1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

Americans not bright enough to understand issues

Discussion in 'Politics, Elections & Legislation' started by Brian in Oregon, Feb 17, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Jan 29, 1998
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    I suppose we should be grateful that this idiot is helping destroy the liberal base with his insulting and divisive horsecrap.

    Oh, and BTW, the frosting on the cake - he says the Marines are socialists.


    Maher Strikes Again: Americans 'Not Bright Enough to Really Understand the Issues'

    By Jeff Poor<br>
    Wed, 02/17/2010 - 09:53 ET<br>

    Either Bill Maher was doing his best effort to impersonate Mel Brooks as King Louis XVI in "History in the World, Part I" or he has a complete and utter disregard for the intellectual competency of the American people.

    Maher, a perennial bomb thrower with a hard left ideology appeared on CNN's Feb. 16 "Larry King Live," facing the king of softball interviews, Larry King, and let it be known he thought alleged terrorism plotter Khalid Sheikh Mohammed should be tried in New York City and that health care should be forced through by the Obama administration, despite the wishes of the American people.

    And why should the American people's wishes be ignored? They're "not bright enough."

    "But what the Democrats never understand is that Americans don't really care what position you take, just stick with one," Maher said. "Just be strong. They're not bright enough to really understand the issues. But like an animal, they can sort of sense strength or weakness. They can smell it on you."
    Story Continues Below Ad ?

    Maher insisted a trial for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in the heart of lower Manhattan should appeal to Republicans - despite the factors of cost, legal questions, etc.

    "So when you back off a situation like that, you just look weak on top of which, somebody who is going to have to explain to me why the Democratic position on this shouldn't really be the Republican position," Maher said. "It seems like the Republicans, who are always the, you know, Jack Bauer, ‘24,' tough guys, macho, they should be the ones who want to try this guy in Manhattan. That, to me, seems like the breast-beating macho position. Yes, we're going to try him right where the crime occurred."

    Later, Maher took the opportunity to reiterate his elitist disdain for the American people and their pushback on policies involving the expansion of government [emphasis added]:

    KING: We have a blog question for Bill Maher: "Do you think it's socialism for the government to take over health care to make sure that every American can afford to have it?" Do you think that's socialism?

    MAHER: Of course it's not socialism. Oh, God. Americans have no clue what socialism is. They just know it's something super terrible.

    MAHER: No. Well, first of all, you know, we have socialism already in this country, as does every modern democracy.

    KING: Social Security is socialism.

    MAHER: Yes, of course it is. And so is the Marines Corps. You know, so is the mail. Every modern industrialized Western democracy is a hybrid with elements of socialism in it. It's - it's not evil. You know, again, the Democrats have done a rotten job of selling health care. There's a lot of good stuff in that health care, but to - to have it be characterized as socialist - to let people characterize it as socialism was a big mistake from the beginning.

    Maher suggested what many gung-ho health care proponents have - force the Senate version of the health care bill despite the wishes of the American people through the House of Representatives instead of going the new route of a televised negotiation to iron out a new, amicable bill.

    KING: Do you think they're going to get a weak bill in, if they get a bill at all?

    MAHER: You know, the Senate bill that already passed is not that bad. Yes, it's not what a lot of people would have liked. But it does cover 30 million more people. You can't get thrown off for a preexisting condition. It - it - it saves money. It does reduce costs. Medicare is solvent until 2026. That's not a bad start.

    You know, you can't solve legislation, usually, in one fell swoop. There's usually a good start, then you go back and you get some more. Why Obama just doesn't, you know, make - tell the House to, you know, adopt the Senate bill, take it into reconciliation and push this through, instead of having this televised supposed love fest with the Republicans. Larry, they're just not into you. I keep telling them, they just are not that into you.
  2. halfmile

    halfmile Well-Known Member

    Jan 29, 1998
    Green Bay Wisconsin
    Maher......I want to rip off his head and pour feces down his neck.

    King of the pukes.

  3. Don Steele

    Don Steele Well-Known Member

    Jan 29, 1998
    Florida's beautiful E. Coast
    To some extent Maher is absolutely right, and he's enough of an "elitist" to tell you . If there was no truth in his contention, we wouldn't have Obama in the White House.
  4. Tripod

    Tripod Well-Known Member

    Jan 29, 1998
    Iowa man!!
    I hate his liberal arrogance. I would like to have a couple or 3 beers with him some time. Ha ha. He would be tied up, gagged and forced to listen to me till I ran my course. I would then watch MSNBC and start all over again.
  5. birdogs

    birdogs TS Member

    Jan 29, 1998
    I cancelled HBO years ago because of Bill Maher. That's the same reason I won't go to movies with Sean Pann and others or buy the NY Times. I will not support people who are trying to destroy the America I love. You see, I have proven my love by fightinmg for my country not just talking and tearing her down piece by piece.

    By their ACTIONS shall yee know them!
  6. highflyer

    highflyer TS Member

    Feb 1, 2006
    We just finished s century where you can see what happens with unchecked socialism. Look it up in the dictionary. Socialism is seen in Marxist theory as a transitional stage between capitalism and communism. Is that what we want in America. Liberals pretend to care about freedom when they support a type of government where freedom is taken away by the government. They say everybody will be rich and free. You end up poor and without freedom. Communism and socialism killed millions in the last century. Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot. Something lost on fools like Maher. He is showing some of his liberal arrogance. Liberals and socialists do believe that the people are to stupid to have freedom. They want to control the dumb masses. He is right about one thing. The people were stupid enough to elect Obama and fill the congress with liberal socialist Democrats.
  7. Big Heap

    Big Heap TS Member

    Jan 29, 1998

    Muslim terrorists and the U.S.A. :

    A different spin on the war in Iraq: This WAR is REAL

    Dr. Vernon Chong, Major General, USAF, Retired

    To get out of a difficulty, one usually must go through it. Our country is now facing the most serious threat to its existence, as we know it, that we have faced in your lifetime and mine (which includes WWII).

    The deadly seriousness is greatly compounded by the fact that there are very few of us who think we can possibly lose this war and even fewer who realize what losing really means.

    First, let's examine a few basics:

    1 When did the threat to us start?

    Many will say September 11, 2001. The answer, as far as the United States is concerned, is 1979, 22 years prior to September 2001, with the following attacks on us:

    * Iran Embassy Hostages, 1979;

    * Beirut , Lebanon Embassy 1983;

    * Beirut, Lebanon Marine Barracks 1983;

    * Lockerbie , Scotland Pan-Am flight to New York 1988;

    * First New York World Trade Center attack 1993;

    * Dhahran , Saudi Arabia Khobar Towers Military complex 1996;

    * Nairobi , Kenya US Embassy 1998;

    * Dares Salaam , Tanzania US Embassy 1998;

    * Aden , Yemen USS Cole 2000;

    * New York World Trade Center 2001;

    * Pentagon 2001.

    (Note: during the period from 1981 to 2001 there were 7,581 terrorist attacks worldwide.)

    2 Why were we attacked?

    Envy of our position, our success, and our freedoms. The attacks happened during the administrations of Presidents Carter, Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton and Bush 2. We cannot fault either the Republicans or Democrats, as there were no provocations by any of the presidents or their immediate predecessor, President Ford.

    3 Who were the attackers?

    In each case, the attacks on the US were carried out by Muslims.

    4 What is the Muslim population of the World?


    5 Isn't the Muslim Religion peaceful?

    Hopefully, but that is really not material. There is no doubt that the predominately Christian population of Germany was peaceful, but under the dictatorial leadership of Hitler (who was also Christian), that made no difference. You either went along with the administration or you were eliminated. There were 5 to 6 million Christians killed by the Nazis for political reasons (including 7,000 Polish priests).

    (see http://www.Nazis.testimony.co.uk/7-a.htm

    Thus, almost the same number of Christians were killed by the Nazis as the six million holocaust Jews who were killed by them, and we seldom hear of anything other than the Jewish atrocities. Although Hitler kept the world focused on the Jews, he had no hesitancy in killing anyone who got in the way of his extermination of the Jews or of taking over the world - German, Christian, or any others.

    Same with the Muslim terrorists. They focus the world on the US , but kill all in the way -- their own people or the Spanish, British, French or anyone else. The point here is that, just like the peaceful Germans were of no protection to anyone from the Nazis, no matter how many peaceful Muslims there may be, they are no protection for us from the terrorist Muslim leaders and what they are fanatically bent on doing -- by their own pronouncements -- killing all of us 'infidels.' I don't blame the peaceful Muslims. What would you do if the choice was to remain silent or be killed?

    6 So who are we at war with?

    There is no way we can honestly respond that it is anyone other than the Muslim terrorists. Trying to be politically correct and avoid verbalizing this conclusion can well be fatal. There is no way to win if you don't clearly recognize and articulate who you are fighting.

    So with that background, now to the two major questions:

    1 Can we lose this war?

    2 What does losing really mean?

    If we are to win, we must clearly answer these two pivotal questions:

    We can definitely lose this war and, as anomalous as it may sound, the major reason we can lose is that so many of us simply do not fathom the answer to the second question - What does losing mean?

    It would appear that a great many of us think that losing the war means hanging our heads, bringing the troops home, and going on about our business, like post-Vietnam. This is as far from the truth as one can get.

    What losing really means is:

    We would no longer be the premier country in the world. The attacks will not subside, but, rather, will steadily increase. Remember, they want us dead, not just quiet. If they had just wanted us quiet, they would not have produced an increasing series of attacks against us over the past 18 years. The plan was, clearly, for terrorists to attack us until we were neutered and submissive to them.

    We would, of course, have no future support from other nations, for fear of reprisals and for the reason that they would see; we are impotent and cannot help them.

    They will pick off the other non-Muslim nations, one at a time. It will be increasingly easier for them. They already hold Spain hostage. It doesn't matter whether it was right or wrong for Spain to withdraw its troops from Iraq . Spain did it because the Muslim terrorists bombed their train and told them to withdraw the troops. Anything else they want Spain to do will be done. Spain is finished.

    The next will probably be France. Our one hope with France is that they might see the light and realize that if we don't win, they are finished, too, in that they can't resist the Muslim terrorists without us. However, it may already be too late for France . France is already 20% Muslim and fading fast.

    Without our support, Great Britain will go, also. Recently, I read that there are more mosques in England than churches.

    If we lose the war, our production, income, exports, and way of life will all vanish as we know it. After losing, who would trade or deal with us if they were threatened by the Muslims? If we can't stop the Muslim terrorists, how could anyone else?

    The radical Muslims fully know what is riding on this war, and therefore are completely committed to winning, at any cost. We'd better know it, too, and be likewise committed to winning at any cost.

    Why do I go on at such lengths about the results of losing? Simple… Until we recognize the costs of losing, we cannot unite and really put 100% of our thoughts and efforts into winning. And it is going to take that 100% effort to win.

    So, how can we lose the war?

    Again, the answer is simple. We can lose the war by 'imploding.' That is, defeating ourselves by refusing to recognize the enemy and their purpose and failing to dig in and lend full support to the war effort. If we are united, there is no way that we can lose. If we continue to be divided, there is no way that we can win.

    Let me give you a few examples of how we simply don't comprehend the life and death seriousness of this situation:

    President Bush selects Norman Mineta as Secretary of Transportation. Although all of the terrorist attacks were committed by Muslim men between 17 and 40 years of age, Secretary Mineta refuses to allow profiling. Does that sound like we are taking this thing seriously? This is war! For the duration, we are going to have to give up some of the civil rights to which we have become accustomed. We had better be prepared to lose some of our civil rights temporarily or we will most certainly lose all of them permanently.

    And don't worry that it is a slippery slope. We gave up plenty of civil rights during WWII, and immediately restored them after the victory ... and, in fact, added many more since that time.

    Do I blame President Bush or President Clinton before him?

    No, I blame us for blithely assuming we can maintain all of our Political Correctness and all of our civil rights during this conflict and have a clean, lawful, honorable war. None of those words apply to war. Get them out of your head.

    Some have gone so far in their criticism of the war and/or the Administration that it almost seems they would literally like to see us lose.

    I think some actually do. I hasten to add that this isn't because they are disloyal. It is because they just don't recognize what losing means. Nevertheless, that conduct gives the impression to the enemy that we are divided and weakening. It concerns our friends and it does great damage to our cause.

    Of more recent vintage, the uproar fueled by the politicians and media regarding the treatment of some prisoners of war perhaps exemplifies best what I am saying. We have recently had an issue involving the treatment of a few Muslim prisoners of war, by a small group of our military police. These are the type prisoners who just a few months ago were throwing their own people off buildings, cutting off their hands, cutting out their tongues, and otherwise murdering their own just for disagreeing with Saddam Hussein.

    And, just a few years ago, these same type prisoners chemically killed 400,000 of their own people for the same reason. They are also the same type of enemy fighters who recently were burning Americans and dragging their charred corpses through the streets of Iraq . And, still more recently, the same type of enemy that was and is providing videos to all news sources internationally of the beheading of American prisoners they held.

    Compare this with some of our press and politicians, who for several days have thought and talked about nothing else but the 'humiliating' of some Muslim prisoners -- not burning them, not dragging their charred corpses through the streets, not beheading them, but 'humiliating' them.

    Can they be for real?

    The politicians and pundits have even talked of impeachment of the Secretary of Defense. If this doesn't show the complete lack of comprehension and understanding of the seriousness of the enemy we are fighting, the life and death struggle we are in, and the disastrous results of losing this war, nothing can.

    To bring our country to a virtual political standstill over this prisoner issue makes us look like Nero playing his fiddle as Rome burned -- totally oblivious to what is going on in the real world. Neither we, nor any other country, can survive this internal strife. Again, I say, this does not mean that some of our politicians or media people are disloyal. It simply means that they are absolutely oblivious to the magnitude of the situation we are in and into which the Muslim terrorists have been pushing us for many years.

    These people are a serious and dangerous liability to the war effort. We must take note of who they are and get them out of office. Remember, the Muslim terrorists stated goal is to kill all infidels. That translates into ALL non-Muslims -- not just in the United States , but throughout the world. We are the last bastion of defense.

    We have been criticized for many years as being 'arrogant.' That charge is valid. We are arrogant in that we believe that we are so good, powerful, and smart that we can win the hearts and minds of all those who attack us, and that, with both hands tied behind our back, we can defeat anything bad in the world. We can't!

    If we don't recognize this, our nation, as we know it, will not survive, and no other free country in the world will survive if we are defeated.

    And, finally, name any Muslim countries throughout the world that allow freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, equal rights for anyone -- let alone everyone, equal status or any status for women, or that have been productive in one single way that contributes to the good of the world.

    This has been a long way of saying that we must be united on this war or we will be equated in the history books to the self- inflicted fall of the Roman Empire . If, that is, the Muslim leaders will allow history books to be written or read.

    If we don't win this war right now, keep a close eye on how the Muslims take over France in the next 5 years or less. They will continue to increase the Muslim population of France and continue to encroach, little by little, on the established French traditions.

    The French will be fighting among themselves over what should or should not be done, which will continue to weaken them and keep them from any united resolve. Doesn't that sound eerily familiar?

    Democracies don't have their freedoms taken away from them by some external military force. Instead, they give their freedoms away, politically correct piece by politically correct piece.

    And they are giving those freedoms away to those who have shown, worldwide, that they abhor freedom and will not apply it to you or even to themselves, once they are in power.

    Muslims have universally shown that when they have taken over, they then start brutally killing each other over who the few will be controlling the masses.

    What is happening in Iraq is a good example. Will we ever stop hearing from the politically correct about the 'peaceful Muslims?'

    I close on a hopeful note by repeating what I said before: If we are united, there is no way that we can lose. I hope now, after the election, the factions in our country will begin to focus on the critical situation we are in, and will unite to save our country. It is your future we are talking about. Do whatever you can to preserve it. I reiterate: our national election is under way.

    After reading the above, we all must do this, not only for ourselves, but for our children, our grandchildren, our country, and our world. Whether Democrat or Republican, conservative or liberal ... and that includes the Politicians and media of our country and the free world.
  8. larryjk

    larryjk Member

    Jan 29, 1998
    Bill Maher is a self dedicated A--H---. I will never listen to him, or others of the same ilk; Rosie etc. Don't give these people good ratings and they will go away.
  9. highflyer

    highflyer TS Member

    Feb 1, 2006
    As one of the last believing Christians in the Western world I find it sad that Islam is taking over. Our freedoms came from our Christian heritage and our freedoms are being lost as we abandon our religion and turn to the religion of big government. As a Christian you have to have faith that God is in charge even if that means the destruction of the world as we know it. Mighty empires rot from within before they are destroyed from the outside. We had a good run. What pains me the most is the failure of the churches as they turn away from the Bible and embrace the modern world with all it's decadence. As Christian influence wanes they try desperately to keep people in the church by adopting modern morality and ignoring the truths in their own Bible.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.