Bill Maher Declares America Stupid

Written by Rizoh. Posted in Gumbo

Published on August 02, 2009 with 26 Comments">26 Comments

I don’t know which is more pathetic — that people are going into a collective panic attack because Bill Maher dubbed America stupid or that Bill Maher recycles his statements.

That aside, Bill Maher is actually right on this. Sure, he’s grown increasingly arrogant over the years, but you can’t sit there and argue that he’s gone overboard when there’s an abundance of evidence to the contrary. And did I mention that he’s called America “stupid” before. Has Bill Maher lost his weed-muddled mind? Well, let’s see.

The Birther Party
Sarah Palin
Orly Taitz
BET
Jim Geraghty
I Love Money and all other Flavor of Love spinoffs
Tila Tequila
Rush Limbaugh
Sean Hannity
2000 Presidential Election
Joe Lieberman
Scientology
The Winter Olympics
Thaddeus McCotter
Chains that cost more than people’s homes

These are all synonyms for “stupid.” So, yeah, Bill Maher has a point.

TRU

Rizoh

Rizoh is the most powerful man in all the lands. He lives in Houston where he earned a BS in Nerf Herding. He's the founder of The Rap Up, the editor of Roc4Life.com, and is in the Grammy-awaiting band Pervertable Disciples.

Website - Twitter - Facebook - More Posts

  • http://my.rawkus.com/xn/detail/u_2zyfwzd7nwlw3 Illmatic620

    There this a liberal tendency among some of my favorite commentators and entertainers, Bill Maher the late, great Bill Hicks to sort of bash American “ignoramuses”, etc etc. It’s a condescending liberal elitism.

    Of course I wouldn’t say this aloud in the presence of any conservatives, but would Bill Maher have been so smart if he wasn’t highly educated and from a cosmopolitan place like New York City? Does he think his DNA is that different than his fellow Americans.

    It’s all environment and consciousness.

    The sons and daughters of the guards at Auschwitz were the ones protesting on Bonn against the Vietnam War.

  • http://my.rawkus.com/xn/detail/u_2zyfwzd7nwlw3 Illmatic620

    There this a liberal tendency among some of my favorite commentators and entertainers, Bill Maher the late, great Bill Hicks to sort of bash American “ignoramuses”, etc etc. It’s a condescending liberal elitism.

    Of course I wouldn’t say this aloud in the presence of any conservatives, but would Bill Maher have been so smart if he wasn’t highly educated and from a cosmopolitan place like New York City? Does he think his DNA is that different than his fellow Americans.

    It’s all environment and consciousness.

    The sons and daughters of the guards at Auschwitz were the ones protesting on Bonn against the Vietnam War.

  • J to the AAP

    Illmatic, correct me if I’m wrong but your point is that being American doesn’t automatically makes you stupid? “It’s all environment and consciousness.” Who is argueing that?

    That doesn’t take away from the fact there’s a lot of stupidity to go around. Seems to me this is the dark side of the first amendment. Freedom of speech: the gift and the curse. Still, living freely among some screeching idiots seems preferable to living in a dictatorship without noise.

  • J to the AAP

    Illmatic, correct me if I’m wrong but your point is that being American doesn’t automatically makes you stupid? “It’s all environment and consciousness.” Who is argueing that?

    That doesn’t take away from the fact there’s a lot of stupidity to go around. Seems to me this is the dark side of the first amendment. Freedom of speech: the gift and the curse. Still, living freely among some screeching idiots seems preferable to living in a dictatorship without noise.

  • http://my.rawkus.com/xn/detail/u_2zyfwzd7nwlw3 Illmatic620

    My point is that most Americans aren’t stupid and if they are that’s a social failing not an individual one.

    And I don’t really see this issue as related to “freedom to speech” ideally the more freedoms the better we would be equipped to engage with each other in a pedagogical discourse.

    Sean Hannity is actually quite intelligent by the way… wrong on basically everything, but he’s intelligent.

  • http://my.rawkus.com/xn/detail/u_2zyfwzd7nwlw3 Illmatic620

    My point is that most Americans aren’t stupid and if they are that’s a social failing not an individual one.

    And I don’t really see this issue as related to “freedom to speech” ideally the more freedoms the better we would be equipped to engage with each other in a pedagogical discourse.

    Sean Hannity is actually quite intelligent by the way… wrong on basically everything, but he’s intelligent.

  • http://my.rawkus.com/xn/detail/u_3dm62ixtfhf8v moneda

    “… wrong on basically everything, but he’s intelligent.”

    I’d like it explained to me how you can be both those things.

    Also, I think it’s impossible to engage in a “pedagogical discourse” with a religious zealot who thinks the Earth is 6,000 years old, unless he or she plans on not saying anything and taking lots of notes.

  • http://my.rawkus.com/xn/detail/u_3dm62ixtfhf8v moneda

    “… wrong on basically everything, but he’s intelligent.”

    I’d like it explained to me how you can be both those things.

    Also, I think it’s impossible to engage in a “pedagogical discourse” with a religious zealot who thinks the Earth is 6,000 years old, unless he or she plans on not saying anything and taking lots of notes.

  • Anonymous

    I do think our country doesn’t do enough to ensure that every child has enough schooling to make educated decisions.

    I have no problem if someone thinks that the Earth is 6,000 years old as long as they are willing to listen to the alternatives and engage in a constructive discourse. I also think that when we immediately discount religious revelation as a valid source of knowledge (or immediately discount the religious as “zealots”) then we are no better than those who won’t listen to scientific arguments…

  • Anonymous

    I do think our country doesn’t do enough to ensure that every child has enough schooling to make educated decisions.

    I have no problem if someone thinks that the Earth is 6,000 years old as long as they are willing to listen to the alternatives and engage in a constructive discourse. I also think that when we immediately discount religious revelation as a valid source of knowledge (or immediately discount the religious as “zealots”) then we are no better than those who won’t listen to scientific arguments…

  • http://my.rawkus.com/xn/detail/u_3dm62ixtfhf8v moneda

    I also think that when we immediately discount religious revelation as a valid source of knowledge (or immediately discount the religious as “zealots”) then we are no better than those who won’t listen to scientific arguments…

    An altruistic yet destructive point of view. I do not, however, discount all people of faith as zealots.

  • http://my.rawkus.com/xn/detail/u_3dm62ixtfhf8v moneda

    I also think that when we immediately discount religious revelation as a valid source of knowledge (or immediately discount the religious as “zealots”) then we are no better than those who won’t listen to scientific arguments…

    An altruistic yet destructive point of view. I do not, however, discount all people of faith as zealots.

  • MimesisBTG

    @ moneda: Destructive? What is being destroyed? Who is destroying it? I think that most historians would agree that religion is not an inherently destructive social phenomenon…at least not more so than any other sociocultural institution.

    The term “religion” has developed a negative connotation in recent years, mostly on account of popular conceptions of religiosity that associate it with militaristic forms of Christianity. As a result, we hear a lot of “I am spiritual, not religious.” Personally, I am not sure that this dichotomy is valid outside of the specific socioreligious contexts in which it is being employed.

    A good article that touches upon these subjects is Jeff Stout’s article entitled “The Folly of Secularism.” Stout is a professor of philosophy & religion at Princeton.

  • MimesisBTG

    @ moneda: Destructive? What is being destroyed? Who is destroying it? I think that most historians would agree that religion is not an inherently destructive social phenomenon…at least not more so than any other sociocultural institution.

    The term “religion” has developed a negative connotation in recent years, mostly on account of popular conceptions of religiosity that associate it with militaristic forms of Christianity. As a result, we hear a lot of “I am spiritual, not religious.” Personally, I am not sure that this dichotomy is valid outside of the specific socioreligious contexts in which it is being employed.

    A good article that touches upon these subjects is Jeff Stout’s article entitled “The Folly of Secularism.” Stout is a professor of philosophy & religion at Princeton.

  • NYHC81

    this country is about as serious as clown shoes…

  • NYHC81

    this country is about as serious as clown shoes…

  • tony

    Gotta love bill maher

  • tony

    Gotta love bill maher

  • LA Huey

    So many big words being thrown about.

    btw, bill maher is a poopy head

  • LA Huey

    So many big words being thrown about.

    btw, bill maher is a poopy head

  • lynx765

    THIS coming from the sugar daddy formerly known as Mr. Superhead.

  • lynx765

    THIS coming from the sugar daddy formerly known as Mr. Superhead.

  • http://my.rawkus.com/xn/detail/u_2zyfwzd7nwlw3 Illmatic620

    Also the way a lot of militant secularists approach Islam reminds me of the way a lot of people approached Judaism in the early 20th century. Judaism was viewed not as a real religion, but as a global conspiracy of world elitists threatening to undermine Western civilization and Christian morals.

    Remind you of any of the Islamophobia we see today?

  • http://my.rawkus.com/xn/detail/u_2zyfwzd7nwlw3 Illmatic620

    Also the way a lot of militant secularists approach Islam reminds me of the way a lot of people approached Judaism in the early 20th century. Judaism was viewed not as a real religion, but as a global conspiracy of world elitists threatening to undermine Western civilization and Christian morals.

    Remind you of any of the Islamophobia we see today?

  • J to the AAP

    “And I don’t really see this issue as related to “freedom to speech” ideally the more freedoms the better we would be equipped to engage with each other in a pedagogical discourse.”

    “Ideally” is a key-word here. Absolute freedom of speech also means anybody can use their personal blowhole to make some noise, no matter how poorly constructed or misinformed a point may be. That’s what I mean with the ‘dark side’.

    Take the continued spread of ‘The Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion’ for instance. Complete antisemitic and fraudulent nonsense but protected by freedom of speech nonetheless. The alternative however, is censorship, which might an even bigger evil. Besides, that same freedom also means I’m able to blast it for what it is. Just take note that that freedom comes at a price.

  • J to the AAP

    “And I don’t really see this issue as related to “freedom to speech” ideally the more freedoms the better we would be equipped to engage with each other in a pedagogical discourse.”

    “Ideally” is a key-word here. Absolute freedom of speech also means anybody can use their personal blowhole to make some noise, no matter how poorly constructed or misinformed a point may be. That’s what I mean with the ‘dark side’.

    Take the continued spread of ‘The Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion’ for instance. Complete antisemitic and fraudulent nonsense but protected by freedom of speech nonetheless. The alternative however, is censorship, which might an even bigger evil. Besides, that same freedom also means I’m able to blast it for what it is. Just take note that that freedom comes at a price.

Site Meter