a whole" -- the "we" there would be anyone who points out that there is an Islamic component to many of these attacks -- and "we're still mired in Political Correctness" -- that "we" is our society as a whole.

And by "trying to apologize for it", I mean that when we attack someone for criticizing something, we place ourselves in the position (at least in perception) of supporting or apologizing for what is being criticized. And in this case, it concerns me greatly when radical Islamists may feel they're being provided some kind of cover for their actions. I have no doubt that they're looking for any possible weaknesses in our resolve, and that they consider this kind of thing just that.

When I see a conversation about an attack that at least probably had a Jihadist component to it diverted to a discussion about abortion clinic bombings, for example, I can't blame a reasonable person from wondering about the intent of the person doing the diverting.

.

So would it be fair to say your post is kind of an amalgam of all the different arguments going on on both sides

Dunno. I recognize that there are usually two legitimate sides to an argument, but my bottom line point in this case is that we're letting Political Correctness get in the way of dealing effectively with a critical issue. Which is what is usually does.

.

 

[Rocko]

Maher is a ******* left-wing hack. He is also a Jew, which is why he attacks Islam. I'm glad he does it, but he still supports Obama, who is a muslim-loving POS.

That is not why he attacks Islam, you idiot. Bill Maher is an atheist, not a practicing Jew.

He attacks Islam because he attacks all religions. Anti-relgion is his thing.


Also, you're no different than Neo-Nazis who swear against people(and even attack them) for loving Jews... with your "muslim-loving POS" shit.

You mean religous bigotry is his thing, right?

 

[paulitician]

Bill Maher actually makes sense once and awhile. Left/Democrats have always had a weird obsession with hating Christians. They don't express that same hatred regarding other religions. It is a bit kooky. That being said, Bill Maher is still a very confused individual. He can't decide whether he's a Libertarian or Socialist/Progressive. He continues to waffle back & forth.

Bald faced lie, when so many "Left/Democrats" are Christians, themselves.
Bill Maher is an astute pundit and a brilliant social commentator.

Whoa there, easy on the Celebrity-Worship. He's a funny guy, and sometimes he does nail it. But there's no need to worship him. And he is right on this one. Left/Democrats have always obsessed on bashing and hating Christians. They don't express that same kind of hatred towards any other religions though. Their always fixated on insulting Christians. I know it's weird, but it is what it is.

 

[SAYIT]

I would guess you think I'm "veering off into wingnut territor" when I say something with which you disagree. That's okay, of course, I get that from both ends pretty regularly, and I'd have to agree it's entirely possible that I'm certifiable. That said:

I used "we" twice: "...top pretending we're attacking the religion as a whole" -- the "we" there would be anyone who points out that there is an Islamic component to many of these attacks -- and "we're still mired in Political Correctness" -- that "we" is our society as a whole.

And by "trying to apologize for it", I mean that when we attack someone for criticizing something, we place ourselves in the position (at least in perception) of supporting or apologizing for what is being criticized. And in this case, it concerns me greatly when radical Islamists may feel they're being provided some kind of cover for their actions. I have no doubt that they're looking for any possible weaknesses in our resolve, and that they consider this kind of thing just that.

When I see a conversation about an attack that at least probably had a Jihadist component to it diverted to a discussion about abortion clinic bombings, for example, I can't blame a reasonable person from wondering about the intent of the person doing the diverting.

.

So would it be fair to say your post is kind of an amalgam of all the different arguments going on on both sides

Dunno. I recognize that there are usually two legitimate sides to an argument, but my bottom line point in this case is that we're letting Political Correctness get in the way of dealing effectively with a critical issue. Which is what is usually does.

And that critical issue, if I understand you, is how to effectively defang the radical Islamists among us who are most likely planning the next attack on Americans. The family of the Boston Bombers were concerned about the radical turn the older one took but said nothing to authorities.
We did take action in 1941 when we established internment camps for our Japanese citizens. It is currently popular to decry the infringment of some citizens rights but were American lives saved? The camps were closed, their rights were restored and the Constitution survived. Had I been a Japanese citizen of the US in 1941 I would have understood and cooperated fully. I suspect many if not most did just that.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Bill Maher actually makes sense once and awhile. Left/Democrats have always had a weird obsession with hating Christians. They don't express that same hatred regarding other religions. It is a bit kooky. That being said, Bill Maher is still a very confused individual. He can't decide whether he's a Libertarian or Socialist/Progressive. He continues to waffle back & forth.

Bald faced lie, when so many "Left/Democrats" are Christians, themselves.
Bill Maher is an astute pundit and a brilliant social commentator.

Whoa there, easy on the Celebrity-Worship. He's a funny guy, and sometimes he does nail it. But there's no need to worship him. And he is right on this one. Left/Democrats have always obsessed on bashing and hating Christians. They don't express that same kind of hatred towards any other religions though. Their always fixated on insulting Christians. I know it's weird, but it is what it is.

It's (still) called.....

...Eternal Vigilance.

​