Bill Maher to tea partiers: The Founding Fathers would’ve hated your guts

posted at 10:20 am on January 15, 2011 by Michael van der Galien

Talk show host Bill Maher once again displayed his ignorance for America’s history and founding by telling Tea Partiers that the Founding Fathers would have “hated” their “guts.”

As you’d come to expect from Maher he constantly referred to members of the Tea Party as “teabaggers” – which would probably be an insult coming from virtually everybody else. When Maher uses this word, however, the Tea Party should wear it as a badge of honor.

Next he told Tea Partiers that the Founding Fathers were “nothing like them.” No, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, George Washington and all the others were profoundly different. How? Here comes Maher:

Now, I want you teabaggers out there to understand one thing: while you idolize the Founding Fathers and dress up  like them, and smell like them, I think it’s pretty clear that the Founding Fathers would have hated  your guts. And what’s more, you would’ve hated them. They were everything you despise. They studied science, read Plato, hung out in Paris, and thought the Bible was mostly bullshit.

Video (via Mediaite):

I hate to break it to you, Bill, but the majority of the Founding Fathers were religious. And those who weren’t orthodox in their beliefs, at least had a healthy respect and appreciation for religion. They didn’t want to force others to believe as they did – certainly – but they respected religion, and the Bible, nonetheless. Even those more critical, such as Thomas Jefferson, believed the Bible contained important lessons – lessons wise men should take to heart. There may have been a few, like Thomas Paine, who held religion in less high esteem, but they were the minority, not the majority.

Furthermore, unlike what Maher seems to believe, the Founding Fathers weren’t big fans of a welfare state. At all. In fact, they considered the government the greatest potential threat to freedom. They understood that an intrusive, activist state always limits a people’s freedom. That’s why they wrote the Constitution in the first place: they wanted to guarantee Americans specific rights, the government could not take away.

The Tea Party continues this tradition. They too stand for individual liberty, over collectivism and social engineering. They want the government to get out of the people’s business – out of their health care and out of their pockets. If there’s one thing they demand, it’s to be left alone to live their lives as they please. Not as it pleases Maher and other cocky liberals who mess up their own lives in virtually every respect, but who nonetheless believe it’s up to them to tell others how to live.

Perhaps that Maher can do what he seems to value so much – get a good education – before spouting his mouth off again about things he has little to no knowledge of. If not, he’d do us all a favor if he’d just keep his deliberately humiliating mouth shut.

This post was promoted from GreenRoom to HotAir.com.
To see the comments on the original post, look here.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

The Founding Fathers would’ve hated your guts

Speaking for yourself, Likewise, I’m sure.

Tennman on January 17, 2011 at 12:14 PM

They hung out in Paris, Bill. But, they never wanted to be Europe.

And I’d gather that I know quite a bit more about Science than you do. I could tell them details, where as you’d be more like “Science disproves God”.

Axeman on January 17, 2011 at 12:17 PM

Yeah, And Bill Maher thought that once Muslim yutes caught on to the awesome moral decay of America they would put down their guns and bombs and join the fray… what an idiot.

Queen0fCups on January 17, 2011 at 12:22 PM

The Fathers would have no interest in carrying on a dialogue with someone as poorly educated and relatively ignorant as Sarah Palin and would be aghast at the idea that the electoral college would fail to prevent her from reaching the Presidency.

The Founders included among their own other men and women of similar standing- in terms of intellect, education, and worldly knowledge. To say that the average Tea Party member could reach that level is ludicrous and denigrating to some of the greatest minds to ever live on this earth.

bayam on January 16, 2011 at 10:07 PM

Ridiculous.

canditaylor68 on January 17, 2011 at 1:56 PM

Ridiculous.

canditaylor68

feel free to offer support for your “ridiculous” by listing a name or two of tea partiers whose knowledge and intellect rival that of the Founding Fathers.

audiculous on January 17, 2011 at 3:04 PM

feel free to offer support for your “ridiculous” by listing a name or two of tea partiers whose knowledge and intellect rival that of the Founding Fathers.

audiculous on January 17, 2011 at 3:04 PM

Peter Schiff, Victor David Hanson, Yaron Brook.

AshleyTKing on January 17, 2011 at 4:54 PM

Peter Schiff, Victor David Hanson, Yaron Brook.

AshleyTKing

Hanson isn’t bad, but is he a tea partier rather than a neocon?

Brook isn’t an American, is he?

and Schiff…. nah. not worthy, and a banker, not a politician.

audiculous on January 17, 2011 at 5:31 PM

audiculous give it up w this straw man bs. The reality is that the TP is much closer to the FF than anything ANYONE else has to offer. Now go FY.

CWforFreedom on January 17, 2011 at 5:36 PM

Look at all the smugness and ugliness from you lefties. You are pathetic. I do blame you for this culture that leads to threats and shootings.

CWforFreedom on January 17, 2011 at 5:38 PM

CWforFreedom, feel free to practice what you prescribe, dimmy.

The TP dwellers may be close to the eighteenth century, but they’re far, far from understanding this century, the founding and history of this nation, or the depth of thought and intent of the framers of the Constitution.

and again, sit and spin.

audiculous on January 17, 2011 at 5:49 PM

If Mahr had lived during the Revolutionary period, he would have been a whiny little pussy loyal to the British Crown. The Founding Fathers would have kicked him to the curb.

infidel4life on January 17, 2011 at 6:10 PM

If Mahr would have lived during the Revolutionary period, he would have been a whiny little pu$$y loyal to the British Crown. The Founding Fathers would have scraped him off the bottoms of their shoes like so much horse manure.

infidel4life on January 17, 2011 at 6:40 PM

If Mahr had lived during the Revolutionary period, he would have been a whiny little pussy loyal to the British Crown. The Founding Fathers would have kicked him to the curb.

infidel4life on January 17, 2011 at 6:10 PM

That is putting it quite lightly, but that is in tone with with the new kinder, gentler discourse the left wants us to engage it. It is however, OK for them to incite violence, call for heads, it’s for the children dontcha know…

M-14 2go on January 17, 2011 at 8:03 PM

An individual on my facebook posted Maher’s video today. I posted this link in response. Sad to find out she was so approving of this turd but nice to finally see the true colors.

aikidoka on January 17, 2011 at 8:09 PM

While I am no fan of Palin, nor will a recount the reasons here, I will say that Madison, Jefferson, Franklin, Washington, Adams would have recognized the Tea Party as their own

Yes, the Founding Fathers would have seen Tea Partiers as their own cannon fodder worthy for manning the front lines.

You still fail to grasp the elite company these men kept and their fear of mob rule, which was repeatedly described as rule from those with second-rate educations or limited intellectual depth and ‘book’ knowledge. Even the least educated of the Founders, Washington (who couldn’t speak Latin fluently), kept a bust of Cicero prominently displayed in his office as an unmistakable sign of reverence to classical education and knowledge.

Our Fathers were a completely remarkable group of men and for anyon to claim their legacy, esp. people with anti-intellectual leanings, is patently absurd and only further reveals their ignorance.

bayam on January 18, 2011 at 12:22 AM

Our Fathers were a completely remarkable group of men and for anyon to claim their legacy, esp. people with anti-intellectual leanings, is patently absurd and only further reveals their ignorance.

bayam on January 18, 2011 at 12:22 AM

Well, then let’s both show up at the rallies and improve the intellectual climate, eh?

AshleyTKing on January 18, 2011 at 1:49 AM

bayam on January 18, 2011 at 12:22 AM

I believe those educated, intelligent Founding Fathers preferred facts, evidence and proof rather than spewing baseless invective, as you do here. But keep spewing, bayam…every time you type, I remember anew why I left liberalism going on twenty years ago now. Second to becoming a born-again Christian, it was the best decision I ever made.

Grace_is_sufficient on January 18, 2011 at 5:33 AM

I believe those educated, intelligent Founding Fathers preferred facts, evidence and proof rather than spewing baseless invective

they managed to throw in a fair bit of the latter despite their preferences.

it has been said that at the Virginia convention debating ratification of the Constitution that Patrick Henry’s oblique charge that Governor Randolph was bought into the federalist camp came near to being settled with pistols.

audiculous on January 18, 2011 at 12:30 PM

Yes Bayam and Audi our founders would love the over-educated types we have today . You know the ones whose political leanings are almost completely the opposite of the FF.

Please quit with the idiocy.

CWforFreedom on January 18, 2011 at 2:54 PM

To me, Maher has always been Ratso Rizzo with dirty-blonde hair.

KyMouse on January 18, 2011 at 4:43 PM

Moron Bill Maher. IMO, the founding fathers would have had this loud mouthed POS facing musketeers!

byteshredder on January 18, 2011 at 8:40 PM

I state that I am superior in intellect to any dem. I am not a tea partier, but I have morals, unlike a single democrat, alive or dead.

proconstitution on January 18, 2011 at 8:58 PM

I state that I am superior in intellect to any dem. I am not a tea partier, but I have morals, unlike a single democrat, alive or dead.

proconstitution

your so sad.

what kind of morality is it that you process. I’m interested in hearing the moral code that denies that half or America hasn’t one.

audiculous on January 18, 2011 at 9:43 PM

Mr. Maher is skating on Thin Ice, and the sharks underneath have his form in their cross hairs. But, fortunately for himself and unfortunately for U.S. the shark will find he has no guts and just smells like brain dead meat and they spit him out to live another day.

MSGTAS on January 19, 2011 at 9:52 AM

bayam,

They were pre-Nietzsche, pre-Derrida intellectuals. They didn’t display their degrees as the force of their arguments–they made them. I think they would have been very appreciative of a “mob” that tried to understand the terms they used.

And as much as they “feared the mob” some of them did manage to say that it was the right of the people to throw off a government that did not that oppressed them. It does not mention that it had to have some really good arguments from intellectuals.

Lastly, the TPM is not “anti-intellectual”. I am an intellectual, I consider myself part of the TPM. I think you have to be pretty un-intellectual to not understand the modern nihilistic malaise that the so-called “intellectuals” now wallow in. And they compensate for the morass by flashing their degrees.

At no point do I think that understanding the Constitution as an agreement among states instead of a theory of government as the base of the government is sub-standard to the “Living Document” crap that chases “emanations and penumbras” and holds séances to channel the document to speak. It’s more historically accurate as a ratified agreement among the diverse powers of the states then as an Athena from the forehead of Madison (for which we must scour the letters and writings of Madison to divine).

There is a difference among people who think that the founders should be credited with what they wrote and not “what they wrote for their time”. Some allowance has to be made for the latter, clearly, but allowance =/= veneration. In fact, it is the left that makes less of the founders as not really intellectuals–but “intellectuals for their time” as some sort of current crop of intellectualism present throughout the ages.

There is also a difference between 1) what you read, what you are interested in, how you think, and 2) credentials. The response from the elites is only how the college one went to is regarded, or how you are generally regarded. When the left says “anti-intellectual” it means “people who flout well-recognized authorities” it has nothing to do with how well you argue or how concerned you are with understanding a correct statement of things. You have to be somewhat of a diminished intellectual not to notice the equivocation between Maher’s “what the founder’s read” and your claim that they’re just like the credentialed intellectuals of today in that they read certain books. Ignoring that the founders didn’t rely on credentials, but reading and understanding what they read.

There are some of us that prefer that classic intellectualism to the modern muddle.

Axeman on January 19, 2011 at 10:20 AM

Lastly, the TPM is not “anti-intellectual”. I am an intellectual, I consider myself part of the TPM.

Somewhere between the TP isn’t anti-intellectual because you’re in it and the TP is flat-out anti-intellectual, is the middle ground where the TP contains a significant proportion of folks that scant consideration of complexity….

(…as does understanding the Constitution as an agreement among states rather than an agreement made by people.)

audiculous on January 19, 2011 at 5:14 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4