Tonight's live Real Time with Bill Maher on HBO will be presented for the first time in HD! As with other HBO programs the show will air in 1080i.

yeah cant wait ben affleck and george carlin :D

I had no idea this was a season premiere thanks to me reading the USA Today I saw his ad. Thanks for the HD report

damnit, i thought id get to start a bill maher topic here. oh well, at least we can talk about how awesome he is in this forum finally after every show.

Yep, he is indeed HD! :D:D It's about time, considering all the crap that's in HD. Looks fantastic, gotta go watch!

Yes the set looks very cool.

Yes the set looks very cool.

Haha, I came here to start a thread too. FINALLY its in HD. He's back a month early, and its great to have him. Wish it was 52 weeks a year.

Well no Affleck and Carlin, but great show and HBO.com for "overtime"

Well no Affleck and Carlin, but great show and HBO.com for "overtime"

Weird i swear i read that they was going to be on.

I like Maher, and I used to watch Real Time religiously, but for the last 2 seasons I can do without.

Man, many of his jokes fell flat... writers

I would rather have a couple of flat jokes from Bill than the rest of the horse **** I see on regular tv and cable!!!

Bill is the king and his best line was "Paul McCartney once said I would rather have my band than a Royals Royce, well I want my writers" That was a very warmhearted comment tonight. He's a good guy!

Weird show. Everything seemed off tonight. I like and watch the show but this is the worst I've seen.

New set, but little use of it. Bill looked like he is very well rested or had some work done for HD. I was looking forward to the show, looked like a good panel. Unfortunately Tony Snow would not shut up, I don't think Mark or Catherine had more than 45 seconds of talk time. I hope they are both back sans Snow.

Tonight's show was framed for 16:9 and shown in letterbox on SD.

Tonight's show was framed for 16:9 and shown in letterbox on SD.

I liked that they are framing for 16:9.
I think they are still feeling out how to direct in widescreen, however.
Too many quick cut 2 shots, reaction shots and closeups, when this show would benefit from more 4 shots (5 when the Rolling Stone guy was out there).
I think that way you could watch the reactions of the entire panel.
I'm not saying stay on one wide shot the entire time, but I think they could utilize the screen real estate a little better and do less cuts.
I realize it was the first show in widescreen, and it's live, and they've been away for awhile, so I don't mean to sound overly critical. I think they'll grow into it.
I've been hoping they would go HD for some time now, and I'm glad they finally did.

As far as the set goes, having one guest on Bill's left side and the three others on the other side of the table didn't make sense. Made it seem like that person had some other level of significance or distinction from the rest of the panel. And I mean no "political" insinuation by that observation.

Maher's show last night was obviously affected by the strike. The New Rules segment was omitted. The ending commentary was replaced with a not so liberal reflection on the WGA leadership. While it's great that the show has transitioned to HD, it's a bit ironic that it did so at a time where the format has been crippled by the writers strike. Maher is trying to walk the fine line between host and support for the writers, but his return to work and vocal questioning of the strike tactics will probably draw the ire of the WGA. The strike may also present a limitation on guests who decline an appearance to avoid crossing the line, but satellite interviews could help make up for that. It'll be great to have the show in HD and full writing strength, but sadly that doesn't appear to be any time soon. In the mean time I'm happy for the extra pixels. PQ looked good to me.

To me this show was better than many in the past. It didn't have all of the flash and pazazz, but it allowed Maher to be Maher without relying on other peoples thoughts. He seemed more in control that usual. I liked that. The monologue was boring and not that funny, but when he got into the guest segment, it really picked up. P.J. O'Rourke was a riot! Interesting panel, overall a decent one, but with the strike, I guess you take what you can get and hope for the best. I did miss New Rules though. That is always my favorite part.

I thought Mark Cuban summed it up well, we have grown to the point that we can't agree to disagree anymore. I firmly believe that. Way to go Mr Cuban!

PC enough?

Man, many of his jokes fell flat... writers
They usually do. I assume they had the usual panel beating up on a conservatve.:rolleyes:

Maher's show last night was obviously affected by the strike. The New Rules segment was omitted. The ending commentary was replaced with a not so liberal reflection on the WGA leadership. While it's great that the show has transitioned to HD, it's a bit ironic that it did so at a time where the format has been crippled by the writers strike. Maher is trying to walk the fine line between host and support for the writers, but his return to work and vocal questioning of the strike tactics will probably draw the ire of the WGA. The strike may also present a limitation on guests who decline an appearance to avoid crossing the line, but satellite interviews could help make up for that. It'll be great to have the show in HD and full writing strength, but sadly that doesn't appear to be any time soon. In the mean time I'm happy for the extra pixels. PQ looked good to me.

I hope the strike continues and it keeps stars off this show. They're almost always the weakest link on this show, and just steal face time from the real political folks.

I hope the strike continues and it keeps stars off this show. They're almost always the weakest link on this show, and just steal face time from the real political folks.
They just need to do a better job of selecting those people, and by now they know who those people are. Some are very knowledgeable and give some excellent opinions, just as good if not better than many of those talking heads that clutter both the TV and radio airwaves, while others, namely comedians, just mess up the continuity of the show. Leave the comedy for Bill, and save the political banter for the panel.

They just need to do a better job of selecting those people, and by now they know who those people are. Some are very knowledgeable and give some excellent opinions, just as good if not better than many of those talking heads that clutter both the TV and radio airwaves, while others, namely comedians, just mess up the continuity of the show. Leave the comedy for Bill, and save the political banter for the panel.

Yeah, the ones that bother me most are the comedians. Dana Carvery? Gary Shandling? Ugh. They both added nothing to the proceedings. And the show is always better when there's panel balance. As an independent this show is infinitely more enjoyable than CNN and FOX News.

Weird show. Everything seemed off tonight. I like and watch the show but this is the worst I've seen.

New set, but little use of it. Bill looked like he is very well rested or had some work done for HD. I was looking forward to the show, looked like a good panel. Unfortunately Tony Snow would not shut up, I don't think Mark or Catherine had more than 45 seconds of talk time. I hope they are both back sans Snow.


Exactly how I feel it was off and Bill looked uncomfortable. Very weird.

Wonder why no mention of HD in the USA Today ad and in their listings on Friday...

If HBO wants funny they should get Dennis Miller. He is still sharp and very funny. Cue "Everybody Wants To Rule The World".

If HBO wants funny they should get Dennis Miller. He is still sharp and very funny. Cue "Everybody Wants To Rule The World".

Dennis Miller is the biggest hypocrite on TV. Thank goodness he's barely on TV now. His IQ since 9/11 dropped significantly.

If HBO wants funny they should get Dennis Miller. He is still sharp and very funny. Cue "Everybody Wants To Rule The World".

I am a big fan of Miller. but have you seen his sports show on versus? I thought he was rusty, but it never got any better. The photo finish was the only part he ever did well. In comparison, Bill is much more entertaining.

If HBO wants funny they should get Dennis Miller. He is still sharp and very funny. Cue "Everybody Wants To Rule The World".

As a former fan of Miller. No. Just no. He's done.

Don't care what his politics are, but a comedian's job is to first and foremost be funny.

Don't care what his politics are, but a comedian's job is to first and foremost be funny.

You will get no argument out of me on that one!!

I'll watch Maher depending on the guest panel. Sometimes you see the promos and it's a great panel of hard hitting but opposing forces, and it's a good show. Most of the time though it is either light weight actors or really one-sided panels, and it's not worth watching.

Besides political humor Dennis Miller and Bill Maher's shows have something else in common. Dennis Miller's old HBO show and Politically Incorrect on Comedy Central used to share the same studio. When PI moved to ABC Dennis Miller moved to the studio where Real Time is presently originated from.

Besides political humor Dennis Miller and Bill Maher's shows have something else in common. Dennis Miller's old HBO show and Politically Correct on Comedy Central used to share the same studio. When PI moved to ABC Dennis Miller moved to the studio where Real Time is presently originated from.

Isn't that the same studio that was used in the Tom Hanks film "That Thing You Do" for the Ed Sullivan-esc "The Hollywood Television Showcase" show and it is really at CBS Television City?

That was a rather interesting shot Bill took at the WGA at the end of the show. I didn't much enjoy the episode, as Tony Snow dominated most of it, and the blogger guy just seemed to want to bash. I wanted to hear more from Cuban. I'm mostly just glad this show is back. This and Entourage is why I pay for HBO, with the occassional movie in HD.

That was a rather interesting shot Bill took at the WGA at the end of the show. I didn't much enjoy the episode, as Tony Snow dominated most of it with a lot of hot wind, and the blogger guy just seemed to want to bash. I wanted to hear more from Cuban. I'm mostly just glad this show is back. This and Entourage is why I pay for HBO, with the occassional movie in HD.

Yes, Mark Cuban appeared to be the most balanced in his opinions (meaning he didn't agree with everyone but he was willing to agree to disagree, i.e. civil) of anyone on the stage, much less panel.

Yes, Mark Cuban appeared to be the most balanced in his opinions (meaning he didn't agree with everyone but he was willing to agree to disagree, i.e. civil) of anyone on the stage, much less panel.


Sadly the closer we get to the election, the less we'll see of that civility on all of these shows. I much prefer intelligent conversation to the constant bickering that seems to pervade.

Got to watch this last night. Nice seeing it in HD, but I wasn’t overly impressed with the set. After watching so many football pre-game shows that are so colorful, this looked rather dull. It really didn’t make any difference because they didn’t show much of it anyway.

There were one or two funny jokes during the monolog, which I find to be pretty much standard for his openings. I’ve never found those to be that funny. The audience didn’t seem to think they were that great either until he was close to wrapping it up. It made me think they missed the dozen or so writers sitting off stage leading the audience in applause and laughter.

Enjoyed the Caucus Me segment. You can really expose a lot of people with that and see how much the media influences them as the guy from Rolling Stone pointed out. Funny segment, but disturbing at the same time. I never heard Mark Cuban say the quote that was attributed to him in another post. P.J. had some great lines, but it looked like Bill wanted some serious answers, not a comedy routine, which is what you get with PJ. His comments are imbedded in his comedy, which makes it funny regardless of your leanings. I enjoyed the show and I’m excited to see it back.

The blonde lady was easy on the eyes ;)

Weird show. Everything seemed off tonight. I like and watch the show but this is the worst I've seen.

New set, but little use of it. Bill looked like he is very well rested or had some work done for HD. I was looking forward to the show, looked like a good panel. Unfortunately Tony Snow would not shut up, I don't think Mark or Catherine had more than 45 seconds of talk time. I hope they are both back sans Snow.

Did you watch the same show I did? I thought they all rambled a lot.

I liked him when he was funny, which he isn't anymore. Don't care what his politics are, but a comedian's job is to first and foremost be funny.

I guess it depends on who's ox is getting gored. I think he's still funny. I think Maher is funny as well.

Real Time with Bill Maher has always been shot in the Price is Right studio at CBS TV City. So unless they moved, that studio must be HD capable now.

A couple observations about this past week's show.

What was missing due to the strike:
1) Pre-opening credits joke/SNL-like short
2) No pre-written monologue jokes
3) No "random items with funny labels" segment
4) No New Rules

I've personally wanted a Bill Maher episode in a format like this for a while. I've always felt he's wasted a lot time on things that are really not that funny and don't contribute anything to the discussion. After seeing it this week, on the whole, I think I like it better this way. In a perfect world I'd like to see the monologue shortened (or dropped) and have "New Rules" back.

I was happy with the panel this week, though it seemed like Tony Snow dominated the conversation by a wide margin. I think this boils down to the personality of the panelists, and it happens a bunch of times every season with various people.

The HD picture was nice - and the new set design is similar enough to the old one to be familiar while still being new enough to look upgraded and refined. The actual camera work seemed to identical to the way they have always done things, but that may just take time. I think the whole show is in transition to the new set and HD format. I remember at the beginning of the show, when the panelists are walking out, Bill said something like "Aren't they already supposed to be seated? Wasn't that the point of this new set?", or something to that effect.

I just wish Bill would do a better job playing moderator. I don't think Tony Snow talked too much. On the contrary, he never got anything out because one of the other three interrupted him immediately almost every time he opened his mouth.

Besides, Mark Cuban and the woman were such horrible public speakers they weren't even worth having on the panel. They couldn't articulate an argument to save their lives--perhaps not surprising in Cuban's case but surprising given the woman was a former judge. It's a shame since Cuban clearly had learned things regarding the voting machines because of the HDNet special, but he had obviously not prepared to present those facts in any sort of orderly or informed manner.

I guess Bill just needs to do a better job evening out the panel with liberals and conservatives, and he needs to do a better job getting people who are informed and have information to contribute to the discussion. The problem with celebrity panelists like Cuban is that you might as well just pull someone out of the audience to sit on the panel. They'll be about as informed, articulate, and open to actual discussion.

Tony Snow has admitted in public that he was the only Conservative who agreed to come on the panel.

Bill has always tried very hard to recruit conservatives for the show. He prefers the panels to be more balanced.

He had an all conservative panel once. I heard Maher on the radio say he tries to keep applause to a minimum because its boring for the home viewer, I think he should just try it without the audience.

He had an all conservative panel once. I heard Maher on the radio say he tries to keep applause to a minimum because its boring for the home viewer, I think he should just try it without the audience.Trying it without the audience is an interesting idea. But - come to think of it - most shows like this seem to have a live audience. The Daily Show does as well. I wonder why that is? Also don't forget that Bill Maher's show is broadcast live each week. This means he doesn't get the benefit of ironing out any perceived imbalances in the show in the edit room.

Maher's studio audience certainly skews liberal, and they moan and groan at the conservatives they have on the show right now, but Maher doesn't side with the conservatives on just about anything either. I wonder if the audience response to conservatives is a product of geography or his demographic.

Lets say Maher decided to take some very conservative stances on a few issues. Would the audience heckle him because they are generally liberal or would they go along with him because they're his fans/share his mindset?

i remember when "the daily show" was filmed without an audience.

Funny how people interpret things differently.

I thought Tony Snow was annoying as H E Double Hockey Stick, And in large part, it sure seemed like he was the one doing most of the interupting .I wont get too much into that because we cant speak frankly on this website.

It felt like anytime some good debating (where you might actually learn something)was about to take place, it was cut short and the topic changed, and I wanted the show to keep going.

I have taken a more recent liking to Bill Maher, not that I once disliked him, I knew he existed, I just never really liked Politics much, but since 911, it has caught my attention and I am trying to play catch-up if you will, and I guess the way Bill presents it, or perhaps the way its presented on his show makes for Entertaining learning, rather than slanted news or agendizing news reporting.

Its also amazing that people who once worked near the top, really dont have a clue as to how much average Americans are struggling to make ends meet these days...Its amazing they dont have someone Cloth and hand feed them, or do they?

Lets say Maher decided to take some very conservative stances on a few issues. Would the audience heckle him because they are generally liberal or would they go along with him because they're his fans/share his mindset?

Maher does take some traditionally conservative positions if they make sense, as any long-time viewer knows. That's the beauty of his show. He takes the common sense position rather than the politically correct position. Bill has never shied away from controversy (he lost his ABC show over a particularly non-politically-correct statement). His guests, however, are free to take whatever position they choose and I've seen him basically pleading on air for more traditionally conservative panelists to offer to join in the discussion. Unfortunately, there are few of them who feel confident enough in their positions to appear in a non-sympathetic environment. He had Ann Coulter on once (at least), and she was far more uncivil than anyone in the studio audience (but that's her shtick). I agree that his studio audience is overwhelmingly liberal, and can unjustifiably harangue some of the more hard-core guests (and I'd prefer to see them better behaved) but that's who buys tickets to see the show. I doubt they give anyone a litmus test before they admit them to the studio.

I agree that his studio audience is overwhelmingly liberal, and can unjustifiably harangue some of the more hard-core guests (and I'd prefer to see them better behaved) but that's who buys tickets to see the show. I doubt they give anyone a litmus test before they admit them to the studio.

Tickets to Real Time are free, nobody buys them. The heavily conservative Orange County folks are welcome to attend as well. But, well, they don't seem too interested.

http://www.hbo.com/apps/realtimetopics/ticketsrequest.do

Funny how people interpret things differently.No kidding. Some posts say he couldn't shut up, some say he couldn't get a word in edgewise.

This should confirm why we don't get into politics here.

Personally, I think the reason so few conservatives appear on his show is because they don't want to deal with his immature, largely uncivilized, outrageously liberal audience. Even reasonable and intelligent Republicans are hissed and booed outrageously while highly moronic liberals and celebrities are praised for bait remarks that are nothing but feed for the audience.
To be fair, you could change the host, flip the party line, and you would get the same results you write about. Does anyone believe a Billo audience would be well mannered? That would be like a Jerry Springer audience on steroids. :D

No kidding. Some posts say he couldn't shut up, some say he couldn't get a word in edgewise.

This should confirm why we don't get into politics here.


Too true.


I'd hardly call Maher a liberal. He has a lot of liberal viewpoints, but he also has a lot of Conservative views, and he's not afraid to express both, and he's definitely not afraid to bash either side. I hate his audience. I hate the booing of anything and everything not staunchly liberal. And I love it when Maher tells them to shut the hell up about it.

I wish he'd have more people from the media on and give them the bashing they deserve. The Blogger that was on this past week did a good job of that, but it would have been nice to have someone from FOX news or CNN to defend the media's inept handling...of pretty much everything.

All I know is that its an extremely fast, and entertaining hour of TV. Enough to justify my continued purchase of HBO each month.

As someone above said, the show minus the stupid fake products was better. I wouldn't mind just seeing the interviews, the panel, and then end it with New Rules each week. When he has the joke stuff to do, you can see him ending conversations mid-stream to get to the jokes.

I still love the balls it took him to bash the WGA like he did. That was good stuff. And deserved.

Lets say Maher decided to take some very conservative stances on a few issues. Would the audience heckle him because they are generally liberal or would they go along with him because they're his fans/share his mindset?

Interesting question...

I'd hardly call Maher a liberal. He has a lot of liberal viewpoints, but he also has a lot of Conservative views, and he's not afraid to express both, and he's definitely not afraid to bash either side.

Bill O'Reilly and Fox News aren't "conservative" either. Bill O'Reilly, Bill Maher and Dave Letterman are all populists and statists. They are just coming from opposite sides of the continuum.

Interesting question...

Not really. If you watch the show regularly, you know what the audience does in those cases. They sit in silence.

As I pointed out, O'Reilly, Letterman and Maher are all statists and populists. Maher and Letterman are secular collectivists while O'Reilly is a theocratic collectivist.

They are all successful because the populist ideology coupled with a snarky personality makes for good TV for the masses. The format of their shows (quick sound bites, playing up for an audience, feigned outrage, speaking out for the little guy, etc) is a big draw. I really don't see any of their shows as purely politically issue driven but more as tribal.

Maher can be entertaining and I think that his show would be more interesting without the audience.

Tickets to Real Time are free, nobody buys them. The heavily conservative Orange County folks are welcome to attend as well. But, well, they don't seem too interested.


Thanks for that clarification; didn't know that. In fact, I just presumed all talk/interview shows charged for tickets, but in light of what you've said, maybe none of them do....?

At any rate, it's too bad more conservatives don't choose to attend. If they did, then the more immature audience members would likely be better behaved; if for no other reason, they wouldn't want the others to act like them. There's something to be said for peer pressure. ;)

Not really. If you watch the show regularly, you know what the audience does in those cases. They sit in silence.

Stunned silence.

Maher can be entertaining and I think that his show would be more interesting without the audience.

It's very hard to do comedy without an audience. It's unfortunate because I think the show would be much better without an audience as well, if only because he'd get better guests.

If CBS can tape Bill Maher in HD for HBO,how come they arent doing Price is Right in HD on CBS if done from the samr studio?

If CBS can tape Bill Maher in HD for HBO,how come they arent doing Price is Right in HD on CBS if done from the samr studio?

Presumably, hopefully, the switch is coming soon.

I don't care for Miller. Too much atitude.

I don't care for Miller. Too much atitude.He's just an entertainer - like all the others. For all we know, he probably doesn't even believe half of what he says. Just like so many of the other political hot-gas bags on the airwaves, it's more about shocking us and getting a rise out of us than anything else.

He's just an entertainer - like all the others. For all we know, he probably doesn't even believe half of what he says. Just like so many of the other political hot-gas bags on the airwaves, it's more about shocking us and getting a rise out of us than anything else.

Yes, and Anne Coulter maybe the most obvious. That conservative is one wild woman guaranteed. She likes Cognac and cigars and is friends with Maher. :D

Tonight's show was framed for 16:9 and shown in letterbox on SD.

That is a good thing. At least the show doesn't look weird like a 4:3 safe newscast where all the graphics are in the "middle" of the screen on HD. It's about time they start getting SD viewers used to letterbox.

Hello,
I have been aware that this show is now in hd, but i can't seem to find it in hd on directv at all. I have it recording every episode on hbo hd channel (501) but its not in hd at all according to the guide, what is going on, why no hd on hbo?

Have you watched any of the episodes yet? Just because it doesn't say HD in the guide doesn't mean the program isn't HD. For instance, my guide with Comcast doesn't show the program in HD but it certainly was.

Hello,
was just reading the bill maher thread that is now closed. I have been aware that this show is now in hd, but i can't seem to find it in hd on directv at all. I have it recording every episode on hbo hd channel (501) but its not in hd at all according to the guide, what is going on, why no hd on hbo?


Not sure what you're watching, but I'm watching my recording on 501 from last night right now and it's in HD. Make sure you're viewing the HD HBO channel(s).

Last night was the 2nd HD show. As mentioned in the other thread the show is composed for 16:9 now and shown in letterbox on HBO SD.

Last night was the 2nd HD show.

I was wondering if it was on last night. My DVR didn't record it. And I'm not sure why, since it didn't conflict with anything else.

I have both new episodes on my dvr recorded from channel 501 on hbo, and yes it is the hd hbo 501, not the regular hbo 501. I am aware of having programming not show the hd symbol in the guide, but both of my recordings have the sd widescreen version, its definately not true hd, i can't figure out why.

If the image is letterboxed then it's the SD feed. HBO made that decision just before the first HD episode aired and I think the show looks better composed for 16:9. Here is an example of how the show fills the screen (click on image for full size):

http://img252.imageshack.us/img252/8817/maher4mus1.jpg (http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/4857/maher4flr0.jpg)

Ok, i finally figured it out. It was my fault. I had my settings where the original 501 hbo, not the 501 hd hbo was recording the show, even though i was using a custom channel list that had only the newer hd 501 hbo listed. Man i hate that they decided to use duplicate numbers for the sd and hd channels, i understand that they want them to be on the same number, but until they get rid of the mpeg 2 older versions, it will cause lots of confusion for some folks like me, LOL

There is an option where you can set your box to hide SD duplicates.

i can't seem to find that setting, would you mind posting it for me? thanks, sleddogn

when did he switch to a four person panel?

Two shows ago. The fourth person is kinda like a "special guest" panelist that comes in a few minutes after the regular panelists. Both weeks it has been a blogger covering the campaigns.

i can't seem to find that setting, would you mind posting it for me? thanks, sleddogn

Menu > Help & Settings > Setup > Display

Under "Preferences" tab, 4th row down: "Guide HD Channels"

Options are:
1) Hide HD duplicates
2) Show HD duplicates

Two shows ago. The fourth person is kinda like a "special guest" panelist that comes in a few minutes after the regular panelists. Both weeks it has been a blogger covering the campaigns.

The fourth guest is always a blogger, the segment is called "Blogga, Please".

The fourth guest is always a blogger, the segment is called "Blogga, Please".

Right. I don't think it will always be a campaign blogger though. Right now that is the hot ticket.

The fourth guest has nothing to do with Blogga Please. The show has always interviewed an additional guest midway through the panel, usually via satellite but sometimes in studio. They've merely modified the format by dedicating that seat to a member of the media. You know, someone who actually keeps up with current issues, unlike Trace or D.L.

Menu > Help & Settings > Setup > Display

Under "Preferences" tab, 4th row down: "Guide HD Channels"

Options are:
1) Hide HD duplicates
2) Show HD duplicates

My 4th row down is: Guide Keypress, no guide HD Channels.

My guess is that the writers' strike is requiring some tinkering with the show's format. Necessity is the mother of invention. Writa pleez.

My guess is that the writers' strike is requiring some tinkering with the show's format. Necessity is the mother of invention. Writa pleez.


Yep. I can't wait until New Rules returns.

The fourth guest has nothing to do with Blogga Please. The show has always interviewed an additional guest midway through the panel, usually via satellite but sometimes in studio. They've merely modified the format by dedicating that seat to a member of the media. You know, someone who actually keeps up with current issues, unlike Trace or D.L.

I don't know about Trace, but D.L. always seems well informed and more thoughtful than most guests.

I don't know about Trace...
Why did they have him on? I don’t think he said more than 12 words and brought nothing to the show.

The fourth guest has nothing to do with Blogga Please. The show has always interviewed an additional guest midway through the panel, usually via satellite but sometimes in studio. They've merely modified the format by dedicating that seat to a member of the media. You know, someone who actually keeps up with current issues, unlike Trace or D.L.

You couldn't be more wrong about DL. DL is one of the funniest, and well-informed "celebrities" that Bill has on the show.

I don't know about Trace, but D.L. always seems well informed and more thoughtful than most guests.

Trace didn't say much but had the best lines of the night. Even DL admitted that.

You couldn't be more wrong about DL. DL is one of the funniest, and well-informed "celebrities" that Bill has on the show.

No doubt he's one of the best celebrities that Bill has on the show, but that's not saying much. To be fair, I thought he was the best panelist on the show this week, but I also thought this was the worst panel I had ever seen.

Personally, I tune into the show to hear new and interesting opinions and perspectives. I would be much happier if Bill never had celebrity guests, but I understand the show has a partial purpose to promote HBO/Warner properties.

It's too bad Fareed Zakaria wasn't on the panel.

Why did they have him on? I don’t think he said more than 12 words and brought nothing to the show.

He had the best line of the night. When Bill asked about thoughts regarding cloned meat, Trace said, "Have cows stopped f***ing?" Brought down the house.

Art

The topic is open, again. I have edited and deleted a number of posts.

Keep comments non-political, or they will be deleted without warning, and suspensions will be handed out.

Topics merged.

Thanks Ken. :)

I thought Bill was very rude to Fareed Zakaria when he misspoke, but it was funny when Fareed hit back.

Keep comments non-political, or they will be deleted without warning, and suspensions will be handed out.Ken's New Rules !!! :D

Now that the writer's strike is over, can we finally have some new rules again?

Yay New Rules It Is!!!!!!!

Ken's New Rules !!! :D

Same as the old rules.....

New Rules has a different look to it. Haven't decided if it's better or worse, but I'm glad it's back.

The show has long breaks but coming back after the strike something feels off. I'm not enjoying the show as much as I used to. Can't say I like the "reporters" sitting in, they take too much time and focus off the panel. I'll give it a few more weeks, but it is one of the reasons I kept HBO and with D's price increase I may cut my HBO sub and just listen to the show via iTunes.

The show has long breaks but coming back after the strike something feels off. I'm not enjoying the show as much as I used to. Can't say I like the "reporters" sitting in, they take too much time and focus off the panel. I'll give it a few more weeks, but it is one of the reasons I kept HBO and with D's price increase I may cut my HBO sub and just listen to the show via iTunes.

Agreed. Something about Bill too. He's not the same. He needs to rediscover his funny bone. A few weeks ago, when he had his rant against drugs/medication, the entire panel looked at him like he had five heads. I want crazy nonsense, I'll read a blog. I look to Maher to entertain. His hatred for Bush has clouded his humor judgement I think. I don't mind his attacking Bush, but it just hasn't been funny in a long while.

this last episode, i thought, was pretty good. the new rules were the best so far, and the topic being discussed were about as usual. the silly bit with that fake real time reporter was kinda lame, but i like the real time real reporters, especially dan savage.

The show has long breaks but coming back after the strike something feels off. I'm not enjoying the show as much as I used to. Can't say I like the "reporters" sitting in, they take too much time and focus off the panel. I'll give it a few more weeks, but it is one of the reasons I kept HBO and with D's price increase I may cut my HBO sub and just listen to the show via iTunes.

I agree about the reporters. But then again, I would like the show better if the entire hour was nothing but the panel. And then only if Bill keeps the panel 'balanced'. Which he appears to have done a better job at since coming back.

Bill is back tonight 10PM est. (note time change)

Great news! I loves me some Bill; he's worth the HBO subscription all by himself. Bet he's going to have a lot of fun with this stimulus package...

Bill is back tonight 10PM est. (note time change)

Sorry Bill, but President Roslin has my attention!


Good to see him back thou. Hopefully now that MR. 43 is gone, maybe he can get some better conservatives on (and some really loony ones too). He's already got a good pool of sane and loony liberals.

Last season was disappointing with it's stack of everyone center-left (and the few libertarians here and there). The show works much better, and is always more entertaining when it's split.

Also, hope he's kicked Amy Holmes to the curb. She offers nothing to the show but a disingenuous alternative viewpoint. Really can't stand her. They could do much better.

Last season was disappointing with it's stack of everyone center-left (and the few libertarians here and there). The show works much better, and is always more entertaining when it's split.


He tries, he does try. I've seen him plead for conservatives to come on the show. The problem is when he gets them, they sometimes tend to be on the loony side. At least we haven't seen Ann Coulter in a few years :eek: (I don't think they're buds anymore ;) ). But rational, sensible "real" conservatives like David Brooks or Andrew Sullivan present their case well and are real assets to the panel discussion.

Also, hope he's kicked Amy Holmes to the curb. She offers nothing to the show but a disingenuous alternative viewpoint. Really can't stand her. They could do much better.
Yeah, I can't understand why Bill keeps having her on. She doesn't provide any insightful or intelligent conversation EVER. She just seems too dimwitted and disingenuous to have on the show. At least usually when Bill has people who are strongly partisan one way or the other they are interesting, but Amy is just boring.

Yeah, I can't understand why Bill keeps having her on. She doesn't provide any insightful or intelligent conversation EVER. She just seems too dimwitted and disingenuous to have on the show. At least usually when Bill has people who are strongly partisan one way or the other they are interesting, but Amy is just boring.

Really, she's just in it for the money and it shows.

At least the best of the few like her know enough to put on a good show face and are somewhat believable in front of the camera. Bill needs to stay away from these "shock jocks".

And truly, there a tons of smart, intelligent, witty conservatives out there that would be much more entertaining, relevant, and funny at all ends of the spectrum. Bill really needs get them back, or this show isn't going to last much longer.

Not sure if Colms has ever been on Bills show, but it be like bringing him on every 2 or so episodes... ugh.

So here's a call for a more diversified panel this season! :)

Anyone know why the repeat is 5 minutes longer?

Anyone know why the repeat is 5 minutes longer?

They actually started the rebroadcast 5 minutes after the hour. I guess to allow for overtime or technical issues.

They again had technical issues during the monologue with audio dropout and sparklies on my Comcast channel. The rebroadcast was OK.

The show itself was dull without any funny people and a downer main theme of the economy. Bill didn't seem to be on his game and had no hard conservative or comedian to play off of.

The show itself was dull without any funny people and a downer main theme of the economy. Bill didn't seem to be on his game and had no hard conservative or comedian to play off of.

Have to agree with it being a very dull episode. I think having all women guests on was part of the problem, and the topic too.

The one girl knew what she was talking about and was interesting, but the others just sat there offering little. It was almost if they had no clue about that thing called economics. They also didn't have much to say.

The anti Muslim Arab woman was comical, but not in the right kind of way.

He tries, he does try. I've seen him plead for conservatives to come on the show. The problem is when he gets them, they sometimes tend to be on the loony side. At least we haven't seen Ann Coulter in a few years :eek: (I don't think they're buds anymore ;) ). But rational, sensible "real" conservatives like David Brooks or Andrew Sullivan present their case well and are real assets to the panel discussion.They're going to debate each other in N.Y.C., Boston and Chicago next month, so we'll see if they are still buds:p

They're going to debate each other in N.Y.C., Boston and Chicago next month, so we'll see if they are still buds:p

:eek: Yeah, that shocked me when I heard it! Interesting that they're going to do three of them. By the end of the second, I would think they would have exhausted their material and could finish each other's sentences. Not that they'd ever want to. :p I hope at least one of those events will be televised.

:eek: Yeah, that shocked me when I heard it! Interesting that they're going to do three of them. By the end of the second, I would think they would have exhausted their material and could finish each other's sentences. Not that they'd ever want to. :p I hope at least one of those events will be televised.

Since I'm in beantown I was thinking of maybe checking it out, but I can't condone the cynical attempt at a cash grab by both of them.

Bill tot's himself as a comedian, but Coulter a foot soldier.... so why are these two debating? It's like a news personality arguing with John Stewart. You look absurd when the argument comes back to "I'm a damn comedian" / "Fake news" / "Make fun of everybody that deserves it" ect. granted Bills more slanted and wears his politics on his sleeve, but still...

He would have been better served to have a tour with a conservative comedian. I'd pay for that!

He would have been better served to have a tour with a conservative comedian. I'd pay for that!

There aren't many, are there? P.J. O'Roarke and Dennis Miller come to mind. I don't think I've ever seen Miller on 'Real Time'.

Since I'm in beantown I was thinking of maybe checking it out, but I can't condone the cynical attempt at a cash grab by both of them.

Bill tot's himself as a comedian, but Coulter a foot soldier.... so why are these two debating? It's like a news personality arguing with John Stewart. You look absurd when the argument comes back to "I'm a damn comedian" / "Fake news" / "Make fun of everybody that deserves it" ect. granted Bills more slanted and wears his politics on his sleeve, but still...

He would have been better served to have a tour with a conservative comedian. I'd pay for that!

Ann Coulter a news personality? Her and Maher are cut from the same cloth but from opposite ends. Both are political satirist. The main difference (other than their political leanings), is that Maher uses stage and screen and Coulter uses books. I was also a fan of Maher's first show, "Politically Incorrect". And anyone who is familiar with PI, knows that Maher and Coulter are old time debaters.

Ann Coulter a news personality? Her and Maher are cut from the same cloth but from opposite ends. Both are political satirist. The main difference (other than their political leanings), is that Maher uses stage and screen and Coulter uses books. I was also a fan of Maher's first show, "Politically Incorrect". And anyone who is familiar with PI, knows that Maher and Coulter are old time debaters.Exactly… and to add… I believe they're both living in a closet. Ann secretly wishes she had the comedic chops of a Bob Hope and Maher, he wishes that (after the laughter, of course) his comedic punch lines were given a second thought and revisited as poignant analysis.

Ann Coulter a news personality? Her and Maher are cut from the same cloth but from opposite ends.[/URL][URL="http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/1707/coulteradamsapple.jpg"]Her (http://g.imageshack.us/img14/coulteradamsapple.jpg/1/)?

The recent election was good and bad for Real Time. Good in that it was fun to watch Bill as the dems cleaned the repubs clock, but bad in that it appears the GOP told every single repub that they were not allowed to appear on his show. I hope that changes this season. The country spoke quite loudly last election or two on what they want, and it would be in the repubs best interest to appear on shows like Real Time and let the country know that they do intend to change. It would make for more interesting TV too. The most Republican Republican of them all was on the other night (Ron Paul), which is always funny in a crazy way, but I'd like to see Jindal or Palin have the guts to do the show. Michael Steele has done the show in the past, but he always comes across as nutty.

... but I'd like to see Jindal or Palin have the guts to do the show. Michael Steele has done the show in the past, but he always comes across as nutty.

True-dat about Steele, but he'll be a good Party leader for them based on what I've seen. I'd pay good money to see Palin on that show. :p :eek:

...it appears the GOP told every single repub that they were not allowed to appear on his show. Must have missed that memo. :rolleyes:


The most Republican Republican of them all was on the other night :confused:

Michael Steele has done the show in the past, but he always comes across as nutty Michael Steel is the GOP chairman. He has a great sense of humor, very intelligent and he knows it wouldn’t be wise to suggest to anyone to avoid the show. I doubt that he will appear again given his position but I wouldn’t be surprised if he does.

Usually, the guests consist of book peddlers. No one is going to promote their book if they feel like they will be entering a hostile environment. Maher’s guests will stay slanted until he can get to that plateau, as John Stewart has done so masterfully, and have guests from both sides of the aisle sit comfortably-- giving and taking funny jabs—not sucker punched.

Maher’s guests will stay slanted until he can get to that plateau, as John Stewart has done so masterfully, and have guests from both sides of the aisle sit comfortably-- giving and taking funny jabs—not sucker punched.

I'd have to disagree that there's any "sucker punching" on Bill's panels. He announces each topic and you can see his shots coming a mile away. His views are pretty well known, certainly by anyone who would agree to appear on his show. Honestly, I just don't think there are a lot of funny conservatives out there who can take it as well as dish it out. PJ O'Rourke maybe, as I mentioned above - he's great - but I don't know of many others.

I'd have to disagree that there's any "sucker punching" on Bill's panels. He announces each topic and you can see his shots coming a mile away. His views are pretty well known, certainly by anyone who would agree to appear on his show. Honestly, I just don't think there are a lot of funny conservatives out there who can take it as well as dish it out. PJ O'Rourke maybe, as I mentioned above - he's great - but I don't know of many others.

I have to agree with this. One thing Bill doesn't take kindly to is BS.

Hell berate you, either side, till the cows come home for using talking points (Except Holmes, we see that twinkle Bill, stay away!).

He try's to steer the convo to frank, common sense discussions and quite frequently will agree with conservatives when they're talking truthfully. Talking points are like a big red bullseye for him.

Anyways, conservatives cocooning themselves in is the last thing the party needs. It was a shock to many when Obama won by the blowout he did, just because of the echo chamber. Independents are key to any majority, and not changing to include them is a death wish in politics.

I'd have to disagree that there's any "sucker punching" on Bill's panels. He announces each topic and you can see his shots coming a mile away. His views are pretty well known, certainly by anyone who would agree to appear on his show..Yeah… I thought long and hard about the phrase “sucker punch.” (That’s why your post beat mine :D ). I agree, Maher has his fists out in front of him. Sucker punch implies a blind side blow. He’s not hiding his tactics. However, it is definitely a hostile environment for any opposing views—given the boisterous crowd and mob rule approach. Stewart has a better handle on his audience—maybe it’s harder for Maher since he is dealing with a panel.

Must have missed that memo. :rolleyes:


:confused:

Michael Steel is the GOP chairman. He has a great sense of humor, very intelligent and he knows it wouldn’t be wise to suggest to anyone to avoid the show. I doubt that he will appear again given his position but I wouldn’t be surprised if he does.

Usually, the guests consist of book peddlers. No one is going to promote their book if they feel like they will be entering a hostile environment. Maher’s guests will stay slanted until he can get to that plateau, as John Stewart has done so masterfully, and have guests from both sides of the aisle sit comfortably-- giving and taking funny jabs—not sucker punched.


Not being allowed to BS on and on and on in response to every question is hardly "sucker punching". They avoid the show because he doesn't lob softballs at them and he doesn't allow anyone, regardless of party, BS in response. Save that for Faux News and CNN.

I hope Steele does come back, though.

And why the face in reaction to my comment about Ron Paul. He's the only fiscal conservative left alive apparently.

All I know is that Bill and his producers try to get Repub guests and they turn him down. Running scared is no way to run.

Not being allowed to BS on and on and on in response to every question is hardly "sucker punching". They avoid the show because he doesn't lob softballs at them and he doesn't allow anyone, regardless of party, BS in response. Save that for Faux News and CNN.

I hope Steele does come back, though.

And why the face in reaction to my comment about Ron Paul. He's the only fiscal conservative left alive apparently.

All I know is that Bill and his producers try to get Repub guests and they turn him down. Running scared is no way to run.

Oh, can the 'running scared' crap. There are plenty of people on the other side of the coin that won't appear on certain shows. And 'being scared' has little to do with it. Moreover, that sort selectiveness cuts both ways. On the other hand I admire people from both sides that will go on shows that aren't necessarily 'friendly' territory. For example, my opinion of Whoopi Goldberg went way up last week when she appeared on O'Reilly's show. I also applauded the Late Tony Snow for going on Maher's show a few months before he passed. So enough with the insults.

Not being allowed to BS on and on and on in response to every question is hardly "sucker punching". They avoid the show because he doesn't lob softballs at them and he doesn't allow anyone, regardless of party, BS in response..That’s cool, I respectfully disagree. :cool: I already stated my opinion why there are few right leaning guests.

And why the face in reaction to my comment about Ron Paul. He's the only fiscal conservative left alive apparently. Not to draw the wrath of the RP galaxy, he kind of reminds me of Ray Walston (http://healthcare.zdnet.com/images/ray-walston-as-my-favorite-martian.jpg)-- with stealthier antenna. :p

Not to draw the wrath of the RP galaxy, he kind of reminds me of Ray Walston (http://healthcare.zdnet.com/images/ray-walston-as-my-favorite-martian.jpg)-- with stealthier antenna. :p

Careful! The 'Paul-leans' will come after you! ;)

I tell you, the Ron Paul supporters are a loyal lot!

Oh, can the 'running scared' crap. There are plenty of people on the other side of the coin that won't appear on certain shows. And 'being scared' has little to do with it. Moreover, that sort selectiveness cuts both ways. On the other hand I admire people from both sides that will go on shows that aren't necessarily 'friendly' territory. For example, my opinion of Whoopi Goldberg went way up last week when she appeared on O'Reilly's show. I also applauded the Late Tony Snow for going on Maher's show a few months before he passed. So enough with the insults.

I'll can it when they stop running scared.

Careful! The 'Paul-leans' will come after you! ;)

I tell you, the Ron Paul supporters are a loyal lot!True! :D If you don’t see anymore of my posts-- :eek: I was either abducted by them or deleted by a mod. Either way—it’s a path I'd rather not take, :) and since this is heading in a contentious direction--- I’ll stifle (http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/ic/blogs/channelsurfing/uploaded_images/archie-739720.jpg). ;)

running scared
Running Scared (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0404390/) was a very good movie. ;)

True! :D If you don’t see anymore of my posts-- :eek: I was either abducted by them or deleted by a mod. Either way—it’s a path I'd rather not take, :) and since this is heading in a contentious direction--- I’ll stifle (http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/ic/blogs/channelsurfing/uploaded_images/archie-739720.jpg). ;)

I think they're all too busy getting high to remember who they're mad at.

I think they're all too busy getting high to remember who they're mad at.

Wow, when was there ever a joke like that about followers of a Republican?

I wish Maher would have Ron Paul on the show again. He helps show Republican hypocracy from a different angle than the usual "liberal" (I hate that term because I am liberal and conservative at the same time, depending on the subject) viewpoint. I love that Paul rails against Republicans just as much as Democrats.

On the other hand, Ron Paul is not the greatest speaker.
I admit it, I agree with his Fiscal views but I just wish someone a bit more articulate would take up his mantle. He's really intelligent, and correct IMO, but sometimes comes off as just an angry old man.

Wow, when was there ever a joke like that about followers of a Republican?

I wish Maher would have Ron Paul on the show again. He helps show Republican hypocracy from a different angle than the usual "liberal" (I hate that term because I am liberal and conservative at the same time, depending on the subject) viewpoint. I love that Paul rails against Republicans just as much as Democrats.

On the other hand, Ron Paul is not the greatest speaker.
I admit it, I agree with his Fiscal views but I just wish someone a bit more articulate would take up his mantle. He's really intelligent, and correct IMO, but sometimes comes off as just an angry old man.

Ron was on this past Friday. I don't think he comes off as angry. He comes off as pretty damn smart, and then he slides in a little bit of insanity to remind you why no one would ever elect him prez. He's a great guest on Real Time though.

This show has sunk to a new low. It wasn’t prime comedy before (IMO) but now it really blows. The two-person set up with a third brought in later is far inferior to the three-person cast. This week with Moss Def, geeze what a moron. Bill has lost control of his show. Time to rethink and renew.

Mos Def is a great musician, better then all the other stupid rappers out there.

Mos Def is a great musician, better then all the other stupid rappers out there.:cool: And I enjoy his movies too but watching him on this show trying to spit out a coherent point …I didn’t here one, he’s stuck on stupid.

Maher must be desperate for new panel members since he opted for Mos Def. I used to enjoy his show but I am finding him and his hate mongers boring now.

You obviously haven't watched his show if you think Mos Def is a new guest. Sometimes he's good, sometimes he's a whackjob. Personally I prefer the 2 panel guest shows now. Still one of the better shows on TV, and amazingly enough in a non-election year repubs are still too damn scared to do the show.

and amazingly enough in a non-election year repubs are still too damn scared to do the show.:rolleyes: Where's your proof of that?

:rolleyes: Where's your proof of that?

The guest lists they're conveniently absent from. ;)

If Bill wasn't a threat, wouldn't you think they would do the show? If he truly was some "left wing, stoner whackjob" why not go on the show and kick his butt? :rolleyes:

The guest lists they're conveniently absent from. ;) : I wonder how his ratings are, or if they’ve gone absent too?

If Bill wasn't a threat, wouldn't you think they would do the show? If he truly was some "left wing, stoner whackjob" why not go on the show and kick his butt? :rolleyes: Probably because he’s not relevant. ;)

Probably because he’s not relevant. ;)

Ahhh yes. How I love that argument. (So and so) is not relevant. Yet almost every episode of their show is dedicated to bashing the person who supposedly is 'not relevant'. ;)

Odd that Coulter (goddess of the braindead right) would take so much time out to debate someone who isn't relevant. :cool: And got her butt handed to her in the debate.

:cool: And I enjoy his movies too but watching him on this show trying to spit out a coherent point …I didn’t here one, he’s stuck on stupid.

Man, you ain't just woofin'! I think even Maher was getting annoyed with his non-sensical blatherings.

If Bill wasn't a threat, wouldn't you think they would do the show? If he truly was some "left wing, stoner whackjob" why not go on the show and kick his butt? :rolleyes:

Yes the guest list is getting smaller. As far as going on his show, Andrew Breitbart wrote this article about his appearance last week:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/03/my_real_time_with_bill_maher.html

Yes the guest list is getting smaller. As far as going on his show, Andrew Breitbart wrote this article about his appearance last week:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/03/my_real_time_with_bill_maher.htmlExcellent and appropriate link. :cool: It gives a timely behind the scenes perspective to the conversation at hand.

Odd that Coulter...
would take so much time out to debate someone who isn't relevant...

Duh, it's all about making a buck.

Yes the guest list is getting smaller. As far as going on his show, Andrew Breitbart wrote this article about his appearance last week:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/03/my_real_time_with_bill_maher.html

Breitbart is a bit of an ass but that aside, one of the problems is the two guest panels that have been too common this year. It kills the flow of the debates and does allow a Mos Def to dominate the conversation with an occasional clever thought but with more incoherent droppings. Maher has a hard time keeping the discussions centered. The week before, when he had a three intelligent guest panel, even though liberal leaning, the show was much better.

Mos Def was.... just plain stoned.

Excellent and appropriate link. :cool: It gives a timely behind the scenes perspective to the conversation at hand.Personally, I disagree 100%.

For similar reasons, I viewed the recently shown "Right America" on HBO as a well presented documentary. I'm sure others will disagree with me.


Not to get political, but the world is not flat. That is a scientific fact and there is no reason to have a "fair and balanced" dialog about that subject, nor is the failure to have such a dialog an indication of "media bias". On the contrary, it is recognition of the "truth in science" notion.

Any references to "activist left", "activist judges", "far left smear merchants", etc., is mindless robotic utterings of the extremist name-calling right... i.e. those with no willingness to engage in true debate on subjects which actually do have two sides to discuss.

Breitbart is a bit of an ass...

Why do you have to result to name calling, just because you don't agree with someone? By opening your post with this, you made the rest of your post inconsequential. I thought Breitbart behaved himself quite diplomatically on the show. And he made some good points (when the audience wasn't booing him, before he even tried to make them).

Personally, I disagree 100%.:confused:What? You disagree? You think this post dealing with a behind the scenes take on the show is not relevant? Geeze, the water has become so thick with mud. Did you even read the link? :rolleyes:

Come on... you know I read it.

To quote (and not get political)...

"The problem with the withdrawal approach is that it cedes the popular culture debate to the other side. We figure talk radio, a certain cable news network and some independent Internet venues will allow for us to get our ideas out to the masses. Well, those few outlets are greatly outnumbered. They are also isolated and targeted for destruction by the activist left. The sitting president (using taxpayer money) is now leading the charge."

"This army of the emboldened and gleefully ill-informed is growing. Groupthink happens, and we must take it on head-on."

"One must get a copy of John Ziegler's 'Media Malpractice: How Obama Got Elected and Palin Was Targeted' to understand the extent to which the traditional media have become an organized enemy aimed at conservatism, its leaders and its institutions. It was the tag team of entertainment (Tina Fey) and news (Katie Couric) that worked to take Sarah Palin down."

"We can't win the political war until we take on the Hollywood and mainstream media battles."

"Coincidentally, it was the race issue and how the media mistreated Clarence Thomas during his confirmation hearings."

I have a very different take on the events verbalized in his article.


"Even though Mr. Dyson filibustered in a poetic jargon only a linguistics student could decipher..."

I felt it to be exactly the other way around.

I hate how Dyson talks. He's a smart dude, he doesn't need the linguistic fireworks show. Granted the guy he was "debating" was a moron, but Dyson talks like this regardless of who is on with him. It's tiresome after about 5 minutes.

But yeah, you can pretty much discount the opinion of any hack media member or politician that is so devoid of ideas that they rely on bull**** phrases like "gotcha media" when they make themselves look like an ass. If we actually did have a responsible "gotcha" media, we would have only had 4 years of the horrendous last administration and perhaps wouldn't be in the mess we're in now.

But I digress. For the most part the 2 person panels have been better because they eliminated the stupid third guess that was usually a comedian etc, but Mos Def was a waste. More concerned with his hat than with the subject matter. IMAGE IMAGE IMAGE. Annoying as hell.

The previous show with Olbermann was very good in comparison.

I will never understand why political ideology and partisan thinking always wins over basic common sense. I don't care what your political beliefs are but, if anyone believes that the gov't can efficiently solve problems then you are either naive, misinformed, or just plain stupid. The problem is the gov't. The career politician's only purpose is to stay in office. They continue to get reelected because the average voter doesn't have a clue how their vote impacts this country. Money is power and the special interests in this country have lots of money. If we had term limits for members of Congress, this gov't would be very different than it is today.

"Even though Mr. Dyson filibustered in a poetic jargon only a linguistics student could decipher..."

I felt it to be exactly the other way around.

Really? So Dyson was 'plainly speaking' and Breitbart was talking in riddles? Wow! Bartender! Give me two of what DSperber is drinking!

I think you are completely missing Breitbart's point. And that was that people who disagree should talk honestly and simple to each other. Something that Mr. Dyson seems totally incapable of doing.

Back to the main topic; I think that the show is definately not as good with only two guests on the panel. I also think the show is not as good when the entire panel consist of people who all think the same way.

Really? So Dyson was 'plainly speaking' and Breitbart was talking in riddles?.No, I agree that Dyson does talk the way he's been described. What can I say... he's a professor!

I was referring to Breitbart's throwing the word "filibuster" out (obviously as a pejorative) to describe what Dyson was doing, when in fact Breitbart was monopolizing most of the time available for talking and wouldn't let anybody get a word in without a fight. He expected others to exhibit courtesy and wait until he was finished (which was never), and instead kept talking (i.e. the definition of "filibuster") so that anybody who was being polite would never be able to get a word in.

In other words, if anyone was trying to monopolize the conversation it was Breitbart.

That's what I meant by "in my opinion it was exactly the other way around".

Just tuned into this thread. I agree w/ DSperber about who was trying to monopolize the conversation. I suppose we could use science, since we are in a science forum, and have someone who TIVO'd the show to settle the issue: run a stop watch to calculate time speaking, and run a counter to see how many times each interrupted the other.

I also think the business of "linguistics" on the part of Dyson is part of the conservative talking points: intellectualism is to be frowned upon. Breibart is considerably smarter than he let on. I have no doubt he understood Dyson.

Do we want political dialogue on Dyson's level of intellect, do we want it on the level of Dubbya (e.g., Romanians or, most recently, authoritarian), or perhaps somewhere in the middle?

Just tuned into this thread. I agree w/ DSperber about who was trying to monopolize the conversation. I suppose we could use science, since we are in a science forum, and have someone who TIVO'd the show to settle the issue: run a stop watch to calculate time speaking, and run a counter to see how many times each interrupted the other.

I also think the business of "linguistics" on the part of Dyson is part of the conservative talking points: intellectualism is to be frowned upon. Breibart is considerably smarter than he let on. I have no doubt he understood Dyson.

Do we want political dialogue on Dyson's level of intellect, do we want it on the level of Dubbya (e.g., Romanians or, most recently, authoritarian), or perhaps somewhere in the middle?

Just because Dyson's 'babble' sounds 'intellectual', doesn't mean he's saying anything intelligent. Sometimes, a bunch of words strung together are just that... a bunch of words.

Just because Dyson's 'babble' sounds 'intellectual', doesn't mean he's saying anything intelligent. Sometimes, a bunch of words strung together are just that... a bunch of words.

Don't just say it's nonsense, refute it point by point. If you can't, then your post is just a bunch of words strung together.

Don't just say it's nonsense, refute it point by point. If you can't, then your post is just a bunch of words strung together.

Whatever.:rolleyes: Just watch the show. Breitbart tried to address Dyson directly with some straight-to-the-point questions. And Dyson did nothing but avoid answering by spouting a bunch of mumbo jumbo.

Whatever.:rolleyes: Just watch the show. Breitbart tried to address Dyson directly with some straight-to-the-point questions. And Dyson did nothing but avoid answering by spouting a bunch of mumbo jumbo.

Can you offer a quote of a specific question and evasive response?

Can you offer a quote of a specific question and evasive response?

I don't have a transcript of the show. As I said, watch the show yourself.

Whatever.:rolleyes: Just watch the show. Breitbart tried to address Dyson directly with some straight-to-the-point questions. And Dyson did nothing but avoid answering by spouting a bunch of mumbo jumbo.


Yep, that's what he does every time.

I will say this though, and I’m sure we all can agree on, the best part of the last Real Time show was that opening skit on Mexico. :cool:

I just like the show. I watch it for what it is...entertainment. You guys should all just take a breath. Bill Maher is, after all, a comedian!

Just because Dyson's 'babble' sounds 'intellectual', doesn't mean he's saying anything intelligent. Sometimes, a bunch of words strung together are just that... a bunch of words.
I understand what your saying and, to a degree, I agree with you. That someone using more than monosyllabic words still may be saying something less than intelligent is true. There's no shortage of pompous speakers in the public arena.

Having stated this, however, I do not think what Dyson said can fairly be characterized as "babble" unless viewed through conservative colored glasses. Stated another way, I suspect the number of liberals who considered Dyson's words as babble is very, very small.

Living where I do (Oakland), I can tell you that a substantial part of my community definitely believes in that which Dyson was saying. Doesn't make what he said true or false.

Since the show came back it's just felt "Off" to me. I've enjoyed it for years, but the at this point I'm not watching it live like I used to. In fact a couple of time I completely forgot about it. That never happened in the past.

The three person panel worked for years, this doesn't. Part of the problem may be that Bush is gone and there is no one out there that's an easy target. Perhaps it's the earlier taping, new writers, who knows -but something is off.

Really anyone who has any discernment or common sense should not be watching or listening to the mainstream American propaganda machine which preys upon people who get sucked in emotionally. All of these talk show commentators and their guests are just preying on viewers emotions to get them pumped up. If you want some truth and real news get outside of the mainstream media and outside of the American media. Listen to true intellectuals who don't lose their cool and don't get emotionally involved when they are discussing even the most controversial topics. Why, because they actually are articulate intellectuals. I don't even care how right or wrong these media whores are when they get all excited, because once they go on their tirades, which is constant IMO they lose credibility.

Then their is the study by Emory university that tells how the rational part of the brain literally shuts down when emotions take over with political bias:

http://www.emory.edu/news/Releases/PoliticalBrain1138113163.html

The people in the media that most people in the US watch and listen to are pompous arrogant blowhards who are spouting rhetorical talking points and do they ever love to prey on viewers fears. What can one do though if they are appealing to average to mediocre intelligence. Most viewers cannot really tolerate someone really intelligent or more intelligent than them, hence the lack of true intelligence, the inflated egos and attitudes of the media idiots they follow.

I think a good panel would be Coulter and Huffington. Once the debate got good and heated, they could wheel out the mud pit and throw them both in to continue the cat fight. At that point Bill could bring out a special guest to help do the play commentary. Chris Rock would be a good choice. Maybe they could have Rush join them to add balance to the narrative. The only problem is that Bill might have a difficult time starting the New Rules segment.

I think a good panel would be Coulter and Huffington. Once the debate got good and heated, they could wheel out the mud pit and throw them both in to continue the cat fight. At that point Bill could bring out a special guest to help do the play commentary. Chris Rock would be a good choice. Maybe they could have Rush join them to add balance to the narrative. The only problem is that Bill might have a difficult time starting the New Rules segment.

Yeah two women that Bill most likely ****** ;) Coulter like cigars by the way. :D

I think a good panel would be Coulter and Huffington. Once the debate got good and heated, they could wheel out the mud pit and throw them both in to continue the cat fight. At that point Bill could bring out a special guest to help do the play commentary. Chris Rock would be a good choice. Maybe they could have Rush join them to add balance to the narrative. The only problem is that Bill might have a difficult time starting the New Rules segment.

I would PAY to watch that!! :D :D

I think a good panel would be Coulter and Huffington. Once the debate got good and heated, they could wheel out the mud pit and throw them both in to continue the cat fight. At that point Bill could bring out a special guest to help do the play commentary. Chris Rock would be a good choice. Maybe they could have Rush join them to add balance to the narrative. The only problem is that Bill might have a difficult time starting the New Rules segment.

I would PAY to watch that!! :D :D

are they both still young and 'hard bodied' enough:eek: to get away with wearing skimpy t-shirts:eek: whilst amid said mud pits:eek:?
if so, i'll pay to watch that.:D

I think a good panel would be Coulter and Huffington. Once the debate got good and heated, they could wheel out the mud pit and throw them both in to continue the cat fight. At that point Bill could bring out a special guest to help do the play commentary. Chris Rock would be a good choice. Maybe they could have Rush join them to add balance to the narrative. The only problem is that Bill might have a difficult time starting the New Rules segment.
A genuine dose of imagination and creativity. I don't know if you're in the TV business, but if you're not you ought to be, particularly given the steady diet of lowest common denominator "reality" shows we're being fed, to state nothing of trite sit-coms.

I think it was during the first W. Bush campaign, when PI had Chris Rock as the traveling correspondent attending the conventions and Huffington (then a conservative) and Al Franken doing the strange bedfellows gag. It was fantastic. And when Rock was at the Republican convention as was the only black person there, it was hysterical. I think it revealed him as the star he would grow to be.

This has gone on far enough.

Further political comments that are not germane to the program, or that incite others to respond, will be deleted without warning, and offenders risk losing the ability to participate.

This has gone on far enough.

Further political comments that are not germane to the program, or that incite others to respond, will be deleted without warning, and offenders risk losing the ability to participate.

This post is my direct impressions of the show and political comments that are germane to the program. I just want to talk about our reactions to the show. I don't want to incite any larger discusions about politics. I hope everyone wasn't scared away. If we keep it civil and stick to discusing the show, I think we'll be safe.

Real Time With Bill Maher, a thread on AVS Forum. A thread barely alive. Gentlemen, we can rebuild it. We have the technology. We have the capability to build the world's first bionic thread. Real Time With Bill Maher will be that thread. Better than it was before. Better, stronger, faster.:rolleyes:

So did no one watch Friday's (04/03/09) fantastic episode? What's in the $.09? Carl Sr? . . . It's $.09!!!;)

I can't tell if Joe the Plumber is for real. I liked it when Bill the Talk Show Host pointed out how Joe liked being in showbusiness better than plumbing. Joe's response sounded sincere, like he really believed in what he was saying. But it seemed like he dodged Bill's question about Obama's Budget Plan affecting his hypothetical business.

Bill's panel was probably the best one this season. I counsider myself a liberal, but found myself agreeing with a number of the things said by David Frum and Reihan Salam. I also enjoyed Sam Donaldson's discomfort with Bill's swearing and dirty jokes. The eating of free range ____ got a thumbs down from Donaldson, but a belly full of laughs from me.:rolleyes::D

The absolute pinacle of the show was when Bill confirmed Glenn Beck's worst fears and mobilized his army. I laughed pretty hard at that one.

I can't tell if Joe the Plumber is for real.Why is illiteracy and the inability to pronounce words correctly something that seems to go unchallenged? Why are interviewees allowed to call it "Democrat party" and get away with it, when that recently coined incorrect phraseology is intentionally insulting and calculatingly provocative, and we all know it? Democrat is a noun, and Democratic is an adjective. It's been that way seemingly forever... until certain individuals invented this new way to insult Democrats just a few years ago.

When Joe said "it's MUTE" (instead of "moot") I gagged! What an illiterate! I was waiting for him to say NOOKULAR and I would have turned the sound off until the next segment.


I'm not a fan of David Frum, and I don't think I agreed with anything he said. Sam Donaldson certainly did not shine, and didn't come across as a great brain.

But Bill and Carol were very entertaining indeed. That free-range comment was HILARIOUS!

I look forward to Matt Taibbi's return for a visit. He's great.

I liked it when Bill the Talk Show Host pointed out how Joe liked being in showbusiness better than plumbing.If it were me, I would have responded with "Yeah? Well, I notice you're not in plumbing."

I thought the show was getting back on track, interesting guests, good discussion, then Carol came out and it all stopped. Don't get me wrong I like her and find her funny, but I saw her a a couple of other shows and she said the exact same things. When she came out and Bill spend way too much time with her the show ground to a halt. I skipped JTP, wouldn't waste my time on him.

Laughed my ass off when Joe said 'Mute Point' instead of Moot Point. That was hilarious.

Bill's panel was probably the best one this season. I counsider myself a liberal, but found myself agreeing with a number of the things said by David Frum and Reihan Salam.

I was going to post the same thing. Both Frum, and Salam, were articulate and got their points across without towing party lines or spouting rhetoric.
Actually, they spoke with a conservative voice, and not a Republican one. I hope future shows can live up to the well reasoned and civil discourse displayed on this episode.

Art

If it were me, I would have responded with "Yeah? Well, I notice you're not in plumbing."

Bill prevented that possible response by mentioning that he was in the entertainment field. :)

Art

I understand that this show talks quite a bit about politics, but I think its starting to go to that "dangerous" place. We could argue back and forth about guests of the show and where everyone stands with their political views but we shouldn't start talking about policies or personal political beliefs.

What I mean is I think we should only focus on saying "I agree with what "xxx" had to say" or "I think "xxx" is talking out of his/her ass" and leave it at that.

With that said we really should stop the name calling from future discussions as its just going to "stir the pot"

Socialist
Communist
Elitist
Unintelligent
Unintelligible
etc etc (sorry I don't have any anti-republican names to list from this weeks entries and hopefully we wont see any in the future as well)

If we cant even carry conversations on without calling people/groups names then how can anyone expect any political discussion taking place peacefully.

Look, this is a Bill Maher show thread, but this can't go unanswered. Yes it can.

Next time, hit Report Post.

Thanks

Thread rolled back. Some legitimate posts may have been lost in the rollback, but I didn't see any. I know it's tough to talk about Maher's show and not discuss politics.. and we're allowing a lot more wiggle room in this thread than most. But clearly sailing way off the deep end will get you banned from this thread. When in doubt, leave it out.

The time is ticking on this thread unless the discussion radically changes course.

But on topic, the show was great. 3 Conservatives on one episode of Real Time! Whoooo. Finally some interesting chatter. Only regret is that Frum continues to hide from what he contributed to. He's a good guest though. My first time seeing the little guy in the middle, but he proved to be a great guest as well. The whole bit with Carol Liefer was a waste of time, regardless of whether or not you like her.

But on topic, the show was great. 3 Conservatives on one episode of Real Time! Whoooo. Finally some interesting chatter. Only regret is that Frum continues to hide from what he contributed to. He's a good guest though. My first time seeing the little guy in the middle, but he proved to be a great guest as well. The whole bit with Carol Liefer was a waste of time, regardless of whether or not you like her.

I hope he chooses guests like this in the future. There was a real discussion because there were no career politicians on the panel to just defend their party, right or wrong.


Art

The whole bit with Carol Liefer was a waste of time, regardless of whether or not you like her.I didn't actually see the show myself, but I'd find it hard to believe that anyone could be a worse, more obnoxious and incessantly disruptive guest then Elaine Boosler used to be (is she even ever on there anymore, or did they finally wise up?).

I didn't actually see the show myself, but I'd find it hard to believe that anyone could be a worse, more obnoxious and incessantly disruptive guest then Elaine Boozler used to be (is she even ever on there anymore, or did they finally wise up?).

Haven't seen her in a long time. It just seems like they're comedy club friends that Bill feels obliged to bring on from time to time. They're almost always the worst part of the show.

Actually, they spoke with a conservative voice, and not a Republican one. I hope future shows can live up to the well reasoned and civil discourse displayed on this episode.

Art

And Bill allowed that to happen? I may have to catch a replay of this episode.

Haven't seen her in a long time. It just seems like they're comedy club friends that Bill feels obliged to bring on from time to time. They're almost always the worst part of the show.Back when he was on ABC she used to be on all the time and drive me nuts. I used to be yelling at the TV all the time. When they would introduce the guests at the beginning, I would be praying, and as soon as they would announce her, I would let out a big groan. I actually started turning the show off when she was on after awhile, because she just made it totally unpleasant and unwatchable.

If she wasn't his "pal", anyone else would've had her yanked off in a second.

At least the guest panel was a little more even back in those days. I miss that. I liked the show in general much better back then.

I too, wish Bill could get some true contrasting views. Perhaps if he didn’t have a studio audience there would be a better opportunity for a discourse-- but that wouldn’t work with the rest of the show. A guy who’s famous for a line that could have been the title of a Marvel Comics book-- David Frum and his Axis of Evil riff-- is not exactly sitting pretty in the Conservative dugout right now. His “opposing views” are irrelevant in my opinion. Put a Barney Frank on the panel with a "Sean O’Reilly" type and let the dice roll.

I too, wish Bill could get some true contrasting views. Perhaps if he didn’t have a studio audience there would be a better opportunity for a discourse-- but that wouldn’t work with the rest of the show. A guy who’s famous for a line that could have been the title of a Marvel Comics book-- David Frum and his Axis of Evil riff-- is not exactly sitting pretty in the Conservative dugout right now. His “opposing views” are irrelevant in my opinion. Put a Barney Frank on the panel with a "Sean O’Reilly" type and let the dice roll.

Yeah, it was sad to see Frum running from any responsibility for that Axis of Evil crap he helped cause. As for Barney Frank, he's well intentioned but I tire of his "CAN I FINISH" tirades.

If she wasn't his "pal", anyone else would've had her yanked off in a second. Perhaps Bill felt that yanking her off would not have been the best way of reciprocating the favor.

I hope he chooses guests like this in the future. There was a real discussion because there were no career politicians on the panel to just defend their party, right or wrong.


Art

And it ties into what I mentioned before in this thread. When discussions by most on both sides, rather almost all sides of the political spectrum get emotional, rational thought takes a back seat which is primarily what most talk shows in the US are about stirring up viewers emotions with hyperbole. Stay away from mainstream media or be a sheeple with emotions steering your ship.

Great episode this past Friday. Dana Gould is one of the few comedians that come on the show that can actually contribute and make great points (his comment about people afraid to give up their guns but readily gave up their freedom with the Patriot Act was both funny and sad). The great insight from the former torture victim CIA officer was wonderful insight. And I get sick of Maher taking shots at married couples and parents, but his assertion that raising obese children is tantamount to child abuse is a good one. Couldn't believe the ethics guy was blaming society over the parent. If they're your kids, you can have a 100 percent say in what they eat.

I liked it, but man the woman just sat there silent as a post most of the time. The former CIA guy rocked.

I liked it, but man the woman just sat there silent as a post most of the time. The former CIA guy rocked.

Wasn't George Clooney's character in Syriana based on him?

I liked it, but man the woman just sat there silent as a post most of the time. The former CIA guy rocked.

Yeah, I'm not all that sure what value Howard Dean brought either, but the others more than made up for it.

Wasn't George Clooney's character in Syriana based on him?

Yep.

Wasn't George Clooney's character in Syriana based on him?

Syriana was actually based upon a few book he wrote, See No Evil and Sleeping with the Devil.