Page 1 of 7 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 64
  1. #1

    Politically incorrect?

    Has PI turned up missing from your viewing area? It's still on the scheduale but is always preempted with a "news special" I know that a few markets have stopped broadcasting the show temp. But does anyone have an idea when it will be back??
    Your signature here!

  2. #2
    I don't know when it will be back, but, presumably, you know the reason for its absence, don't you?
    Postatem obscuri lateris nescitis

  3. #3
    Because advertisers are too afraid to hear actual opinions expressed. They'd rather have everybody on air follow the safe line down the middle to protect their investment.

  4. #4
    No, it's just that an arrogant blowhard needs to be humbled every once in a while. Sure this is America, you're free to say what you want, but ill-time your words and you better be prepared for the backlash.

  5. #5

    Thumbs down which is another way of saying "patriotic correctness" is the New P.C. . . .

    . . .and any violations of it will be regarded as yelling fire in a crowded theater.
    it sounds to me like the terrorists may've already won, by provoking us into reverting to our most fearful instincts- namely, our fear of straight talk.
    Last edited by vulcantouch; 09-30-2001 at 12:49 AM.

  6. #6
    Ever hear of the saying "Don't rock the boat you're riding in"?

    What he said was simply tactless and poorly timed. It has nothing to do with having his freedom of speech revoked. He mouthed off about the wrong thing at the wrong time and angered too many people. Sure, it isn't fair; but democracy isn't about fairness, it's about majority rule.

    Freedom of speach allows you to cuss out your boss; but you're still most likely going to get fired. You can walk up to a woman at a club and say anything you want; but it might get you slapped. You can tell a co-worker his wife is a dirty *****; but don't be surprised if he breaks your nose.

    It's not about freedom of speech, it's about cause and effect.

  7. #7
    For those who don't know exactly what happened: Bill Mauer made some comments, on his first show after Sept. 11, about a US military retaliation being "cowardly." Thus, his sponsors, Sears and another company I don't remember, pulled their support of the show. I'm not sure if they recieved phone calls requesting them to pull sponsorship or if they decided to do it on their own, the news report I read didn't say.

    No sponsors=no money; no money=no TV show

    The real question here is the motive behind pulling sponsorship. Did these companies just not want to be associated with Mauer after these comments? Were they truly offended by the comments? Were they pressured by TV viewers? I don't know. Maybe someone else can shed some light on this question. (Although I already know what the cynics are going to say)

    Personally, I've never liked Bill Mauer. I totally disagree with about 95% percent of the crap he spouts off, so I don't watch his show anymore.

  8. #8
    Actually, what happened was Maher said that to fly a plane into a building knowing you'll die and stay in the plane is not cowardly, to fire a missile from thousands of miles away is. It has nothing to do with honor or soldiers, it has to do with the definition of the word "cowardly", the stigma it wields, and the politicians who give deadly orders from the safety of their desks. Read AICN's latter 2 stories on this to learn (warning, reading of AICN Talkback will result in your brain turning to mush, avoid the Talkback until after you've read BOTH stories at least):

    I think it's pretty interesting that ABC chose to air the show without sponsors rather than give into the censorship and fascism that was gripped our country since the terrorist acts on Sept 11th.

    BTW, before any of you ask, my position is that Maher is both right and wrong, both types of acts are cowardly and non-cowardly in different ways. There's no question that the terrorist actions are unspeakably despicable, but that's a different discussion altogether. Perhaps it's not cowardly to knowingly take your own life in the chasing of something you believe in, but to kill thousands of innocent civilians instead of facing military forces, that is cowardly. Yes, to order your fellow countrymen to kill and die to advance your agenda while you stay at home, push papers and give press conferences instead of looking into the eyes of the people you're having killed is a bit cowardly in a way, but anybody with a conscience will have a lot of personal demons to face when they give the order to kill, as well as facing opposition of fellow countrymen and those who speak for the people you had killed, and that is often NOT cowardly. I think the dichotomy of the issue is far too complicated for any simple debate or a quick sound bite, and people opposed to this type of free speech and those who would like to lynch Bill Maher for his opinions need to take a good strong look at Senator Joseph McCarthy first.
    Darth Vader is becoming the Mickey Mouse of Star Wars.

    "We named the dog 'Chewbacca'!"
    The use of a lightsaber does not make one a Jedi, it is the ability to not use it.

  9. #9

    Question bb: "Ever hear of the saying 'Don't rock the boat you're riding in'?"

    -indeed i have; it refers to not endangering one's own group. so if you're implying that maher's remarks even come Close to constituting an endangering of america, i'd say the speciousness of your analogy speaks for itself

    "What he said was simply tactless and poorly timed. It has nothing to do with having his freedom of speech revoked"
    -i didn't say nuthin about freedom of speech cuz, as you correctly point out, this is more about commerce and majority rule (i.e., the adult version of peer pressure) than rights. that said, anyone tuning in to a show called Politically Incorrect in a time of crisis have only themselves to blame if they don't like what they hear.
    meanwhile, it's "tactlessness and poor timing" that don't have nuthin to do with nuthin. "tactlessness and poor timing" are part of the risk run by a society that Claims to value freedom of thought and speech. if they don't Really value them, i'd again say their actions speak for themselves

    "He mouthed off about the wrong thing at the wrong time and angered too many people"
    -if only "wrong thing", "wrong time" and "too many people" were the black-and-white issues you imply. but of course they ain't.

    "democracy isn't about fairness, it's about majority rule"
    -indeed; which is one reason that our view of democracy as the world's best possible option should not be exempt from questioning. personally i think a meritocracy's much preferable which, for practical reasons, we already have to some extent. and thank goodness for that: the notion that the voice of an ignoramus should carry the same weight as that of an expert is, as the history of democracy has repeatedly shown, a recipe for disaster.
    as for maher's remarks: our so-called leaders were practically begging for his kind of rebuttal with their repeated, self-serving and jingoistic contentions that the terrorists were "cowards". as per the case i've already made, they most certainly were not. maher was throwing light on our leaders' hypocritical spin, nothing more. tact shouldn't enter into such critiques, now or ever. if our country's now so fearful that it can't handle such a "tactless, poorly-timed" critique, then not only have the terrorists scored a true victory, it will be a victory we Deserve to have scored against us.
    personally i find some of maher's sensibility self-servingly skewed to favor his own hefner-wannabe lifestyle, and think his PETA affiliation is completely off the wall (why embrace clarity in so many other areas but get all fuzzy when it comes to animals? to fool starlets in the back of your limo into thinking that deep down you're a sweetie? ). but agreeing with him across the board's hardly the point- i admire his often-exhilirating ability to stay on-target and puncture his guests' attempts to obscure issues

    btw bb, i'm still on the lookout for your vintage accessory wants for our binocs trade; no luck yet, but i'll keep you informed

    jt: "anybody with a conscience will have a lot of personal demons to face when they give the order to kill. . ."
    -alas, offhand i can't think of a single leader of ours to whom this description would apply

    ". . . as well as facing opposition of fellow countrymen and those who speak for the people you had killed"
    -alas, the social circles of those in power are so self-servingly circumscribed as to all but eliminate the possibility of any such encounters. it ain't like we'll ever see bush senior at a local bar, for example; instead he'll be sticking to his country clubs, where members know they'll face expulsion if they even Try to confront him thusly-
    Last edited by vulcantouch; 09-30-2001 at 11:37 PM.

  10. #10
    Yes. But, does the show still air in your viewing area?

    Bill wasn't the one who brought up the whole conversation of being cowardly one of his guests did,, I think the dad from 7th heaven, I can't remember. But anyways Bill just agreed. I understood what and whom he was referring to, but apparently a lot of people did not.
    The discision to pull advertisments from the show was "ill-timed."
    The countrys based on freedom (ideally.)

    I personally watched the show the night it returned to see someone elses pov that wouldn't be "pollitically correct" on cnn.
    Then people speak their mind and it's all downhill from there.
    Your signature here!


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO