Cancelled!

F Me In The Brain

I can understand people sharing what they believe but if what they believe is messed up I'm happier if they keep it to themselves. 
(And, fully understand that many people have thought/will think the same thing about opinions I voice.)

Hobbes

Speak your mind, but if you get called out on your bullshit and double down, then I take issue. Here's Maher doubling down:

https://twitter.com/ChuckModi1/status/1383422532066312193?s=20

F Me In The Brain

I guess his personal experience gives him a blind spot to something so obvious.
Love the line about the soap commercial.  

gimmesometruth27

every day maher reminds me more and more of joe rogan. and as you know, to me, that is a terrible look at this point.

gimmesometruth27

how long until maher announces he is moving to texas due to inability of california to get his solar power hooked up?

HughFreakingDillon

gimmesometruth27 said:

every day maher reminds me more and more of joe rogan. and as you know, to me, that is a terrible look at this point.

it's really something, and shouldn't have been unpredictable, that everything progressive these days is considered "woke" by some of these guys, which is a pejorative at this point. 

gimmesometruth27

HughFreakingDillon said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

every day maher reminds me more and more of joe rogan. and as you know, to me, that is a terrible look at this point.

it's really something, and shouldn't have been unpredictable, that everything progressive these days is considered "woke" by some of these guys, which is a pejorative at this point. 

i think maher just needs to be a contrarian to justify his own career and show. he is at his best when republicans are in power. then he can pretend to be a liberal champion. then when dems are in power he suddenly coddles and comforts the right wingers. i have not watched his show since he had kellyanne conway on a couple of months ago. my thinking was, "really, why continue to give her a platform?"

funny that at one time his show was the only reason i kept my hbo subscription. now i can't stand the sight of him.

Ledbetterman10

gimmesometruth27 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

every day maher reminds me more and more of joe rogan. and as you know, to me, that is a terrible look at this point.

it's really something, and shouldn't have been unpredictable, that everything progressive these days is considered "woke" by some of these guys, which is a pejorative at this point. 

i think maher just needs to be a contrarian to justify his own career and show. he is at his best when republicans are in power. then he can pretend to be a liberal champion. then when dems are in power he suddenly coddles and comforts the right wingers. i have not watched his show since he had kellyanne conway on a couple of months ago. my thinking was, "really, why continue to give her a platform?"

funny that at one time his show was the only reason i kept my hbo subscription. now i can't stand the sight of him.

Not really. He spent a good portion of the Trump years criticizing liberals and woke stuff. Here's a few examples...

White Shame:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0q2ZR4nBuE

BLM and White Liberals:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8EEAx9tkLQ

Liberals vs. Free Speech:
https://youtu.be/7wvfxh0PbTQ

Liberal censorship:
https://youtu.be/PFQn0zv3FtE

Liberal "pet causes" need to take a backseat to defeating Trump (during 2016 election):
https://youtu.be/HggNLz5fLFA

Trump won because of PC liberals:
https://youtu.be/y3-uNxmNj5o

Halifax2TheMax

gimmesometruth27 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

every day maher reminds me more and more of joe rogan. and as you know, to me, that is a terrible look at this point.

it's really something, and shouldn't have been unpredictable, that everything progressive these days is considered "woke" by some of these guys, which is a pejorative at this point. 

i think maher just needs to be a contrarian to justify his own career and show. he is at his best when republicans are in power. then he can pretend to be a liberal champion. then when dems are in power he suddenly coddles and comforts the right wingers. i have not watched his show since he had kellyanne conway on a couple of months ago. my thinking was, "really, why continue to give her a platform?"

funny that at one time his show was the only reason i kept my hbo subscription. now i can't stand the sight of him.

Regularly hosting KellyAnne CONway and Ann Coulter, because we need to "hear the other side." No, we don't need to hear from racist pieces of shit. Sorry, Bill.

gimmesometruth27

Halifax2TheMax said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

every day maher reminds me more and more of joe rogan. and as you know, to me, that is a terrible look at this point.

it's really something, and shouldn't have been unpredictable, that everything progressive these days is considered "woke" by some of these guys, which is a pejorative at this point. 

i think maher just needs to be a contrarian to justify his own career and show. he is at his best when republicans are in power. then he can pretend to be a liberal champion. then when dems are in power he suddenly coddles and comforts the right wingers. i have not watched his show since he had kellyanne conway on a couple of months ago. my thinking was, "really, why continue to give her a platform?"

funny that at one time his show was the only reason i kept my hbo subscription. now i can't stand the sight of him.

Regularly hosting KellyAnne CONway and Ann Coulter, because we need to "hear the other side." No, we don't need to hear from racist pieces of shit. Sorry, Bill.

don't forget the time he basically fellated Milo on air. everyone expected bill to go after him but he absolutely did not. that was the interview where my opinion of bill really started to change.

Halifax2TheMax

Buh, bye. Now imagine the racism that exists in everyday life, never mind on the bench in a courtroom.

Colorado judge used the n-word and proclaimed that ‘all lives matter.' Now she’s resigning.

Cloaked and seated on her bench, Colorado District Judge Natalie T. Chase asked two Black court employees last May to explain the Black Lives Matter movement after overhearing them talk about protests in Denver over the death of George Floyd.

After hearing their explanation, Chase, who is White, said she thought the police involved in Floyd’s death should be investigated. But then she maintained that, in fact, “all lives matter.”

The incident was one of numerous claims of racist or unprofessional behavior raised against Chase, including another occasion where she used the n-word multiple times while talking to a Black colleague, court officials said.

On Friday, Chase agreed to resign after the Colorado Supreme Court censured her based on a report finding she had “undermined confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary by expressing [her] views about criminal justice, police brutality, race and racial bias, specifically while wearing [her] robe in court staff work areas and from the bench.”

Chase did not dispute any of the incidents. Her attorney did not immediately return a message from The Washington Post late Sunday.

Chase is the latest judge to resign or face disciplinary action in recent years after complaints of racist behavior in the courtroom. In February 2020, a Louisiana judge left her job after admitting to using the n-word multiple times in text messages to her lover. Last November, a Pennsylvania judge resigned following several misconduct charges, including calling a Black juror “Aunt Jemima” and speculating that she had a drug-dealing “baby daddy.” In March, a Washington judge said he would take time off after video surfaced showing him ridiculing a young Black man who was fatally shot by two sheriff’s deputies.

Former Colorado governor John Hickenlooper (D) appointed Chase, who had owned a private firm focusing on family law, criminal law and estate planning, to Colorado’s 18th Judicial District Court in 2014. Chase mainly oversaw domestic relations cases.

In recent years, though, Chase has faced a number of complaints about her behavior in the courtroom and with her colleagues.

Early last year, Chase drove herself and a family court facilitator, who is a Black woman, to a conference in Pueblo, Colo., according to a report by Colorado’s Commission on Judicial Discipline.

During the ride, Chase asked the facilitator “why Black people can use the n-word but not White people, and whether it was different if the n-word is said with an ‘er’ or an 'a' at the end of the word.” Chase repeatedly used the full n-word in the conversation.

Stunned, the facilitator said she felt uncomfortable because she was stuck in the car with Chase. She told court investigators that she was worried that if she spoke honestly, the judge could retaliate against her, adding that the conversation made her feel “angry and hurt” and that hearing the judge say the n-word was “like a stab through my heart each time.”

Then, during a court break in early February last year, Chase overheard two Black courtroom employees talking about the Super Bowl. As she sat on the bench in her robe, Chase said “she would be boycotting the Super Bowl because she objected to the NFL players who were kneeling during the national anthem in protest of police brutality against Black people,” according to court documents.

There were other allegations of misconduct against Chase, including assigning a law clerk early last year to do research unrelated to the judge’s caseload but rather for “personal family legal issues.” Several times last year, Chase also asked her clerk to proofread and rewrite her personal emails before sending them. After returning from a meeting with another judge last year, Chase told her clerk the judge was a “f------ b----,” court documents say.

The judge also “repeatedly discussed personal and family matters” with staff and other court employees during work hours and in work settings “in a manner that was not dignified or courteous,” according to court documents.

Last August, Chase declined to use an ambulance after a medical incident at the courthouse and instead instructed a court employee to drive her to the hospital and stay with her, forcing the employee to miss half a day at work.

Colorado judges are rarely censured publicly, the Denver Post reported; in a review published last December, the newspaper found only four judges were publicly censured between 2010 and 2020.

On Friday, the Colorado Supreme Court found Chase’s use of the n-word, though not directed at anyone, “has a significant negative effect on the public’s confidence in integrity of and respect for the judiciary.” The commission also chastised her for failing to “act in a dignified and courteous manner” and for violating a rule that “prohibits a judge from manifesting bias or prejudice based on race or ethnicity by word or action.”

Chase apologized and expressed remorse for her actions, the court said. She officially resigns next month.

Colorado judge Natalie T. Chase resigns after using n-word - The Washington Post

Merkin Baller

gimmesometruth27 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

every day maher reminds me more and more of joe rogan. and as you know, to me, that is a terrible look at this point.

it's really something, and shouldn't have been unpredictable, that everything progressive these days is considered "woke" by some of these guys, which is a pejorative at this point. 

i think maher just needs to be a contrarian to justify his own career and show. he is at his best when republicans are in power. then he can pretend to be a liberal champion. then when dems are in power he suddenly coddles and comforts the right wingers. i have not watched his show since he had kellyanne conway on a couple of months ago. my thinking was, "really, why continue to give her a platform?"

funny that at one time his show was the only reason i kept my hbo subscription. now i can't stand the sight of him.

Regularly hosting KellyAnne CONway and Ann Coulter, because we need to "hear the other side." No, we don't need to hear from racist pieces of shit. Sorry, Bill.

don't forget the time he basically fellated Milo on air. everyone expected bill to go after him but he absolutely did not. that was the interview where my opinion of bill really started to change.

Bill Maher's shtick is no less performative than Milo's or Kellyanne Conway's. 


It's all a bit. 

Merkin Baller

Hey conservatives, does this count as cancel culture? Or does cancel culture only apply to shitty celebrities facing consequences for their own stupidity? 

Asking on behalf of our first amendment and 330M of my fellow countrymen. 

tbergs

The culture wars rage on! This is clearly their response to corporations punishing them for their restrictive policies and laws recently passed in multiple states.

Merkin Baller

tbergs said:

The culture wars rage on! This is clearly their response to corporations punishing them for their restrictive policies and laws recently passed in multiple states.

It's in response to backlash against a GOP that's out of fucking control. 

tempo_n_groove

Merkin Baller said:

Hey conservatives, does this count as cancel culture? Or does cancel culture only apply to shitty celebrities facing consequences for their own stupidity? 

Asking on behalf of our first amendment and 330M of my fellow countrymen. 

I'll play devils advocate on this and ask a few questions.

If I am in my car and I get swarmed by a mob and they start banging on my windows trying to get at me and or my family, fearing for my life I run through them to flee, is this what that law is protecting?

If you protest in an area but you decide to create some carnage, is that what this is going after?

My guess would be that it is to protect peoples possession's and well being?  I can see it easily being misconstrued and the race card played.  

Merkin Baller

tempo_n_groove said:

Merkin Baller said:

Hey conservatives, does this count as cancel culture? Or does cancel culture only apply to shitty celebrities facing consequences for their own stupidity? 

Asking on behalf of our first amendment and 330M of my fellow countrymen. 

I'll play devils advocate on this and ask a few questions.

If I am in my car and I get swarmed by a mob and they start banging on my windows trying to get at me and or my family, fearing for my life I run through them to flee, is this what that law is protecting?

If you protest in an area but you decide to create some carnage, is that what this is going after?

My guess would be that it is to protect peoples possession's and well being?  I can see it easily being misconstrued and the race card played.  

Regarding your first question: are you swarmed by a mob, or are you trying to drive your car through a mob of people who were there when you got there? Sounds like a pretty specific scenario...If I was driving up the road and came across a protest, I would turn the F around. Like the whole "Stand your ground" law, this legislation if accurately described, could lead to people thinking they're entitled to / protected if they plow through a crowd. 

I have never once defended people rioting or looting which I infer you mean when you say "carnage", I'm in favor of prosecuting anyone who loots or destroys property to the fullest extent of the law. There is a difference between protesting and rioting, I trust you agree with me on that. 


With all that being said: 

Who decides when a protest becomes an unlawful assembly? The penalties being suggested are pretty serious and can have some long lasting repercussions. To me it feels like they're trying to deter people from protesting, which is as much our right as the freedom of speech, which I thought we all cared about. 


I'm waiting for conservatives to start fretting as much about the 1st amendment as they do about the 2nd, and it just isn't happening... did you see how the Brooklyn Center police treated the reporters in the last week? 

I'm waiting for conservative to start caring as much about these matters as they do a fucking Dr Seuss book. 


I'm not holding my breath. 

tbergs

When they reference protesting, what they really mean is BLM, not capitol insurrectionists. They just can't say the quiet part out loud even though it's clear.

mace1229

Merkin Baller said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Merkin Baller said:

Hey conservatives, does this count as cancel culture? Or does cancel culture only apply to shitty celebrities facing consequences for their own stupidity? 

Asking on behalf of our first amendment and 330M of my fellow countrymen. 

I'll play devils advocate on this and ask a few questions.

If I am in my car and I get swarmed by a mob and they start banging on my windows trying to get at me and or my family, fearing for my life I run through them to flee, is this what that law is protecting?

If you protest in an area but you decide to create some carnage, is that what this is going after?

My guess would be that it is to protect peoples possession's and well being?  I can see it easily being misconstrued and the race card played.  

Regarding your first question: are you swarmed by a mob, or are you trying to drive your car through a mob of people who were there when you got there? Sounds like a pretty specific scenario...If I was driving up the road and came across a protest, I would turn the F around. Like the whole "Stand your ground" law, this legislation if accurately described, could lead to people thinking they're entitled to / protected if they plow through a crowd. 

I have never once defended people rioting or looting which I infer you mean when you say "carnage", I'm in favor of prosecuting anyone who loots or destroys property to the fullest extent of the law. There is a difference between protesting and rioting, I trust you agree with me on that. 


With all that being said: 

Who decides when a protest becomes an unlawful assembly? The penalties being suggested are pretty serious and can have some long lasting repercussions. To me it feels like they're trying to deter people from protesting, which is as much our right as the freedom of speech, which I thought we all cared about. 


I'm waiting for conservatives to start fretting as much about the 1st amendment as they do about the 2nd, and it just isn't happening... did you see how the Brooklyn Center police treated the reporters in the last week? 

I'm waiting for conservative to start caring as much about these matters as they do a fucking Dr Seuss book. 


I'm not holding my breath. 

Its hard to comment without the actual language of the bill and just from a tweet, or whatever that was. I haven't had time to look for the bill myself. But there were multiple examples of people being swarmed in a car, sometimes beaten and hospitalized. So if that is what it is trying to protect, I 100% agree. There were also some examples where drivers appeared to intentionally run protesters over, I would not support protecting those drivers. 
Its also difficult to know what they mean by "protestors." Many people have supported the looting and violence as a form of protest. I don't. If the bill targets the violence and rioting. I would assume that's what it is doing if its talking about taking away students loans, and not just a peaceful march. I don't know if I agree with the student loans part, but I'd agree with boosting penalties for rioters, torching police buildings, looting, etc.

Merkin Baller

tbergs said:

When they reference protesting, what they really mean is BLM, not capitol insurrectionists. They just can't say the quiet part out loud even though it's clear.

Exactly. 


The voter suppression laws are a reaction to the Big Lie and a record turnout at the ballot box in November. The GOP can't have that. 

These new protest laws are a reaction to social unrest which was in response to citizens being murdered by police. The GOP doesn't want that. 




Wake the fuck up, people.