Bill Maher Unbaptizes Mitt Romney's Father-In-Law

Naomi Watts on Real Time with Bill Maher

Klein: The disaster is far from over. They've actually just relocated. The disaster was on Wall Street and they have moved the disaster to Main Street by accepting those debts and you said they didn't have to bomb, the bomb has yet to detonate. The bomb is the debt that has now been transferred to the taxpayers so it detonates when, if John McCain becomes president in the midst of an economic crisis and says look we're in trouble, we have a disaster on our hands, we have to privatize social security, we can't afford health care, we can't afford food stamps, we need more deregulation, more privatization. The thesis of the Shock Doctrine is you need a disaster to rationalize these very unpopular policies so the real disaster has yet to come.The real disaster is the debt that is going to explode on the American taxpayers. And then they do economic shock therapy.

They had to step in, but I don't think they had to step in in the way they did. The reason why the stock market went up on Wall Street today is because it's Christmas morning. Imagine waking up and being told your credit card debits have been wiped out, your mortgage has been erased. There's a fairy godmother that has taken care of you. A guardian angel. But actually that's the tax payers.

Sullivan: You're favoring nationalizing the other companies.and most industries?

Klein: No, I'm just saying. This is socialism for the rich.

Maher: Why are you so hostile towards this?

Sullivan: Because I think the fundamental thesis that she is proposing is wrong. I think the reason why we're in this situation is not demonizing a few individual companies, it's systemic. And part of the reason we have this is the American People. The American people since the 70's have had stagnating income, so they decided to get something for nothing. And the government never told them they couldn't. So we have the stock bubble of the 90's and now we have the real estate bubble in the 2000's.

Klein: That's not why we have this.

Sullivan: And the government never told them they couldn't. Wall Street is to blame for giving these people these loans, but no one is ever forced to take out a bad load they cannot pay.

Klein: The reason why this bubble was allowed to inflate was not that the American people demanded it, it was spectacularly profitable for Wall Street. Just in bonuses last year, they handed out 33 billion dollars in bonuses... The problem is we have crybaby capitalism where when the times are good they are preaching deregulation and when the times are bad they want the bail-outs. The problem I have with your argument is where is this ideal capitalism of which you speak?

Here is the problem with Andrew Sullivan's view of "personal responsibility", it doesn't work. If you remove regulation of the market greedy people take advantage of the lack of protections and prey on the vulnerable, just like if you remove speed limits, those who don't normally speed will, and those who already do will do so even more. The role of government is to govern men, as in protect them from themselves and each other. The common man does not have the education nor the understanding of economics that, oh let's just say a financial lender does!!! So Sullivan's "personal responsibility" belief has been tested on a national level and has fallen flat, and his cavalier attitude of "it's everyone's fault" smacks of the typical conservative response they give when presented with the consequences of their ideology: First, say it is not a time to point fingers. Second, spread the blame around and include the general public if possible. And finally when all else fails, resort to the "No true Scotsman" fallacy and claim that the ultra right wing Bush Administration are really a bunch of leftists and not "real conservatives". No, really, he actually tried to pull that.

This financial meltdown is the baby of deregulation and the people who have championed it are going to have to own up to it.

Bill Maher: Conspiracy Weary

Bill I normally would consider myself a fan, but I lost a little respect for you. It is one thing to discredit, it is another thing dismiss with a horse laugh.

Tell you what. We will stop asking questions when you answer them seriously:

Why did the building fall at near free fall speed?

Why was there molten metal in the basement?

Why did Cheney tell NORAD to stand down repeatedly?

Why were war games being held on the day of 9-11 which conveniently confused fighter pilots to where the actual threat was?

Why did Bush continue into Washington Elementary after the first plane hit the first tower?

Why did he continue his photo-op after the second plane hit and after Andrew Card notified him that "America is under attack?"

Why have they not released the video footage from the Hilton of the plane hitting the pentagon?

Why were there audible blasts prior to the collaspe of the towers?

Why did eye witness after eye witness speak of bomb blasts?

Why does the 9-11 Comission Report completely omit the collapse of WTC #7

Why did WTC #7 fall in the first place?

Why did someone on September 6th and 7th purchase 4,744 put options on United Airlines on the Chicago Board Options Exchange?

Why did someone on September 10 purchase 4,516 put options on American Airlines on the Chicago exchange?

Why was nobody held responsible for such a failure of government?

As you can see, these are not questions from a crazy perspective, they are legitimate questions. And if the answer is incompetence, then why are these people still in power, and why do they continually claim they a strong on national defense and not get laughed out of the room?

Why Bill? Why?

So since you so easily dismiss these questions as the musings of an individual who should be on Paxil, allow me to dismiss you as being an establishment ass clown.

Ron Paul on Real Time with Bill Maher

Apparently Bill Maher thinks the world of Ron Paul. I have to admit that if I had to vote for a Republican, I would vote for Ron Paul. Except I know what Ron Paul really is, he is a Libertarian. And while I totally agree with the Libertarian view of the government having as little to do with our personal lives, Libertarians believe said argument should apply to big business. I disagree tremendously with that and I would believe that anyone who remembers Enron and the whole deregulation fiasco would agree with me that leaving business to regulate itself is not exactly intelligent.

Still, given the fact that Ron Paul stands a snowball's chance in hell to win the Republican nomination, I am glad he is there to show how ridiculous the front runners are.