Green Room

Happily Divorced from Bill Maher’s ‘Reality’

posted at 11:07 pm on April 24, 2009 by

“At age 53, Maher has never married.”
Wikipedia

Bill Maher is an adolescent phase that his parents probably hoped he’d grow out of. Instead, he’s made a career of being a smart-alecky eighth-grade know-it-all, and thus the pluperfect embodiment of contemporary Hollywood culture.

Years ago, when he still had his ABC show, Politically Incorrect, I observed that Maher had two pet peeves, Christian morality and feminism. This struck me as not coincidental, as both of these belief systems would tend to interfere with what was transparently the chief object of Maher’s existence: Getting laid.

After I’d moved to Washington, I became acquainted with someone who had frequently been a guest on Maher’s show. When I shared my supposition about the basis of Maher’s political fixations, my friend nodded eagerly and said: “Bill Maher’s idea of a romantic evening is doing coke with hookers at Sky Bar.”

He is a short, unattractive man who evidently supposes that obnoxious arrogance can compensate for his deficiencies. And his physical deficiencies are actually far less a hindrance than his emotional deficiencies, which are extreme.

Maher is the sort of stunted narcissist who cannot conceive that other people have needs, desires and feelings as legitimate as his own. In his puerile mind, there is no room for consideration of anything except What Bill Wants Right Now. To know such creatures — and most of us have, unfortunately, encountered at least one spoiled brat like Maher — is to loathe them. They tend to be unconscionably rude toward “little people” like waiters and store clerks, taking vicious pleasure in bossing around and humiliating people.

Was anyone really surprised when, after Maher’s breakup with former Playboy model Nancy Johnson, she sued him and complained of his “insulting, humiliating and degrading racial comments”? It’s not that he’s a racist; he’s just the sort of sadistic coward who compensates for a want of courage by relentless cruelty toward others, especially women.

Like the rest of his underdeveloped personality — note well his sneering disdain of anything decent or honorable — Maher’s contempt of womankind is part of an elaborate system of psychological defense mechanisms constructed around his molten core of self-loathing. It is a remarkable irony of this type of narcissist that the driving force of Maher’s childish egocentrism is a hatred of himself. Try as he might, he cannot escape the guilty knowledge of his own worthlessness, a knowledge that fuels the negativity he projects onto others, making them scapegoats for his own failings.

It is in this light, then, that we behold Maher’s nyah-nyah tantrum in the Los Angeles Times:

If conservatives don’t want to be seen as bitter people who cling to their guns and religion and anti-immigrant sentiments, they should stop being bitter and clinging to their guns, religion and anti-immigrant sentiments.
It’s been a week now, and I still don’t know what those “tea bag” protests were about. I saw signs protesting abortion, illegal immigrants, the bank bailout and that gay guy who’s going to win “American Idol.” But it wasn’t tax day that made them crazy; it was election day. Because that’s when Republicans became what they fear most: a minority.

(Via Memeorandum.) Of course, Maher has made no serious effort to investigate the Tea Party movement, any more so than he has ever seriously engaged conservatism as a political philosophy. His politics, like everything else about him, is superficial and selfish. By comparison to Maher, Maureen Dowd is a deep well of profound insight and James Wolcott a 21st-century Pericles.

Maher slams conservatives and Republicans in much the same way, and for much the same reason, that an eighth-grade class clown mocks the teacher behind her back. Living in an entertainment colony populated overwhelmingly by liberal Democrats, he mugs and preens, seeking to elicit approval for his exhibition of disdain for the doltish rubes in Tulsa or Tucson or wherever else those idiotic stereotypical Republicans are presumed to reside.

The basic decency of those people — hard-working, law-abiding, honest, kind, courteous — is no reason for Maher to admire or praise them. Indeed, it is all the more reason to scorn them, for they exemplify virtues Maher utterly lacks. And so he puts them down as ignorant dupes, belittles their religious faith and traditionalism, mocks their bourgeois values and aspirations.

Obama rides high atop the polls now, the Republicans have lost badly in the past two election cycles, and Maher’s arrogant mockery of conservatives is exactly the kind of vaunting strut one expects from him at such a moment.

It may be that he is correct about the futility of any effort toward a conservative resurgence. Yet it may also be that he is wrong. The man is a natural-born loser and, in the long run, you’ll never go wrong betting against a loser like Bill Maher.

UPDATE: The Armoury has this video review of Maher’s Religulous:

At the beginning, you see Maher mocking the Catholic notion of transubstantiation and, at the end, you see an excerpt of Religulous in which Maher interrogates his mother, who married into the Catholic Church. The refutation of transubstantiation is simple enough: When Jesus spoke to the apostles about bread as symbolic of his body and wine as symbolic of his blood, Jesus was still sitting there among them, alive. Obviously, then, the expression was symbolic in meaning and the famous phrase, “This do in remembrance of me,” captures Jesus’ intention of this as a memorial ritual, not as a miraculous feat whereby the bread and wine literally became his flesh and blood.

That Maher would think it a serious critique of Christianity to mock a clearly unbiblical belief like transubstantion tells you a lot about his shallowness. And the fact that he felt the need to bring his mother into it tells you a lot about the childish resentments that motivate him.

Recently in the Green Room:

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

I guarantee you that I have been in more physical fights than you. I don’t back down and I don’t go through life afraid of everything like you cons.

You realize you have no way of proving this statement, right? You can be anyone you want to be on internet. So, why embarrass yourself?

Brad Paisley’s tribute to robertnyc212:

I work down at the Pizza Pit
And I drive an old Hyundai
I still live with my mom and dad
I’m 5 foot 3 and overweight
I’m a scifi fanatic
A mild asthmatic
And I’ve never been to second base
But there’s whole ‘nother me
That you need to see
Go checkout MySpace

‘Cause online I’m out in Hollywood
I’m 6 foot 5 and I look damn good
I drive a Maserati
I’m a black-belt in karate
And I love a good glass of wine
It turns girls on that I’m mysterious
I tell them I don’t want nothing serious
‘Cause even on a slow day
I could have a three way
Chat with two women at one time
I’m so much cooler online
So much cooler online

When I get home I kiss my mom
And she fixes me a snack
And I head down to my basement bedroom
And fire up my mac
In real life the only time I’ve ever even been to L.A
Is when I got the chance with the marching band
To play tuba in the Rose Parade

Online I live in Malibu
I pose for Calvin Klein, I’ve been in GQ
I’m single and I’m rich
And I’ve got a set of six pack abs that would blow your mind
It turns girls on that I’m mysterious
I tell them I don’t want nothing serious
‘Cause even on a slow day
I could have a three way
Chat with two women at one time
I’m so much cooler online
Yeah, I’m cooler online

When you got my kind of stats
It’s hard to get a date
Let alone a real girlfriend
But I grow another foot and I lose a bunch of weight
Every time I login

Online
I’m out in Hollywood
I’m 6 foot 5 and I look damn good
Even on a slow day
I could have a three way
Chat with two women at one time
I’m so much cooler online
Yeah, I’m cooler online
I’m so much cooler online
Yeah, I’m cooler online

Fed45 on April 25, 2009 at 12:38 PM

ronsfi on April 25, 2009 at 11:38 AM

You missed my point — I don’t believe it’s fantasy. I think he’s dead-on.

D2Boston on April 25, 2009 at 12:39 PM

How else can you explain a few guys with box cutters taking over an entire plane. You probably cross the street when you see black people.

robertnyc212 on April 25, 2009 at 11:40 AM

So all four airplanes were filled with conservatives? Idiot. Of course, you could make the case for flight 93…

2ipa on April 25, 2009 at 12:40 PM

Your bad, Mr. McCain.

Funny, but bad.

cs89 on April 25, 2009 at 12:43 PM

What’s up with the comments? On my screen, the words disappear off to the left of the screen.

Is it just me?

cs89 on April 25, 2009 at 12:44 PM

To The Other McCain,

Thank you so much for expressing so eloquently everything I have ever thought about Maher. As my father would say “he is a little weed of a man”.

I will admit that I watched Politically Incorrect as I loved the concept, although this was more of a love/hate thing. I enjoy debate in general but Maher, of course, would consistently stack the panel with 3 lib guests. When you add Maher it was usually 4 against 1. This was infuriatingly unfair but I watched, nevertheless. I do not watch his show on HBO because it is so over-the-top biased that I just can’t take it.

When it comes to marriage, what Maher and his ilk never address is raising children. This is no surprise since he is way too selfish to ever want any; the idea of having a stable environment in which to raise children and that marriage is the best way to achieve this never crosses his mind. Even if it did, he would dismiss it as unnecessary because he has buddies in Hollywood that have kids and don’t get married so that would be proof enough for him.

I fantasize about just punching him straight in the face. If only someone, somewhere just one time would do that we would never have to hear from the wussy again.

yubley on April 25, 2009 at 12:44 PM

We barely beat some dudes fighting in flip-flop sandals in Iraq. You are afraid of any confrontation. How else can you explain a few guys with box cutters taking over an entire plane. You probably cross the street when you see black people.

Great! You’re a tough guy! Then put your money where your ass is and enlist tomorrow. I’m sure Barry can use tough asshats like you to lead the charge in Afghanistan. Should easy enough. Afterall, they are just “some dudes fighting in flip-flops”. Gawd!, you are hopelessly pathetic.

Fed45 on April 25, 2009 at 12:46 PM

Maher is a hater in the same league of Michael Moore. I’m in agreement with both of them on one point though, even if they don’t acknowledge the point, that being that they are both correct in hating themselves.

The only thing these people (and you can toss Pelosi in there too) are good for is as examples of the kind of person you don’t want to be. Vile creatures.

Spiritk9 on April 25, 2009 at 12:46 PM

I don’t back down and I don’t go through life afraid of everything like you cons.

robertnyc212 highschoollife on April 25, 2009 at 11:49 AM

IIIITTTTTT’SSSSS BAAAAACK!

“Good-bye Cruel World” needsalife has another troll name…

btw – my half-sister who is part African from Ivory Coast laughs her butt off every time a leftists resorts to pathetic things like “you probably cross the street when you see black people” about conservatives and republicans since she has been called a n-word by countless times by demonRATs!

Branch Rickey on April 25, 2009 at 12:47 PM

The Other McCain has really nailed Maher in this piece: 100% right on all points!!

I don’t know how anybody can watch Maher. He’s not entertaining – any more than a young teen throwing a tantrum is. And as The Other McCain points out, he not only lacks knowledge of the subjects he spouts on, he’s not even curious.

landlines on April 25, 2009 at 1:01 PM

I guarantee you that I have been in more physical fights than you. I don’t back down and I don’t go through life afraid of everything like you cons.

robertnyc212 on April 25, 2009 at 11:49 AM

Another pubescent creature hits the boards. Got all that new testosterone running through his veins and don’t know how to handle it. I’m surprised he can still type,his hand has got to be worn out.
Sonny if you’d really had been in all those fights, 1) you wouldn’t be advertising it. You wouldn’t want any possible opponent to know you were experienced.
2) you would not be looking for more fights. No matter how many times you fight or how many times you win, they are never fun.

oldernwiser on April 25, 2009 at 1:17 PM

robertnyc212 on April 25,2009 at 11:15 AM

robert, you are just another demented liberal who thinks we “crybaby conservatives” and “rubes” should just shut up and take all the crap the nutty left dishes out without standing up for ourselves. We will never do that, and hopefully you will be hearing a lot more from us soon.

silvernana on April 25, 2009 at 1:57 PM

Bill Maher…a small, angry, little little man.

coldwarrior on April 25, 2009 at 2:07 PM

I wish more people understood what this video communicates. Then they wouldn’t spend so much time trying to “reveal” the hypocrisy of Christians when Christians do something wrong.

True Christianity has nothing to do with man’s ability to be righteous. Christianity is the opposite – it is based on the knowledge that man has no ability to be righteous.

Daggett on April 25, 2009 at 2:27 PM

When did hotair add a comedy writer? (I can’t believe that this is supposed to be a criticism of Maher by a similarly ignorant punk)

corona on April 25, 2009 at 3:16 PM

Thinking as I do of Mr Maher, this piece comes across as flowery praise.

Chaz on April 25, 2009 at 3:54 PM

I once saw Bill Maher, on his old show Politically Incorrect, say that he supported capital punishment for minors as young as 12-years old. One of his guests, actor Chris Eigeman, was so shocked that he asked Maher to repeat his position, which he then did with pride. I remember this clearly. What I want to know is why is water-boarding the murderer of 3,000 people so wrong but executing a 12-year old murderer of 1 so right? What’s the moral distinction?

Sean68 on April 25, 2009 at 3:57 PM

That was an excellent and thought-provoking expose on Maher.

It was also a nice take-down of the jerk.

Well done!

kybowexar on April 25, 2009 at 5:06 PM

The Other McCain on April 25, 2009 at 12:19 PM

.
Astroturf? Go die! You are obviously new to this blog.

ronsfi on April 25, 2009 at 5:17 PM

Astroturf! Ha! Heheheheh!….Ha! ohh tooo funny. No. I am a genuine asshole. Astroturf…dude. You think ronsfi is a Donk plant? Hahahahahaha. Paranoia big destroyah!

ronsfi on April 25, 2009 at 5:24 PM

amerpundit on April 25, 2009 at 11:35 AM

With all due respect. No. I have not spent much time at KOS but…this kind of psychological projection is annoying to the extreme. One need not agree with BM but still, these tactics are lame and beneath my idea of HA’s stature. But hey I don’t own the place so maybe not.

ronsfi on April 25, 2009 at 5:32 PM

Sorry, McCain, you’re understanding of and argument against transubsantiation is incredibly shallow. Stick to things you know.

Btw, seeing as how transubstantiation was the belief of Christians since its very inception. Refuting a key belief of the first Christians would go a long way to undermining the legitimacy on all Christians who stand on their foundation.

Because protestants, a millennium and a half later, went through theological gymnastics to disbelieve previously central tenets of Christianity doesn’t mean that refuting early Christianity isn’t an effective tactic.

Nessuno on April 25, 2009 at 5:53 PM

Nessuno on April 25, 2009 at 5:53 PM

I’m shocked
that McCain added this controversy to the mix
that it took until 5:53pm for someone to object
that the objection would be so goofy

jgapinoy on April 25, 2009 at 9:55 PM

“That Maher would think it a serious critique of Christianity to mock a clearly unbiblical belief like transubstantion tells you a lot about his shallowness.”

No. I think I’ve found out something about *your* shallowness via this gratuitous statement of anti-Catholic belief which does nothing to add to the point of your essay. Transubstantiation has far more biblical warrant than the 16th century Protestant doctrine of sola scriptura. Please point out for me one lengthy section of Scripture that can back up sola scriptura to the degree that transubstantiation can be backed up by the sixth chapter of John. Which part of “unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you” don’t you understand?

Do you have some problem with sussing out the meaning of the word “is” in the following passage? “While they were eating, Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his disciples said, “Take and eat; this is my body.” Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you for this is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins.” (Mt 26)

Or is 1 Corinthians 11:27-29 too unscriptural for you? “Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself.”

Your statement is without foundation. But the doctrine has always caused trouble. From John 6: “Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him. Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me…Then many of his disciples who were listening said, “This saying is hard; who can accept it?”…As a result of this, many (of) his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him.

Look, if God Incarnate could do it (transubstantiation), if God Incarnate said He’d do it, why don’t you believe that He did it? If He could pull off the Incarnation, I’m sure He’d have little trouble with transubstantiation. You believe the former (presumably) but why not the latter? You only thereby cut yourself off from a great source of grace for eternal life. God wnats to be far more one with you than you imagine. He offers you His very flesh, His very substance, and you spurn it as superstition and somehow “unbiblical”. If so, it is your loss.

Matteo on April 26, 2009 at 7:02 PM

Congrats, The Other McCain, you’ve earned a mention at my blog for your amazingly ignorant post slamming Catholics as shallow and unbiblical:

Hot Air Blog Post Attacks Catholics as Shallow and Unbiblical.

Sydney Carton on April 28, 2009 at 11:18 AM

Sydney Carton on April 28, 2009 at 11:18 AM

Matteo and Sydney..

it’s ‘Remembrance’ not cannibalism.

As Catholics, you would think symbolism wouldn’t be lost on you.

DaveC on April 28, 2009 at 10:58 PM

As a moron, DaveC, I’m sure that the truth is lost on you.

corona on July 9, 2009 at 11:21 AM