Maher writes: "So, as these things go, even if the terrible damage can never be undone, at least the healing can begin. And we can move on to the next time we choose sides and pretend to be outraged about nothing. When did we get it in our heads that we have the right to never hear anything we don't like?"
Bill Maher HBO promo poster. (art: HBO)
Please Stop Apologizing
22 March 12
his week, Robert De Niro made a joke about first ladies, and Newt Gingrich said it was "inexcusable and the president should apologize for him." Of course, if something is "inexcusable," an apology doesn't make any difference, but then again, neither does Newt Gingrich.
Mr. De Niro was speaking at a fund-raiser with the first lady, Michelle Obama. Here's the joke: "Callista Gingrich. Karen Santorum. Ann Romney. Now do you really think our country is ready for a white first lady?"
The first lady's press secretary declared the joke "inappropriate," and Mr. De Niro said his remarks were "not meant to offend." So, as these things go, even if the terrible damage can never be undone, at least the healing can begin. And we can move on to the next time we choose sides and pretend to be outraged about nothing.
When did we get it in our heads that we have the right to never hear anything we don't like? In the last year, we've been shocked and appalled by the unbelievable insensitivity of Nike shoes, the Fighting Sioux, Hank Williams Jr., Cee Lo Green, Ashton Kutcher, Tracy Morgan, Don Imus, Kirk Cameron, Gilbert Gottfried, the Super Bowl halftime show and the ESPN guys who used the wrong cliché for Jeremy Lin after everyone else used all the others. Who can keep up?
This week, President Obama's chief political strategist, David Axelrod, described Mitt Romney's constant advertising barrage in Illinois as a "Mittzkrieg," and instantly the Republican Jewish Coalition was outraged and called out Mr. Axelrod's "Holocaust and Nazi imagery" as "disturbing." Because the message of "Mittzkrieg" was clear: Kill all the Jews. Then the coalition demanded not only that Mr. Axelrod apologize immediately but also that Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz "publicly rebuke" him. For a pun! For punning against humanity!
The right side of America is mad at President Obama because he hugged the late Derrick Bell, a law professor who believed we live in a racist country, 22 years ago; the left side of America is mad at Rush Limbaugh for seemingly proving him right.
If it weren't for throwing conniption fits, we wouldn't get any exercise at all.
I have a better idea. Let's have an amnesty - from the left and the right - on every made-up, fake, totally insincere, playacted hurt, insult, slight and affront. Let's make this Sunday the National Day of No Outrage. One day a year when you will not find some tiny thing someone did or said and pretend you can barely continue functioning until they apologize.
If that doesn't work, what about this: If you see or hear something you don't like in the media, just go on with your life. Turn the page or flip the dial or pick up your roll of quarters and leave the booth.
The answer to whenever another human being annoys you is not "make them go away forever." We need to learn to coexist, and it's actually pretty easy to do. For example, I find Rush Limbaugh obnoxious, but I've been able to coexist comfortably with him for 20 years by using this simple method: I never listen to his program. The only time I hear him is when I'm at a stoplight next to a pickup truck.
When the lady at Costco gives you a free sample of its new ham pudding and you don't like it, you spit it into a napkin and keep shopping. You don't declare a holy war on ham.
I don't want to live in a country where no one ever says anything that offends anyone. That's why we have Canada. That's not us. If we sand down our rough edges and drain all the color, emotion and spontaneity out of our discourse, we'll end up with political candidates who never say anything but the safest, blandest, emptiest, most unctuous focus-grouped platitudes and cant. In other words, we'll get Mitt Romney.
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
 16 May 2013
|
 18 May 2013
|
 16 May 2013
|
 17 May 2013
|
 16 May 2013
|
 17 May 2013
|
|
18 May 2013
|
 17 May 2013
|
 18 May 2013
|
Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
They have remained SILENT over Glenn Beck and other Conservatives spreading links to DOCTORED PHOTOS (a la Breitbart) of AND//OR LIES about TRAYVON MARTIN to maliciously and falsely portray him AND BLACK MEN generally as A "THREAT" AND "DANGEROUS."
AND NOW they manufacture an issue to SLANDER & PORTRAY IN A FALSE AND NEGATIVE LIGHT Tom Hanks and President Obama to FALSELY PORTRAY THEMSELVES as caring about the very negative image of Blacks that THEY and their minions like Limbaugh (and Brietbart copy-cats) et al DAILY spread of Black (aka "BLAH") people.
This effort to cover-up, distract away from, and self-exonerate CONSERVATIVE WHITE-SUPREMACY is:
ABSOLUTELY FIENDISH!
For more on techniques perfected by Breitbart to race-bait and stoke White racial resentment, fear, and bigotry towards Black people for political purposes, please see my article:
http://open.salon.com/blog/ronrobinson/2012/03/01/andrew_breitbart_the_anders_breivik_of_rightwing_media_dies
The examples you give is exactly Bill Maher's point. When the trivial is used to either balance the truly outrageous or to create outrage when none is warrented, makes the truly horrible, watered down.
Your post makes a very important point, perhaps even more important than the author's point above.
However, I do thoroughly agree with Bill's point above.
Maher asks: "When did we get it in our heads that we have the right to never hear anything we don't like?"
Indeed, when *did* we become such sensitive little lilies ? It's been going on for over thirty years in the public schools and in homes across America when parents and teachers both decided that it was more important to teach children to "feel good about themselves" than to teach them how to accomplish anything. Thus, of course, ignoring that fact that what truly makes any human feel good about themselves IS accomplishing something.
So, then it became all about "feel good" words. This is why audiences now "boo" comedians for content. At one time people either laughed or did not laugh. Audiences didn't take it on themselves to "edit" the author for political correctness.
It also explains this knee-jerk sense of entitlement TO whine and moan over *anything* said that didn't succeed at making them "feel good" about themselves.
Many of these people have spent their formative years being pampered, pandered, and catered to, such that anything said not to their immediate liking is considered an outrage against their own "privileged" class, i.e., the child raised and educated only to "feel good about" themselves.
I think if you consider Lenny Bruce, comedians and other artists do have a history of being mistreated for what they say. In fact, back in the 50's if any performer stepped outside the politically correct boundaries of a lily white homogeneous world, they stood a chance at being ostracized.
The current problem is one of false equivalencies. The false belief that all politicians are corrupt and there is no difference between the D's and the R's. The refusal of the press to challenge the status quo, along with their acceptance that the trivial is important has demeaned our political dialogue into dueling irrelevancies.
In my opinion it started when it was discovered that Bill Clinton was getting BJ's from a consenting adult, while he worked. Totally irrelevant to anything, but it was enough to initiate an impeachment trial, while actual law breaking has not.
Your commentary about society and politically correct speech along with making every child think he is "special" instead of actually treating each kid as an individual is an important subject that deserves lots of discussion. I am just not sure it is what Bill Maher is talking about.
Excellent post, and your points are well taken. It was not, however, my intent to analyze or re-hash what Bill Maher is talking about, only to offer one possible answer to his question: "When did we get it in our heads that we have the right to never hear anything we don't like?"
Therefore, your observations re: Lenny Bruce et al, while quite instructive and very important subject matter, do not seem specifically germane to the narrower scope of my observation.
Thank you, however, for taking the time to respond.
I also agree with Ron and think we need to sort out those things said and done that are totally not acceptable and those that make for humorously absurd commentary. (Problem is so much of what the right does is totally unacceptable!)
The right's constant exaggerated shock and outraged response to the left's attempts to deal with the right's outrageous policies and opinions with humor, aren't worth acknowledging.
As always, the rights' outrage is meant to present themselves as the victims of the left -- and deflect any justified criticism. Meanwhile, they are busy using all their power to make permanent victims of the 99%.
And while the Dems act like ostriches instead of confronting the God awful truth, Americans become more disgusted with politics, don't vote and the election process becomes a free for all mess... once again. Let Ilya Sherman be a lesson. You want to get elected? Talk publicly about Wall Street securities fraud and wrongful foreclosures and absurd evictions... Don't follow the Obama party line code of silence or offensive remarks like "homeowners bought homes they could not afford." They were sold inflated appraisals and false promises... By who? Wall Street crooks.
I wish those who voted for Bush would stand up and apologize to the rest of us. We would never be in this mess if it weren't for his (stolen) 'election'. But, they won't.
I wish that those who sat by passively though the last 30 years, not bothering to take notice of what the right was up to, would stand up, go march and now get involved.
We, Americans, are responsible for the government we have if we sit on our behinds and don't get out in the streets and get involved in every way possible.
And by the way, though I'm not a fan of Obama's middle-of-the-r oad policies when he takes conservative positions,there 's no way that the Democrats and Republican are equally responsible for what's gone down.
And the Republicans will never, ever, admit that. They've convinced many that it was all the Democrats.
And those would be . . . ?
Lesser evil? Actually, Obama is a very good president. If you just overlook his wars of aggression, mass slaughter of Afghan, Pakistani, Iraqi, Libyan, Yemeni, Palestinian, and Somali children. And ignore his evisceration of civil liberties. Actually, otherwise, a good leader. Of course, the same could be said of Hitler.
And it's Sheyman, also BTW.
Actually, GWB was not elected even once. I live in Florida and I can tell you that the Republican muscle machine was down here to make sure that the recount went their way. Also, in the 2004 election Ohio voting machines did not function correctly, and Cuyohoga County recorded more votes for Bush than were registered voters. I met Douglas Dillon, a computer expert from Stanford University who told our political group that he had personally called John Kerry, who won by 3.5 million votes actually, that election fraud could be proven; but Kerry declined to take the issue into the House of Representatives and challenge the results. A pity really as the US was poorly served by the "selection" of Bush Jr.
And John Kass (Chgo Tribune) thinks Illinois is crooked.
It is impossible to express an idea or an opinion without someone, somewhere, taking offense. Which means, if somehow we manage to create a society in which no one is offended, there will be no ideas or opinions. Even then, someone will say "your nose is ugly!" and claim to be offended by said nose while the owner of the nose claims to be offended by the speaker.
Come to think of it, this could be the basis for a new Monty Python sketch. Which would, of course, be utterly offensive, and very very funny.
It has nothing to do with Jews per se.
Now I sound like a WWII geek, huh. I'm not really, but I do love history :)
Well said!! Your explanation rings true. For the record, however, I have relatives who suffered through WWII in Britain and they referred to the relentless indiscriminate bombing of London and other cities by the Nazis as a "blitzkreig."
Of course,the bottom line is that it had nothing to do with Jews per se.
Sometimes political correctness can go too far but oftentimes it's necessary to express outrage. Overall I think we're moving in a better direction.
But here's the difference! I am a "leftist," a self-professed "democratic socialist" and, on a bad day ... well, I'll let that ride.
Here's the problem. Some friends of mine (American right-wingers) constantly complain about being harassed by "liberals." Living outside the USA, I worry that a colleague of mine, teaching a "Women's Studies" course for "freaking" sake, got suspended for two weeks without pay and compelled to take a "sensitivity" program with one of her corporate higher-ups. And what was her Ph.D. in? Women's Studies! (Her offence was to criticize "female circumcision," this alientating some Muslim students.)
And me? I teach the "Philosophy of Science," and what happened? Some nit-wit Christian Fundamentalist complained that I taught "evolution" despite the fact that she and some of her classmates don't "believe in" evolution.
Apologize my ass!
At some time (just before the apocalypse or the long good-bye), Democrats, or "democrats" or decent people have to learn that it's going to be a "rude" awakening, if awaken we do.
I'd say the inmates are about to take over the asylum, but that would be unfair to the inmates.
Like all things, selectivity is an oft-ignored quantity and I'd only 1/2-agree with Maher. It was hard to ignore Limp-balls as he was shoved down our throats by every media outlet on the English speaking planet (and beyond) and there are some things and people that CANNOT be ignored and they get away with much by calling their hate-speech "entertainment" or worse still, "comedy".
Carlin and the likes of Scotland's Billy Connoly are comedians who stick it straight to people. Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart are kind of politico-comedi c commentators who are very clever and funny but take on both sides at times for a chuckle.
Maher himself (can't think of when I last watched or heard him) has been know to cross the line into bad taste and quite recently from what I heard (somebody remind me please). Maybe this is his way of wriggling out of it.
I love to laugh, including at myself betimes and a good belly-laugh or gufffaw is one of the most healing sounds I know of.
But it should not be at the expense of someone or something that are not in positions to defend themselves -that's humorless cowardice, in my 'umble opinion.
I don´t apologize for telling you, that
you were absolutely wrong giving one
million to Trump or was it Newt or maybe
Obama?
GET MONEY OUT OF POLITICS!
Roosevelt in a message to congress (1938)
"A democracy is in danger if the people
tolerate private powers...
(Corporations, Adelson/Bill Maher,
AIPAC)
... to a point where it is stronger than
the democratic state itself.
That, in it´s essence is fascism."
principles are for both sides
Some appointees to the Court have risen above the partisan intent of their sponsors, and have become the sort of exemplary beings the power of the Court demands. The current crop is too weak and too moronic to understand the potential for justice and even-handedness that their position offers them. They do not have the spiritual capacity to be more than brain-dead robotic regurgitators of right-wing cant. How tragic. Tragic for them, and for the country.
Bill Maher understands this, and contributed a much higher percentage of his income than the right wing sources in an attempt to redress the imbalance the "Supreme Losers" rammed down the throat of the country. Complain about what Maher did AFTER you get Citizens United repealed, and get the truly evil money out of politics.
Here, Bill complains about people complaining, on his free time off from hosting his show - on which he mostly complains.
The real problem, I think, is that people in the US don't know how to disagree. We've lost all debating skills, and with those went our comfort with disagreement. So, we turn to calls for censorship, or in Bill Maher's case, a kind of inattention bordering on apathy.
Instead, let's keep complaining - especially about imbeciles and hate-mongers like Limbaugh and Colter. But let's do it in celebration of verbal argument, which is the bloodless and necessary way to resolve conflict in a democracy.
The problem with Maher, Oberlmann etc... is that they often let their passion and anger get in the way of developing a consistent and powerful message that can be heard by those who might disagree.
While I might agree with their points, too often we produce spokespeople who are only able to do what Rush, Colter and O'Reilly do: Preach to the converted.
BTW: This is one of the reasons Elizabeth Warren is so exciting!!!
Hear-hear! (or is it Here-here?); OK, lets go for "Heah-heah!"
I'm not Canadian but agree that this was downright flippant and -sorry to say it, typical blinkered American snide shots at other countries reminiscent of Reagan's heavy-handed sound bites without substance! I expected nothing else from All-American Ronnie but Maher should know a bit better.
And I'm a pretty thick-skinned Scotsman.
You submitted a great post in re: George Carlin, but here you seem to miss the joke. I am certain that the post you were quoting submitted by thepass was tongue-in-cheek satire. thepass could correct me if I'm wrong.
And, as a Scotsman, you may be unaware that there is a running joke in America re: what is called "Canadian nice". The joke is based upon the fact that most Canadians are much more polite and well mannered than are most Americans. It is actually a "reverse compliment" in most cases.
Whether or not this perception is 100% accurate, it is fair game for a comedian to refer to a prevalent attitude, whether or not the comedian himself subscribes to said attitude.
This is definitely *not* one of our "typical blinkered American snide shots at other countries", although those too exist in shameful abundance here as well.
So, to all involved, and to paraphrase the apparent intent of Bill's article: let's all just lighten the f*ck UP
I am one of your Celtic cousins, (Irish), and historically, if we hadn't been able to laugh at ourselves and our predicaments, none of us would be here today to prate on about humor in political comment threads.
It's not all the same old "political correctness,"-- don't get upset over "nothing to see here."
Go check out the SPLC, and look at the statistics on the damage that giving hate speech free reign on the airwaves has done. Or go ask Dr. Tiller what he thinks--Oh, but he can't. How many times did O'Reilly call him "Dr. Tiller the baby killer?"
re my comment above, to wit: "historically, if we hadn't been able to laugh at ourselves and our predicaments,
none of us [Celts] would be here...."
While your comments are very accurate and quite valuable, they have nothing at all to do with the subject under discussion between myself and reiverpacific.
In any class on formal logic, rebutting questions that were never raised is referred to as "setting up straw men" (in order to knock them down). This is one of many formal logical fallacies that serve to invalidate a premise, however else well stated and logically consistent.
So, again, wonderful post - just disconnected to the comments it was apparently based upon. We were not discussing abortion in Ireland, here, or in any other country. The subject of the discussion was American humor. Big jump.
Just as it could be said that Russ is a woman hater and a jerk so can it be said
he has the right to say what he says. However, I have the right to call him a woman hater and a jerk.
But to be clear, I don't think Limbaugh should lose his sponsors for those remarks any more than I think he's entitled to keep those sponsors: in a society that guarantees free speech, the sponsors are free to let their money talk as they see fit.
That said, it is we the people who own the airwaves, and any ass that uses our air to spread blatant and potentially dangerous falsehoods (e.g., the only reason a woman would require a contraceptive pill every day is that she's having sex very frequently) should be held to some account.
I agree that we shouldn't ask for or offer apologies anymore. But we should call them out and set the record straight at every opportunity.
We don't need Rush to apologize; We all know who and what he is. Let's make sure others understand the difference between a Bill Maher and a Rush Limbaugh as well as a Fox "News" versus CBS, NBC, MSNBC etc. Thinking people can tell the difference and the others; Well, they'll keep their heads where they've always been.
Maher is simply wrong. There IS a difference between the broad insults of a comedian and the concerted, libelous attack of Rush. It has nothing to do with apology. One is against the law, the other is not!! Neither is acceptable, and Maher is personally responsible for making this point more difficult to make by his irresponsible and foul "jokes".
Congrats Bill, you are helping the Republicans. Congrats.
He reminds me of Clinton this way- Both are brilliant, but ultimately irresponsible egomaniacs who can't put their own impulses aside for the greater good. If Maher wants Obama to win so much, he should simply close his mouth.
He says we don't have to listen, but at the same time he doesn't have to address his verbal flatulence to a national audience. No one is forcing him. Stop blaming ME for having ears and a mind that pick up and respond to the crap you spout.
I'm a hard core Lib who agrees with the IDEA of what he says BTW, just not the way he says it.
1 War without end; (Commander-In-C hief?)
2. U S Treasury Handily 'Emptied' (given to Friends);
3. U S $ Printing Presses Rolling
4. NDAA/Further demise of The Bill of Rights.
and this discussion is centered on ?
Are You Kidding?
WAKE UP !!
I cannot believe that the Republican Jewish political folk of Illinois are that stupid; and am offended that they have so little regard for the gray matter of rest of the country try and snow us with something so incredibly asinine.
I can see by your article that you are trying to say we need to stop complaining and go on - do not think so and interesting you put all this trash that is being sent across the airways that when citizens particularly women stand up and say No More of this abuse, you call it complaining.
To be honest I am not sure why you are even in the limelight and are given a voice. I need to pay more attention when I listen to whom is sponsoring you.
Yes we have free speech, we live in a free country and I wish those who have the air ways would be more responsible about what they are saying.
RSS feed for comments to this post