HOME | DD
Plowplot — Rush-Limbaugh should Be Fired
Published: 2015-03-07 08:32:54 +0000 UTC; Views: 270; Favourites: 9; Downloads: 1
Redirect to original
Description
For those of you who think Bill O'Reilly is going to be fired for being a pathological liar just remember, Rush Limbaugh has been saying things like this for over 30 years and he's still employed spewing hate.Related content
Comments: 11
The Fairness Doctrine is supposed to give balance to political views on the air. But it also let me know that people like Limpballs exist.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
May he find himself at the end of a long rope...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I don't really see a lot of his work. From what little I have seen of him he's not good at his job. He presents information very poorly, his oratory doesn't really flow well so it's hard to watch him. He tries too hard to be funny when he isn't. I know he did that atheist movie that was just painful to watch. As for his politics, he's said things I agree with and things I don't agree with so over all I'm a little apathetic towards him.
I don't see enough of him to have a powerful opinion.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
He's the kind of atheist that I wish new atheism would stop associating with. They make a big point of logic, reason and solid thinking, and Maher just takes cheap shots at religion over and over, generalized points... there are a lot of things he's not wrong about, but he isn't an impressive advocate for intellectual atheism. And on top of that, he's an anti-vaxxer, which is just a huge big warning sign right there.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah, Maher, as much as he claims science and reason, is still a product of the Hippie movement and dabbled in the new-agey meta/naturalist movement of the 80s. It seems those influences have overridden his sense of logic and science when it comes to topics like health. He's not just anti-vaxxer, but anti-medicine in general, preferring to believe that being all "natural" and vegetarian is enough to keep one healthy. I find it interesting that he can dismiss mountains of scientific evidence for modern medicine while claiming the science camp, and that he can dismiss religious faith-based ideology while clinging to his faith-based ideology for health.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I liked his comedy at first, but increasingly I noticed generalization and stupidity. His criticism was unsophisticated. Phrases like "religion caused most wars" or his constant generalization of islam. And then his anti-science nuttery... why the dickens does he get the Dawkins award? Is this really who we want to represent us? For pete's sake, if we want somebody hardline on religion, better to go read PZ MYers' blog- at least he shows some nuance.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I guess Maher is like most people I know - not perfect. When it comes to supporting climate change, evolution, science education, etc., he's very much on board, and I suppose that's why people thought he was eligible enough to win a Dawkins award. But there are times when he says things that just make me cringe. I agree that there are better spokespeople out there for atheists and science/reason-minded individuals, and I also agree that the art nuance is dying. In fact, I had planned to write a journal post about the death nuance, but half way through, it got too depressing to finish.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
It's one thing for your average joe to be like that- people are on the average both ignorant and prone to generalization, including atheists. But is that really something we should expect from a leading figure? Pleb logic, like what you might hear from some guy at your neighbour's barbecue? If the movement values intellectualism, then favouring the likes of Maher comes across as hypocritical. We should hold ourselves to a higher standard than that.
As for nuance- nuance is alive and well, it's just that, as ever, there aren't many people who actually appreciate it enough that it's a mainstream value.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I agree. On the one hand, atheism is a big tent, and there is plenty of space for people of all mindsets. Excluding people like Maher would simply be elitist. But on the other hand, this is a battle of hearts and minds, and one doesn't succeed in that arena with crudeness. And I would go one step further, as far as leadership goes, and say that more than just valuing intellectualism, we need people who can both understand and articulate science. Intellectualism without empiricism is just bullshit with big words. Maher appreciates science and accepts science when it suits him, but he is too dismissive of science based on his own whims and misrepresents the evidence (or lack thereof) just as badly as the faithful do at times.
As far as nuance goes, I think that the truth of most topics is buried in nuance, but most people seem unwilling to dig that deep. People just parrot blanket statements, take sides and offer unwavering support even of the most egregious nonsense while blasting and dismissing the "other side" regardless of any good points it might make. Good debate takes time distill, but everything today is TLDR;. I just feel like the internet age has taken everyone's natural tendency to forsake reason for emotion, and everyone's tendency to be opinionated and intellectually lazy, and completely amplified all of that. If you can't piss someone off in 140 characters or less, you lose. Sure, the internet has gotten a lot more people involved in a lot more debate, some of which is quite helpful of course, but a good majority of that debate is shallow, crass, and quite meaningless. I'm certainly thankful for the few who still appreciate nuance, but I generally feel like the volume and nature of argument today really drowns it out. Of course, it could just be that modern media is simply magnifying what always was, but I really feel it more these days.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'm not suggesting his like be excluded- but he's being put at the very forefront. He's receiving awards. He's a leader of the movement. That is what I would see him excluded from. Maher panders to the already converted, with unintelligent bashings of everything new atheism likes to bash on. We need our Bill Nyes and Neil Tysons far more than we need any more Mahers.
That, I am afraid, is the human element. Most people don't like to rethink ideas, open their minds- it's easier to take in ideas and arguments from your own movement instead. I don't think this is to do with google or the modern era of computers- people have always been prone to generalization.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0