Maher to Greenwald: Every Time Snowden Speaks, 'He Always Says Something F*cking Nuts'

[Tx4obama]

Bill Maher returned to TV Friday night, and kicked things off with journalist Glenn Greenwald to talk about the NSA, and one of the things they addressed was Edward Snowden himself, and Maher admitted that he doesn’t like how every time Snowden speaks, he comes out saying “something completely nuts.”
-snip-
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/maher-to-greenwald-every-time-snowden-speaks-he-always-says-something-fcking-nuts/

[JDPriestly]

1. Snowden witnessed activities that horrified him, that offended his conscience, his sense of fair

play. He is trying to communicate the feelings that he has, the fear and the awe at the authority, power and information that the NSA has and exploits or can exploit. He is trying not just to communicate facts, but also his feelings. That is why people think that he exaggerates or says "crazy" things. The things he witnessed put him in a bit of a state of shock. I don't know what it was that pushed him to leave his good life behind and expose to us what he had seen, but it must have been pretty frightening. I don't think he is a crazy person. I think he saw crazy things. But that is my opinion.

[zeemike]

4. And when you see crazy things and try to tell people about it

they think you are the crazy one...because like it or not, we all like to feel comfortable, and when someone makes us uncomfortable we attack them for it.
Human nature is like that, and it makes change hard.

[JDPriestly]

6. Yes.

[Snoopy 7]

37. Friend

True did you notice how Bill, and I love to hear him on his rants, never gave one (1) example if it's "every time" then he should have had dozens of the quotes ready.

[VanillaRhapsody]

80. Oh yes he did!

Snowden said they could go back in time and listen to every conversation you have ever had with anyone...Bill mentioned that point.

[Cleita]

53. True, which is one of the reasons people often don't report crazy stuff

they see. They are afraid of seeming cuckoo and in the minority even if their gut is telling them that something wrong is going on.

[MannyGoldstein]

8. Well put.

We live in crazy times.

[blackspade]

14. well said.

[pansypoo53219]

57. not during bush, only after obama won.

he is a flawed 'hero'.

[delrem]

2. Greenwald is right. Maher is just pushing trite character assassination hot buttons.

[Th1onein]

20. ABSOLUTELY.

AND, you know that Snowden had boxes in his garage, right?

[tomp]

32. agreed. nt

[drynberg]

3. Maher loses lots of credibility with his "nuts" statement

Just because Billy doesn't want to believe the government has evil brewing, with a cover of "terrorism", doesn't make it less true, nor does his immature namecalling. Grow up Bill and look at our world with truly open eyes and ears...then maybe you'll see that Ed Snowden is sadly speaking the truth. Now, it could be that Bill Maher knows this and just throws out absurd statements like the "nuts" line to have a soundbite. Not Impressed. Bet millions of Americans agree too.

[SoapBox]

5. Yawn...Snowden and Greenwald...two former Americans

that ran away to foreign countries.

They've lost all cred.

[freshwest]

9. Maher is generally entertaining, anyway. nt

[rpannier]

11. with whom exactly have they lost all cred?

[Maedhros]

15. Apparently with the Nationalists. [n/t]

[VanillaRhapsody]

82. Oh maybe real Americans like for example....

Muhammed Ali who had the "courage of his convictions"...and didn't run away....

[Hissyspit]

17. Greenwald is not a "former American."

False statement from someone arguing about who has "cred."

Frankly, Snowden is not a former American, either, as far as I know: "The US denies that revoking a passport is the same as deprivation of citizenship,"

Your post sounds awfully "America Love It Or Leave It" right-wing crap, too.

[brush]

28. IMO Greenwald is a user

Last edited Sat Jan 18, 2014, 10:38 AM - Edit history (1)

He used a naive — maybe not so naive, 29-year-old — who took a job for three months to apparently steal info. Or maybe was encouraged to steal info by, who knows, Greenwald?

Greenwald, he with the smug, shit-eating smirk, now has parlayed his use of Snowden in this whole affair to get financial backing for his own media company while Snowden, apparently pining to come home, sits miserably in Russia.

Snowden should have stopped with releasing documents on domestic info gathering. That was legitimate whistle-blowing. Releasing information on our international intelligence gathering (all countries that can afford it do it, btw), damaged our relationships with some foreign governments and possibly blew the cover of our operatives and the foreign nationals they worked with.

To me, as I posted in another thread, because he did the latter, he's no hero as he over-stepped the province of whistle-blower heroism and became something else (I mean, who is he to decide that the intricacies of our international intelligence gathering should be released to the world?).

Some call what he did sedition or even treason, I'll just call him a defector.

[Madmiddle]

56. Snowden and Greenwald are great American heroes.

Spying on Americans without consent is against the law!!

[brush]

62. What about exposing our international covert operations?

Did you miss the part in my post about Snowden should have stopped with the revelations about the domestic info gathering? Then he would've been a legitimate whistle blower.

But by releasing the intricacies of our international information gathering he blew the cover of our operatives and possibly endangered their lives and the lives of the foreign nationals who they worked with.

How do you ignore that? He and Greenwald went too. They're no heros.

[fasttense]

87. Revealing the International spying was needed

It backs up how out of control NSA has gotten, it clearly shows that NSA's spying is NOT about terrorism and it clearly defines the spying as corporate controlled for economic benefit.

Almost all of "our international information gathering" is about corporations trying to gain control and power through spying on competitors and obtaining regulatory information about other countries for profit. So much for "free" markets.

[brush]

88. Let me get this straight . . .

you know for sure that the NSA's info gathering is "NOT about terrorism"?

To be able to make such declarative statements like that you'd have to have read all the terabytes of information Snowden took with him?

My position on Snowden is that he did a good thing on releasing info on the domestic spying. That has to stop.

However I have a big problem with someone revealing the intricacies of his own country's international covert operations, especially a somewhat naive, twenty-nine-year-old with a murky, libertarian-leaning background. I don't think that was his decision to make, and to then defect?

Now he's stuck in Russia, pining to come home, while his partner in the operation, Greenwald, has parlayed his "scoop" into financial backing for his own media venture.

Greenwald's doing okay for himself. Snowden not so good, sounds like he didn't think the whole thing through too well. Maybe listened to Greenwald too much.

[VanillaRhapsody]

84. could have been....but now they are not...

good riddance to bad rubbish...

[VanillaRhapsody]

83. Yep...he went a bridge too far....

I think he got "convinced" to bite off more than he could chew...

[AtheistCrusader]

18. Must really chap your ass that neither of them are being waterboarded by Dick Cheney right now.

[Th1onein]

21. I doubt they've lost any credibility, but our government has lost a lot.

The powers that be made the allegations more credible by freaking the hell out, when all of this came out. Of course, they've probably got good reason to freak out. Which, of course, gives credibility to Snowden/Greenwald's claims.

[wildbilln864]

64. with authoritarians yes. n/t

[VanillaRhapsody]

81. EXACTLY!

[Shoulders of Giants]

7. Why does the content of Edward Snowden's character even matter?

The information he exposed matters. However, the media seems to want to focus on if Snowden is a good guy or a bad guy. Why does that matter? If it was Mother Theresa or Ariel Castro who leaked the information, would it change the fact that government is breaking the constitution? Focus on the unconstitutional spying program, not an unemployed computer programmer.

[jjewell]

19. Thank you!

[DeSwiss]

10. Bill!

- Of course it sounds crazy to someone without principles or integrity, you nimrod. You know, like the ones who sign your checks? Be careful or you'll alienate the few people who still bother to watch you tell your tired (unfunny) little jokes......

[CrawlingChaos]

25. + infinity

[Cha]

12. Thank you, Bill Maher.. you are not the only

one who's noticed.

Thanks Tx

[Th1onein]

23. Sorry, Cha. Snowden is a HERO, whether you like it or not.

And Americans are absolutely pissed off at their government spying on them.

[brush]

29. What about releasing info on our international intelligence gathering?

He should have stuck to exposing the domestic info gathering. That was legitimate whistle-blowing.

Releasing information on our international intelligence gathering (all countries that can afford it do it, btw), damaged our relationships with some foreign governments and possibly blew the cover and endangered the lives of our operatives and the foreign nationals they worked with.

I mean, who is Snowden to decide that the intricacies of our international intelligence gathering should be released to the world?

WHO IS HE TO MAKE THAT DECISION?

IMO he's part whistle-blower and part something else.

Some call what he did on exposing our international, covert operations sedition, or even treason, I'll just call him a defector for now.

[Sky Masterson]

31. Pretty much.

"I mean, who is Snowden to decide that the intricacies of our international intelligence gathering should be released to the world? "

This is my biggest problem with people like both Snowden and Manning.
In a way, I'm just as pissed that my government would so easily give access to such information to so many people.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2013/06/09/government-security-clearance/2406243/
"They are just two of almost 5 million people holding a government security clearance, federal documents show.
A January report from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence says more than 4.9 million people have some sort of government security clearance. About 1.4 million of those lay claim to "top secret" clearance."
.

[tomp]

34. right. it damaged our relationship with germany...

...to find out we were tapping merkl's phone.

you really should go into comedy.

[brush]

38. And you think Germany isn't spying on us?

Cut the pretend naivete. Operatives covers were blown, and the foreign nationals they worked with were also exposed and their lives possibly endangered.

Joke about Merkl's phone all you want but Snowden did much more damage than that.

Like I said, he should have stuck to exposing the domestic info gathering, but being just 29 — and apparently encouraged and used by Greenwald — I guess he didn't think of the international consequences of his actions.

Like I said in the earlier post, who is he to decide that our covert, international operations be exposed to the world?

[tomp]

46. i see you're simply locked into the status quo...

...of world espionage. you obviously do not understand the nature of world imperialism. you quaintly believe that our spying (foreign or domestic) is about protecting us, when it is really about protecting corporate profits. the fact that all imperialist countries do it does not excuse it. friends, enemies? it doesn't matter as long as the money keeps rolling in and resources and markets are protected/controlled/dominated.

i don't have pretend naivete. you have real ignorance and have succumbed to brainwashing.

[brush]

50. Call it brainwashing if you want

I call it just awareness of the reality of the situation. And Merkl's phone is still nothing to joke about.

And as far as world imperialism, it takes no Einstein to know that the US is and has been at the top of the heap, having begun with the whole "manifest destiny" entitlement concept to take huge swaths of this continent from Native Americans and much of the West from Mexico, and on to sending gunboats to Hawaii in the 1890s to help ex-pat American planters overthrow the Hawaiian monarch.

And I'm "quaintly" aware that we've been in wars, occupations or involved in coups continuously ever since for the natural resources of those invaded and occupied countries.

And btw, there is movement on releasing Jonathan Pollard, who spied against us for Israel in the 1980s, which just goes to my point. Even our allies spy on us, Germany included.

[tomp]

72. you claim to be "aware" but...

for someone who is "aware" you come to some very strange conclusions.

it's really quite simple for those who are truly aware. the problem of secrecy in government is that there is secrecy in government and there is secrecy in government to protect the guilty.

that's all you need to know. but for all you claim to know you still don't get it.

[brush]

73. How many times do I have to say this

I would be in the Snowden fan club if he had limited his revelations to the domestic info gathering. I'd be calling him a hero as well. It puzzles the hell out of me that people who claim to be so aware don't get that blowing the cover of secret, international covert operations of your own country is not a good idea — kind of akin to sedition, and what Chaney/Libby did to Valerie Plame.

I repeat, I'm glad he exposed the domestic stuff. That needs to stop.

My problem is he released detailed information about international covert operations. You seem to think that's a good idea? Somethings kinda have to be secret — like, I have to say it — spying on other countries.

All countries do if to intercept threats to their country. Divulging that information was not, imo, a decision for a somewhat naive 29-year-old to make.

You seem to lump "secrecy in government" with covert operations which, if you think about it, have to remain secret.

[Th1onein]

49. British and American intelligence traded information on Americans!

THIS is treason. THIS is sedition. How can you say that that is okay?

[brush]

51. I'm not the one saying what Snowden did . . .

as far as releasing info on our international intelligence gather is okay. That would be his fans. I say he should have stopped at exposing NSA's domestic operations.

Snowden is a defector who many feel acted in a seditious and even a treasonous way by releasing info that blew the covers of covert operatives and the foreign nationals they worked with.

[Th1onein]

65. Now you're not even making sense.

Just repeat and rinse, repeat and rinse: Snowden is a defector. Snowden is a defector. Is that the new meme in the conservative groups now?

If foreign operations are spying on Americans, you think that we have no right to know that? If our own operatives are spying on us and sharing that information with foreign agencies, you think that we have no right to know that? Get real, man.

[brush]

68. My post didn't even remotely say that

Is this stuff over your head?

It's not that hard. Snowden should have stuck to releasing info on the domestic info gathering.

Exposing the intricacies of international info gathering — bordering on sedition, maybe even treason. Maybe that's why he defected.

You may not like the word but that's what he is now.

And check my posts, no conservative here. I just know that releasing information on the international covert operations of the country is best not decided by a naive twenty-nine-year-old possibly influenced by an ambitious journalist who has turned his big scoop into backing for his own news organization.

Greenwald is doing okay for himself as Snowden, stranded in Russia and pinning to come back, fades in his rearview mirror.

Open your eyes. Snowden, who just a couple of years ago was spouting Libertarian talking points, and Greenwald, a known Libertarian as well as an opportunist, are no heros. If they had stopped at releasing the domestic info gathering I'd be touting them both as whistle blowing heroes myself but they blew it with the international stuff.

[Th1onein]

70. Name one fact he exposed. ONE.

You know you can't. Just like when you're told to name one covert operative, you can't do that either. Once again, as always, you attack the messenger, and ignore the message. OPEN YOUR EYES: YOUR GOVERNMENT IS SPYING ON YOU!

Keep on insulting me and you're going on Ignore.

[brush]

71. Are you thick?

I've acknowledged many times I think what Snowden did to expose the NSA's domestic spying on US citizens is a service to the country. It's been in the news for months that the NSA was gathering info on us. You're not telling me anything I don't know so why do you keep shouting:

"OPEN YOUR EYES: YOUR GOVERNMENT IS SPYING ON YOU!"

My problem with him is he went too far with exposing the country's international operations. ALL COUNTIES SPY ON OTHER COUNTRIES IF THEY CAN. And if we aren't doing it as well we're losing ground in keep up with threats to the country.

And you keep demanding I tell you one operative that has been exposed. Common sense will tell you in the terabytes of information that Snowden released there are names of people that were to be kept secret.

[Th1onein]

48. When these foreign intelligence agencies are part of the problem.....

I think it's very necessary to expose how we work with them. And, as Snowden said, is it only Americans who have the right to privacy? Our Bill of Rights enumerates the rights of man, inalienable rights. It doesn't speak to nationality. ALL people have the right to privacy.

[brush]

52. It was not Snowden's decision to make . . .

to blow the cover of covert operatives and possibly endanger their lives and the lives of the foreign nationals they worked with.

Why that sounds a lot like what Chaney and Libby did to Valerie Plame. Are you now endorsing that as well?

Snowden should have stopped with the exposure of domestic info gathering. In that area his actions were that of a legitimate whistle blower.

Now he's a defector. Many think he committed sedition and even treason.

[Th1onein]

63. Name one, just one, whose cover he blew. One.

I'm sorry, but your propaganda won't fly unchallenged this time.

Are you a member of Fox News Media? Some say.....many think....

[brush]

66. Snowden should have stuck with releasing info on domestic info gathering

He went way over the line with releasing info on our international covert operations.

Why would you even think that's defensible? Releasing the domestic info gathering was a service to the country but the rest, not at all.

[Th1onein]

69. Yeah, I didn't think you could name one.

You lose.

[wildbilln864]

67. answer post 63 please?

I thought as much.

[brush]

89. Ya think that in all the terabytes of info . . .

Last edited Tue Jan 21, 2014, 02:35 PM - Edit history (1)

Snowden took there were no names?

[Cha]

60. Oh, I've noticed that there are those who don't care wtf comes out Ed's mouth.. long hail

the fucking nut hero.

[VanillaRhapsody]

85. Stealing govt property...above and beyond anything required to whistleblow

makes him a criminal.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

13. Every decision? Like if we picked the red or the blue Siamese fighting fish?

[Hissyspit]

16. Well, Greenwald won that argument.

[Th1onein]

22. Sure did. Thanks for pointing that out!

[Cha]

24. "Bill Maher and Glenn Greenwald clash over ‘totally batsh*t’ Edward Snowden"

“..No one is arguing with that Glenn,” Maher said, cutting in. “What I said is, every time he opens his mouth, he always says something f*cking nuts. When he says, ‘They know every friend you’ve ever discussed something with,’ we’ll just have to agree to disagree on what’s f*cking nuts.”

Maher

Now Maher's messing with Greenwald's bread and butter! Must be stopped!

[thesquanderer]

45. Greenwald was right here. Maher was being too literal.

Do they know literally every friend you ever discussed something with? No. They are presumably not bugging your car, office, or the local diner. But they may have enough information to know who you have communicated with about something via email or facebook. And even if they only have phone metadata and not contents, knowing who and when you talked to someone, and combining that with other information they have about that person (their emails, their searches, their physical location when making the call, etc.), they may be able to surmise that you have likely talked about certain things. I think most people could understand that that was Snowden's meaning in that claim, even if stated with a bit of hyperbole.

Are they literally turning back time? No. But they can examine your communication activities from years ago, use that information retroactively to pursue information they were not looking for at the time it occurred, so they are figuratively turning back time.

As Greenwald said, Snowden is not a professional communicator with consultants and speech writers, and may not express himself perfectly. But if those were the looniest quotes that Maher could come up with, then the criticism seems to reflect more on Maher's apparent inability to understand figurative speech at above the level of an 8 year old than it does on Snowden's statements.

I tend to agree with Maker more often than not, and often find him funny, but I don't think he's the brightest bulb.

[Cha]

58. No, Maher is right.. "Everytime Snowden speaks.. he says something f*cking nuts".

[thesquanderer]

59. If Maher is right, he picked poor examples (n/t)

[VanillaRhapsody]

86. they were PERFECT examples!

[thesquanderer]

92. You think Snowden LITERALLY meant they the NSA could go back in time?

or literally "scrutinize every decision you've ever made, every friend you've ever discussed something with"?

These statements are clearly figurative and hyperbolic. The underlying point, though, is valid, and clear, and not nuts.

As Greenwald said, he's not a professional speaker, he's not working with speechwriters, so things may not be put so elegantly, but I don't have a problem with what he said. Maybe he has said nutty things, but if that's a perfect example, if that's about the nuttiest thing he said, then I don't see the issue.

[Pholus]

26. So are we playing normal house rules here?

After all, the last seven months have taught me that any agreement with something a libertarian says is a defacto admission of being a libertarian.

It is known.

Maher's libertarian credentials have been openly (and proudly) claimed as recently as April 2013 (More recently than Greenspan and obviously Snowden ain't been practicing since June 2013). Sure Billy said libertarians have went nuts (and water is wet) -- but he also clearly stated that he did not abandon the principles of libertarianism, the movement left him. That didn't even make sense back then, cause I'm old as dirt and I REMEMBER the LaRouchies. I didn't see some radical change from being a radical. So if anything Billy changed, and if he did it was only cause he saw his demographics shift.

He, like Glenn, is in it for the attention.

So, welcome to the "you're a libertarian troll" section under the bus, tex. Greenwald's last Cato association is 14 months older than Billy's last admission of loving him some libertarianism.

[chervilant]

27. Yeah, like Maher has never said anything

that could be characterized as 'nuts.' He's relentlessly sexist, and seldom funny.

[SaltyBro]

30. And racist

Remember what he said about Wayne Brady not long ago?

[brush]

33. I wouldn't go that far

Maher donated a million dollars to Obama's presidential campaign.

[SaltyBro]

36. So he is allowed to be racist since he donated to the President?

Maher sucks and he's racist.

[brush]

39. Give us examples please. nt

I need more than just your word that Maher is a racist.

[SaltyBro]

40. Look up Bill Maher-Wayne Brady feud

n/t

[brush]

41. I looked this up

It's Brady on Aisha Tyler's podcast:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002924991

I like what Brady had to say about Maher in defending himself.

But wasn't it Paul Mooney himself, a black man, who said something to the effect:
"White people like Wayne Brady because he makes Bryant Gumbel seem like Malcolm X"?

Maher is a comedian. He goes too far sometimes, and this is one instance where he did. I wouldn't call him a racist though.

[SaltyBro]

42. In addition to being a racist

he's a joke thief.

[brush]

43. OK, you don't like Maher

He goes too far sometimes with his cracks, tries too hard to be edgy and funny.

I watch his show all the time. Most of the time he's got good guests on (not including the obligatory repugs he has to have on — too much IMO) and he comes down on the progressive side of issues most of the time.

I say that because the country is overrun with right wing pundits and broadcasters on TV and radio, and since there are so few outlets for progressive views on the air, I don't want to see his show away. I put up with his occasional missteps.

But that doesn't make him a racist — a joke thief? Okay, maybe.

[cpwm17]

47. Bill Maher's constant over-the-top, pro-violence, off the scale, bigotry against Arabs and Muslims

shows that he is just about the most racist TV personality we have. Anyone that spends any time watching his show that doesn't recognize his extreme racism is likely a racist him/herself.

[brush]

75. Examples please.

You can't go around accusing people of heinous behavior without something to back it up.

Asking people to take your word for it is not enough.

[arcane1]

76. He hates Islam, therefore he's "Bigoted against Arabs".

Some people wrongly apply words like "bigotry" to the criticism of ideas.

[cpwm17]

90. He hates Arabs

Some people use religion as cover for his hatred of Arabs.

Bill Maher is a bigot who greatly favors his mother's religion and who hates Israel's neighbors and their religion.

Bill Maher is a hard-core Zionist and he deserves no defense on a liberal web-site. Even his creepy movie 'Religulous' promoted Zionism, showing what a religious bigot (pro Judaism) Bill Maher is.

[arcane1]

93. Thank you for proving my point.

He criticizes non-Arab Muslims too, you know.

I hate all religions. I guess that makes me a "bigot" too?

DU is an entire website dedicated to "bigotry" against conservatives.

[cpwm17]

77. I guess you've never watched his show?

or you wouldn't have to ask for examples.

I don't have cable TV so I have seen him much less than many other people, and I've still seen him make numerous vile, racists comment in the times I've watched him. I saw him claim that Arabs only know violence and the only way to deal with Arabs is with violence. FUCK BILL MAHER.

Most of his comments don't appear on the web. They're not searchable.

[brush]

78. I watch his show . . .

and maybe I missed these instances but that's not really an area of discussion that comes up much.
It's mostly Democrat v repugs and related topics.

I'll have to star paying more attention to what you claim.

[CrawlingChaos]

79. You want examples? How much time have you got?

http://www.juancole.com/2012/09/muslims-are-no-different-or-why-bill-mahers-blood-libel-is-bigotry.html

http://www.loonwatch.com/2011/02/its-official-bill-maher-is-a-racist/

http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/06/21/bill-maher-worse-than-glenn-beck/

In Maher's so-called "comedy, Muslims (invariably Arab) are always crazed savages to be shunned and feared. He uses degrading and dehumanizing Arab stereotypes to promote his hateful agenda. He also regularly makes shit up in the course of his attacks, but his fans keep making excuses for him, usually playing the "comedian" card. It's bullshit, and Maher is a complete scumbag.

[swilton]

74. Although I

can't provide the precise year, I watched an HBO special hosted by Maher - I was extremely offended by the end segment when he had Muslim women coming out in a 'fashion' show and he was ridiculing their dress. I have not watched him since then.

I find some of his hyperboles - 'every time' Snowden opens his mouth.......disingenuous and serving to weaken his argument.

I did see his 2008 movie Religulous and thought his critique of all religions was balanced; however, at other times I think he becomes extremely bigoted in his rants against Muslims and people of Arab descent.

[Snoopy 7]

35. come on Bill

Did you notice how Bill, and I love to hear him on his rants, never gave one (1) example if it's "every time" then he should have had dozens of the quotes ready. Instead he was on a rant with out a paddle...

[Oakenshield]

44. He's an entertainer first and foremost.

He'll do what's convenient. Jon Stewart is the same way. Sure he roasts right-wingers every week, but did he stand with the writers during the writer's strike back in 07? Nope.

[KurtNYC]

91. I'm not sure that Stewart "roasts" RWers -- the majority of his guests are RWers

John McCain has done TDS 13 times. Jon Stewart puts RW guests in front of LW audiences:
- Tony Blair, Kissinger, Ashcroft, Colin Powell, Tom Ridge, Rumsfeld, Tony Snow, John Bolton, Andrew Card, George Tenet, Mike Huckabee, Rick Perry, Rudy Giuliani, and Bill O'Reilly.

TDS is like watching Fox News with a comedian at your side.

Maher loves outrageous lines. I think that is the basis of his fame, just saying things that are somewhere between controversial and irresponsible. I thought he was particularly obtuse in this interview because I find it hard to believe that Maher thinks 100% of the NSA program is related to terrorism, or that he doubts that the NSA has used their system to blackmail and intimidate political, business and non-profit entities when such things are now a matter of record:

http://consortiumnews.com/2013/06/21/bushs-foiled-nsa-blackmail-scheme/

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/09/25/it_happened_here_NSA_spied_on_senators_1970s

[20score]

54. Bill Maher usually gets things right, but when he's wrong he dives right in the deep end.

He did the same thing when he bought into the bullshit about "Freedom in Iraq" because of purple fingers. (2005)

I think he'll soon get that Snowden is a hero, and is the very definition of sanity. But for some reason he's still holding on to some of the propaganda that's being put out there.

Really like and admire Bill Maher, so I hate to see him buy into any of the bullshit when it concerns such an important issue.

[Madmiddle]

55. Greenwald said it best when he told Maher he was the one that sounded crazy. I agree with

Greenwald. Maher did sound pretty stupid.

[JoeyT]

61. Says the guy that claims vaccines are bad.

Being called nuts by Bill Maher is like being called hyperbolic by Glenn Beck.

[adirondacker]

94. I prefer Jon Stewart's take on the whole topic...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024366765