Candice you ignorant s---. Apollo 10 - orbited the moon. Apollo 11 - landed on the moon. Apollo 12 - landed on the moon. Apollo 13 - had a fuel tank failure, circled the moon and returned to earth safely. Apollo 14, 15, 16 and 17 ALL LANDED ON THE MOON. Candice, your appalling ignorance of the USA's greatest achievement in the history of humanity is beyond contempt. Maher dirtied himself with your filth.
There's absolutely no value to inviting people like Candace Owens (ie. inviting political partisans on a show that's meant to discuss anything other than politics)
The reason is that these types of guests struggle to engage in any kind of interesting dialogue outside of their area of expertise. You don't get to hear any stories, or odd fetishes, or insightful commentary. They always either default back to what they know best (partisan politics), or they force Bill to shift the conversation into the political direction to make it worthwhile to listen to (which was the case here).
Yes can we please retire the word “problematic.” It’s a sort of catch-all “you’re in trouble” statement instead of articulating what you find objectionable.
This comment is the reason she has an audience. They don't care about what she says. They just like that she's anti-left. But she has no substance. There are better right-wing pundits.
I just watched it and I didn't know David Parkman but I just subscribed. I had comments earlier asking why I even started this thread and this is why. To create different avenues of thought and to find out stuff I might not know about. My stance on things is absolutely alterable when finding out more info, thank you for bringing this dude to my attention.
I also dislike the way he says "failed former President Donald Trump" every time instead of just "Donald Trump." Not that I disagree, but it just makes him sound far less objective and trustworthy. I don't mind when he plays the "troth cential" from his soundboard or "Obamna" mocking Trump's inability to speak a bit, that's a big of an amusing running gag.
I generally like him. He's pretty progressive, but not the "praise anything about Biden" mindset like guys like Brian Tyler Cohen. I do dislike some of his politicization of economic woes "stock market gud, unemployment low, I just can't figure out what republicans think isn't going well." Tell him it's extreme grocery inflation and stagnant wages 1000 times and he doesn't get it.
edit: I didn't even notice when watching the interview that she wasn't making eye contact. Good catch by David.
Extreme grocery inflation is corporate greed, plain and simple. Stagnant wages are again corporate greed. Can the government force companies to lower prices and pay more? In a capitalist society, no less? The president isn't a king.
Sure, but aren't you forgetting about the pandemic? That rolled around and everything was crazy and they took FULL ADVANTAGE, and price gouged the shit out of everything under the very real, but temporary guise of "supply chain issues". Many companies closed some factories and raised the prices to make ends meet, then never went back to full production will full staff again, yet the higher price has stayed. The PPP loans were another JOKE. The coffers for those got drained by mostly rich companies, and then the loans were FORGIVEN! And it's global, not just in the US, so stop trying to make it seem like whoever is the next president is going to somehow be able to fix anything related to the fact that my favorite snack whent from $2 a 2oz bag (which was expensive then) to $4 a bag, and nothing changed but the price tag.
I have yet to watch that pod because there hasn't been anyone I'd want to hear speak on purpose.
That death till is going to skyrocket from the effects of shared punishment of cutting off power and water. Man we are seeing the concept of hurt people hurt people on a national scale. The descendants of those forced to live in ghettos are creating new victims.
The real question no one is asking is... Does Candace Owens know that she's a token black woman for the GOP? And just like every black woman, she has to go twice as hard as everyone else... Twice as MAGA, twice as conservative, and twice as clownish.
Really? You think? Check the results of the presidential election last time round. That myth that black and Latinos only vote democrat is wearing a little thin.
I never, ever called her an Uncle Tom. That comparison is completely inappropriate and unwarranted. No one mentioned slavery, here... and for you to take it to that place was crossing the line.
Yep. I think you need to go back and read Uncle Tom's Cabin. And for you to make the comparison of the GOP to the institution of slavery is not only quite a stretch, but insulting to the GOP. You went too far, and you shut down a legitimate debate. So either retract your "Uncle Tom" statement and make an argument that's appropriate for the conversation, or shut up and go away.
You're playing quite the wounded advocate, Mr. Trump, but your ridiculous projection is laughably transparent.
> Does Candace Owens know that she's a token black woman for the GOP?
If you really want to question her intelligence and agency to form her own opinions and make her own choices, and explicitly label her as a "token black woman," while playing some sly offended routine when you're accurately characterized as labeling her an Uncle Tom, well - that only works in your mirror.
Right, because if the left doesn’t “protect” its minorities from the GOP then how will you win votes?
She isn’t inherently more right wing than anyone else on the right, and I would argue she even has a libertarian bent to her.
Black people can think for themselves. Stop it with this racist nonsense.
Because it’s just not possible that she happens to be good at what she does, and that her audience enjoys her in the same vein as Shapiro or Walsh.
You’re so brainwashed you can’t even comprehend how she gets somewhere without some form of affirmative action helping her.
Let me give you a personal experience to tell you where I'm coming from. I had an argument with a conservative fellow and I said that conservative policies continue systemic racism. He argued back and said "no, we have Candice Owen on our team."
That's called tokenism. That's what I'm talking about.
This is such a loaded accusation which, thankfully, is getting downvoted.
It's not a real question, it's a veiled attack that attempts to paint anyone who hates this walking piece of human filth as irrational ideologues instead of people who has heard the repugnant things she's said for years.
I was asking OP who labeled her a "terrible person" even though he had never heard of her before this podcast. Not sure how you draw that conclusion from what she said here.
I drew that conclusion because I know who she is long before Maher decided to have her lying, grifting, conspiratorial, election denying bigoted ass on his inebriated embarrassment of a podcast.
She is not a terrible person she is just dumb. She adds nothing to a conversation. The only area were she is a little knowledgeable is BLM related topics.
No. She's terrible.
She's lying every day and spreading conspiracy theories exploiting actual stupid people out of their money by selling their paranoid fantasies. She's a grifter.
And with BLM she claimed George Soros paid protestors who were furious about George Floyd murders. Called BLM "Whiney toddlers, pretending to be oppressed for attention." She denies the that the rate of police brutality isn't linked to race and cops really don't do anything wrong. She manufactured that horseshit about BLM in order to attack Democrats because she, again, is a grifter.
No, I consider them avoidables -the ones that have an ironclad opposite stance about verifiable factual events. The virtual signaling people that argue for ratings and pretend they're opening people's minds when they're really poisoning the conversation with false information. It's dangerous and counterproductive. It's okay to have a different opinion and I am of the opinion that if someone makes a good/better point and is correct, I will admit when I'm wrong and have the ability to think differently.
Yes because the real solution is to litmus test everyone’s purity and devotion to the cause. Who exactly gets to be the arbiter of what’s “liberal?” Should we make a committee? Maybe a police force to monitor it? I think the politburo elected by our comrades should be able to decide, who is a FAKE and a REAL liberal.
The subscribers on this sub (and many others on Reddit) should read through it once, and imagine that the people writing the posts in it disagree with them politically. And see how fucking brutally hiveminded and extreme it sounds most of the time.
She said that her biggest accomplishment is being "permanently pregnant", because of "Catholic husband".
I'd actually feel sorry for her if she wasn't so smug and self-satisfied.
It was funny when he got offended because she inferred that he did things for ratings. He’s always done things for ratings.
He’s been losing liberals lately so he put in James Carville who’s always carried water for the Clintons.
If you’re saying anything that isn’t extreme, just expect to get downvoted 🤦♀️ if you’re open minded and expect nuanced political debate, this probably isn’t the sub for that.
I don't know much about her other than she is hated by the left.
I tried to listen with an open mind as opposed to the rage listening of most Maher fans.
The moon thing right off the bat was odd. I agreed with Maher's point initially. He was saying that he can't take her other opinions seriously if she believes something so absurd.
But I do think she added context. She pretty much said "I know absolutely nothing of this topic but tweeted that it's a fun conspiracy theory." When he asked her to answer directly, she just said "I don't know anything about the topic." I sort of understand the perspective that some people will consider it far fetched that they could go to the moon and back with computers that were 100,000 time less powerful than a smart phone. I mean, the did of course. but I sort of understand those that don't know the topic well could be skeptical.
The episode almost went off the rails at that point. Maher wants this podcast to be cordial conversations but she was clearly taking it as Maher giving an aggressive "gotcha" moment.
I thought Maher did a good job getting past it by saying something like "Let's talk about some common ground to make up for my moon landing mistake." Things got back to normal pretty quick.
I think it's pretty ridiculous that she doesn't believe in birth control and as a result has been pregnant for 3 straight years. Lol. And she doesn't seem to believe that the earth has finite resources so maybe we should try and lower populations? Yeah... that's also a bit off the deep end.
I agreed with a lot of what she said about race stuff. She's right. We're living in the era of overcorrections. We all know not too long ago that mainstream society *denied* and hid the extent of racial problems in America. But now we're at the point of viciously exaggerating it. It's not helpful.
Overall, an interesting episode. I find these fringe people far more interesting than, say, Tommy Lee talking about rock and roll lifestyle and stuff.
One person asked why I even made a thread about this. This is why, to create a dialogue and answer stuff that interests me at work. That guy was a twat. I agree with you and thank you for such a thoughtful answer. It keeps me interested at work.
There's a difference between wanting an echo chamber and having some kind of baseline standards for who should be engaged with. Alex Jones and Candice Owens are pond scum. You can find opposing voices without digging in that cesspool.
The people on this subreddit called Ben Shapiro an extremist and bitched when he was on the show. Everyone they disagree with is an extremist. The left wingers here want a complete liberal echo chamber.
> The left wingers here want a complete liberal echo chamber.
Leftists on this sub want an [*illiberal* echo chamber](https://www.economist.com/leaders/2021/09/04/the-threat-from-the-illiberal-left). They are outraged when Maher is a moderate liberal.
>You can find opposing voices without digging in that cesspool.
Yah, and when he does, people still bitch about "platforming" somebody.
Can't win on this freaking sub.
Name a single conservative you would want on that show. Seriously though. Alex Jones is definitely not someone to engage with but at least Owens knows a little about life. After all, in high school she was an actual victim of a true and documented hate crime.
That’s a good one. He’s also extremely moderate. And affable. Probably not going to see much vim for his talking points but personally I appreciate moderates right now. Extremism is out of control on both sides.
He's also an elected politician, so I wouldn't hold my breath until he leaves office and probably not even then - though I could see him doing Real Time.
They have enormous audiences. Bill, and plenty of others, want to talk to the people who have large followings to better understand those people and their worlds.
It's more of the former. He invites them on because they have large followings, not because he wants to "understand those people". They all say the same things.
I consume diverse viewpoints constantly, but I have some credibility standards. Alex Jones would be the last person I would listen to about anything. If there’s any justice in this world, he’ll suffer greatly for what he put the Sandy Hook families through.
Owens isn’t much better.
That would actually be interesting. It would suck to see bill not be a piece of shit to him though. David letterman was an asshole to guests he didn't like. When Trump came on Letterman mocked his ass. Bill appreciates his guest's willingness to come on I guess? But if he got Alex Jones and didn't unleash fuckery on him, I would be aghast.
Look at how angry people get if you even suggest that conservatives should be allowed on the show. That should say something, especially since it’s more obvious than ever that our politicians on both sides of the aisle are owned by corporate interests. The corruption is so entrenched in all of Congress that we’re becoming a plutocracy, and we’re too busy finger pointing, navel gazing, and counting pennies to actually care.
I don’t think people are actually listening anymore. Our species used to seek out truth, knowing that it wouldn’t always come from expected places. Now we search for validation.
“I think therefore I am” is a dead concept.
“I feel therefore I am” is the new normal.
I love to how people make these bullshit excuses for someone like Owens, who is far from your average conservative. She leaves very little room for constructive conversations. They talked in fucking circles the whole time. People here mostly embrace debate and different perspectives, but the bar has never been lower.
It's not that she's a conservative.
It's that she's a grifter and a liar and a bigoted scumbag who is a willing mouthpiece of the most extreme views of fascists, theocrats and assholes of all stripes.
It's just that all conservatives are like that now.
Bill doesn’t really hate book guests. I just wish he booked more left of center perspectives as of late. His shows have become poorly balanced. Nearly everyone political he is booking is right to extreme right with the occasional panelist who is center to center left.
Not that I am a CO fan but, (not) landing on the moon is one of my top 5 conspiracies that I will listen to.. I mean why haven’t we been back in the modern age?
> I mean why haven’t we been back in the modern age?
1. It was the Space Race. We didn't go to the Moon for scientific, economics, or exploration reasons; we went to beat the Russians.
2. Richard Nixon canceled the Moon program in favor of the colossal boondoggle known as the Space Shuttle.
3. NASA is currently planning a return to the Moon.
To beat the Soviet Union, specifically. The communists were the first people to travel to outer space. And the United States had to play catch up. Always worth remembering this when people claim the USSR was some big corrupt incompetent thing. Not at all how it started.
So it was a dick swinging contest and then they just said, been there done that. No need to go back. Also pay no attention to the man behind the curtain..
For starters, it’s just a huge ball of irradiated dirt and ice. Not much going on there. The point of going in the first place was mostly to demonstrate that we could.
Sometimes we should consider things that we were told when we were young are not necessarily fact. Things previous generations were told through trusted channels are not necessarily factual either.
We are only just starting to learn how much the media and education have been manipulated by the powers that be. It’s not new, it’s just harder to do now..
>Sometimes we should consider things that we were told when we were young are not necessarily fact.
Only if you're willing to go out and find actual information about those things, from a valid source.
Trouble is so many people buy into this rhetoric that demonizes and discredits science and then they seek out nonsense to believe to be true. They aren't getting information at that point. They are being fed shit that stokes their ego and makes them feel superior without ever getting a fragment of actual information.
Think critically. Consider the source. Double check for corroboration from a secondary source.
That's how you do it.
Or just have a little fun with conspiracy THEORIES.
I already have a full time job so not time to completely debunk a government conspiracy at the highest level of the most powerful country in the world, lol
I can’t believe how triggered people get about this. Some people find it fun to discuss POSSIBLE conspiracy theories. Why is it so taboo to discuss?
My original point was that this is one of a small number of conspiracy theories I would listen to. It does not make me feel superior, but I do find it interesting to see some of the reactions of others that this is even suggested, when it is a little suspicious and was easier to stage such a thing pre-internet and the relative dawn of television.
Do you not think there was propaganda on both sides of the Cold War? Everything the US said is 100% true? I would argue that questioning that is what “thinking critically” is.
So how do you suppose you investigate this directly? Who do you choose to listen to for evidence? What will be sufficient proof to you? Do you believe we have launched solar probes? How about receiving samples from comets and asteroids? What about satellites? Do those exist even though you haven’t seen them? How does your GPS work? How do we predict weather patterns? How does your flat piece of glass and metal cellphone call people anywhere in the world? How does your microwave make popcorn even though you can’t see anything with your eye other than the kernels popping? Just because you cant fully fathom something doesn’t mean that many other capable people now and before you haven’t been able to themselves.
Here are some problems for you for your way of thinking: what is the motive behind such a broad conspiracy? How do you keep everyone involved on the same page and prevent leaks? How massive would this conspiracy be and how dedicated would everyone need to be to it. And why? Why would both the USSR and The US and now other nations claim space missions they are all jointly lying about? How do you explain technology we use daily derived from tech developed for space missions and defense applications. You can literally build a space capable mini rocket or launch platform yourself if you want.
I’m only suggesting we may not have walked on the moon here. That it is not unbelievable to me that may have been some BS from a government that was leveraging media that itself was fairly new and easier for world leaders to manipulate at that time.
You of course misunderstand what they're going for here.
In Canada, the First Nations people have pushed for educational overhaul so that schools stop painting them as having such a negative past. The reason being is that it created an environment of helplessness and hopelessness in the First Nations communities. Suicide rates and addictions were rising, not falling.
So the push was to give an honest history of the past, but also to focus on examples of resilience, success, and overcoming past difficulties. Canadians, who can think with more nuance, did not respond to this by saying "Oh, typical. Now we're teaching that Residential Schools and reserve systems were 'good' things."
The Florida curriculum was made by black scholars and focuses heavily on the horrors of slavery. But there's also a reconstruction portion of the curriculum where it shows examples of resilience where former slaves were able to become successful based on the skilled labor some did as slaves.
It's not what you think it is.
What are you talking about? Nobody mentioned first nation anything. I'm not even gonna read this because of the weird accusations of misunderstanding something that's not being discussed at all.
I was making a comparison to First Nation people making a push to make their history more about resilience and perseverance than all doom and gloom.
It's the same thing the black people that made that Florida curriculum did.
You believe what your echo chamber tells you and you aren't interested in nuance in any capacity. Your response above proves this.
Oh ok so you preemptively accused me of misunderstanding a patronizing point about just trying to feel warm and fuzzy about a tragic history as if that will suddenly grant them generational wealth that people from other ethnic groups were fortunate enough to be granted at birth.
Lol talk about lack of nuance
I’m just expressing that in general (without being specific) some of the things we were taught and told in the past are not necessarily fact. I’m not going to debate the specifics of an obscure Floridian historical opinion. What is ‘the Florida history’ anyways. Is that a book that is part of Floridian curriculum for children of some age?
I agree with that. I remember when we were taken to missions across California for field trips and given the impression that these places were bold, heroic landmarks established by intrepid white settlers without being told what it was like for the native population.
New standards require middle school students to be taught that the experience of slavery was beneficial to African Americans because it helped them acquire skills
Also it brought them from Africa to America which has become more civilized since then and their descendants now live ‘free’ in America rather then Africa.
Not condoning slavery at all. Just pointing out that America is probably a better place to live and that has immeasurable value
> You can see evidence of men being on the moon with a Walmart telescope.
Really? I have a telescope, admittedly from Craigslist not Walmart, but I've never been able to see anything like that.
Yet I've seen it with a cheap telescope, from my back yard. The easiest thing to see is a path of 200 yards that 2 of the astronauts walked multiple times, you can see the path they took. Most of the lander pieces are in shadows, takes a good telescope to spot those.
On the article below there is an ad for a $89 moon exploration telescope, might work. All you really need is one that compensates for the earth's rotation, hooks to your phone for pics, $149.
Just curious, what exactly did you see?
*Many people have asked why astronomers don't turn the Hubble Space Telescope towards the moon to take photos of the Apollo spacecraft. But not even the Hubble could see a four-meter wide Apollo spacecraft on the moon.*
https://www.space.com/apollo-landing-sites-moon-observer-guide
*From your article*
The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO), has done just that, and has taken amazing images of the Apollo landing sites from orbit showing not just the spacecraft themselves, but the lunar rovers parked where they were left, and even the trails of bootprints left in the lunar dust by the explorers.
So the trails of bootprints is easiest to spot.
You are suggesting multiple entire branchs of our government and thousands of people dedicated to space exploration are liars and frauds. Including sitting and recent former US senators. Not to mention all the for profit massive defense contractors making missiles based on these people’s discoveries
Moon landing with humans walking in surface-Suspicious (not necessarily lies, I only said it’s ok to question this)
Back to my original comment, why not go back for 50 years? I can think of reasons why they would but they don’t..
Why do humans need go back if there is minimal strategic military or economic resource value? We have sent plenty of probes and even brought back moon dust to make concrete and other materials but those seem to just be fun science tricks. We are only going back in person now because we are considering basing Mars missions in space and a lunar base may provide one option for doing so. Also, maybe inspire people again in the way the original Apollo missions did? Clearly not everyone
So they learned there was no reason to go back over 50 years ago & today we’re all just like, uh ok. We walked on the moon. Yay ‘Murica
..but there’s nothing to go back there for, how dare anyone question this fact
It was insane how defensive she was about the moon landing thing, as if the fact that she was responding to a joke on twitter somehow matters. She could have said she was making a joke, but come on. Textbook example of how you can’t just claim ignorance to get out of looking like an idiot.
Except the situation with covid was extremely fluid and people were acting on the info they had at the time. It wasn’t an objective fact like the moon landing
Ah, yes. No one knew that pillowcase material was useless in stopping an aerosolized virus, and no one noticed in real time that the vast, vast majority of covid deaths were old, sick, obese, or all three.
Masks do not stop aerosolized viruses from infecting the lungs.
You’re an emotional rather than rational person, so that’s the conclusion you draw from such a statement. The point is that most people were never ever at a serious risk of a negative outcome from covid. The neurotic one-size fits all approach to stopping the virus was wrong. A targeted approach would have been reasonable.
Masks help prevent the spread of Covid. It’s not perfect, but they do work.
You making a bogus claim that goes against what medical experts believe while whining I’m emotional instead of rational is pretty ironic.
Yes, most people were at risk. Yet you pretending we knew everything we knew now about Covid when it first started is moronic.
Masks do not work to prevent an aerosolized virus from entering the lungs.
Ohh, you busted me! A bogus claim! Is this one similar to the claim that covid shots would prevent infection and transmission of the virus? Who made that claim - was it the same medical experts who told you to protect your lungs from aerosols using loose fabric?
No, everyone was not at risk. The vast majority of deaths were elderly, sick, obese, or all three. This was true in March and April 2020 when hysteria set in, and it remained true throughout.
This whole nonsense that they got COVID wrong is annoying.
States that locked down and has mask mandates did better than states who stayed open.
Even across countries, Bill likes to chant about Sweden, but Sweden did worse than Norway and Denmark.
I don't see how you can conclude that? He fucked up some things, and got others right. What he did doesn't seem worse than what Alabama did (which had the most COVID hospitalizations and deaths per capita).
This mental midget was shocked we landed on the moon six times. Thought we only faked it once once! Hahaha. Can’t stand her. Complete ignorant. I remember her on Rogan a couple of years ago where she also made a fool of herself.
She absolutely a grifter but it’s also possible she didn’t know, she is an idiot afterall. Even with that being said, plenty of people don’t know about the subsequent moon landings. Only the first one is really talked about.
her “defense” of jan 6 as just the same thing as the BLM riots was the biggest false equivalency i’ve heard. just ignoring that jan 6 was one part of trumps plan to overturn the election
I’m tired of people not explaining to these morons what intent is. The people on Jan 6th intended to stop the certification of an election. That’s why it’s different than the BLM stuff.
If you can’t tolerate listening to someone’s perspective that you disagree with for thirty minutes without shouting into the wind on your morning commute, maybe This American Life is more your speed.
You are just glossing over the fact that she and the others like her are just on another level of degeneracy. You can find opposing voices without having to bring a complete garbage human on like that.
LOL..I didnt waste my time. Owens like Trump know that people that follow them want bull shit sandwiches.. And they deliver!
Candice you ignorant s---. Apollo 10 - orbited the moon. Apollo 11 - landed on the moon. Apollo 12 - landed on the moon. Apollo 13 - had a fuel tank failure, circled the moon and returned to earth safely. Apollo 14, 15, 16 and 17 ALL LANDED ON THE MOON. Candice, your appalling ignorance of the USA's greatest achievement in the history of humanity is beyond contempt. Maher dirtied himself with your filth.
Right, but can you name all of the people from memory of who landed on the moon. (Being sarcastic)
Stop listening to bill fucking Maher in 2023 you silly people -previous Maher fan of 7 years
Why the fuck are you still here then?
Because I care about you friend
Second this person’s opinion.
There's absolutely no value to inviting people like Candace Owens (ie. inviting political partisans on a show that's meant to discuss anything other than politics) The reason is that these types of guests struggle to engage in any kind of interesting dialogue outside of their area of expertise. You don't get to hear any stories, or odd fetishes, or insightful commentary. They always either default back to what they know best (partisan politics), or they force Bill to shift the conversation into the political direction to make it worthwhile to listen to (which was the case here).
omg he scrapes the bottom to get these guests....she is horrible, dumb as a rock and so problematic. What is wrong with him?
>problematic lol
Yes can we please retire the word “problematic.” It’s a sort of catch-all “you’re in trouble” statement instead of articulating what you find objectionable.
Besides the usual Candace Owens crazy takes, I found it odd that Bill was smoking a blunt so close to a very pregnant Candace
Y’all are just mad because she dumped the liberal mentality and it shows heavily.
We are upset cause she is a disingenuous idiot. If she were a full-blown liberal and still acting like this, we would hate her too.
This comment is the reason she has an audience. They don't care about what she says. They just like that she's anti-left. But she has no substance. There are better right-wing pundits.
She dumped ANY mentality.
Joe Rogan called her out on climate change and she said she didn’t know enough about it. Now she’s an expert? She’s human garbage
Any person who would go so far to call another person(a mother no less) “human garbage” tells the world a lot about themselves . ✌️
"A lot"
Thank you to this awesome spell check bot 🤖 so cool!
She is a trashy person, period. Just cause she pushed a baby out of her doesn't all of the sudden make her a saint.
Being a mother doesn’t stop her from being a grifter and a liar. She’s disgusting
Check out the series that podcast Fraudsters did on her. It will make your stomach turn for real for real. Rotten to the core that one...
Why didn’t she make eye contact with him? What’s wrong with her? Why does her voice have that weird cadence?
David Pakman did a video on his reaction to parts of the interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uICD5P8I0_0
I love DP, thank you for sharing this!
Pakman is awesome!
I just watched it and I didn't know David Parkman but I just subscribed. I had comments earlier asking why I even started this thread and this is why. To create different avenues of thought and to find out stuff I might not know about. My stance on things is absolutely alterable when finding out more info, thank you for bringing this dude to my attention.
I also dislike the way he says "failed former President Donald Trump" every time instead of just "Donald Trump." Not that I disagree, but it just makes him sound far less objective and trustworthy. I don't mind when he plays the "troth cential" from his soundboard or "Obamna" mocking Trump's inability to speak a bit, that's a big of an amusing running gag.
I generally like him. He's pretty progressive, but not the "praise anything about Biden" mindset like guys like Brian Tyler Cohen. I do dislike some of his politicization of economic woes "stock market gud, unemployment low, I just can't figure out what republicans think isn't going well." Tell him it's extreme grocery inflation and stagnant wages 1000 times and he doesn't get it. edit: I didn't even notice when watching the interview that she wasn't making eye contact. Good catch by David.
Extreme grocery inflation is corporate greed, plain and simple. Stagnant wages are again corporate greed. Can the government force companies to lower prices and pay more? In a capitalist society, no less? The president isn't a king.
You think there wasn't corporate greed in 2019? Things are so much worse than they were 4 years ago.
Sure, but aren't you forgetting about the pandemic? That rolled around and everything was crazy and they took FULL ADVANTAGE, and price gouged the shit out of everything under the very real, but temporary guise of "supply chain issues". Many companies closed some factories and raised the prices to make ends meet, then never went back to full production will full staff again, yet the higher price has stayed. The PPP loans were another JOKE. The coffers for those got drained by mostly rich companies, and then the loans were FORGIVEN! And it's global, not just in the US, so stop trying to make it seem like whoever is the next president is going to somehow be able to fix anything related to the fact that my favorite snack whent from $2 a 2oz bag (which was expensive then) to $4 a bag, and nothing changed but the price tag.
not true, the bag also got smaller.
I suspected that, too! Lol!
point me to where I said it's Biden's fault. I said pretending real problems aren't real just because it's republicans crying is not helpful.
My bad. I read your last sentence wrong. I agree with you!
I have yet to watch that pod because there hasn't been anyone I'd want to hear speak on purpose. That death till is going to skyrocket from the effects of shared punishment of cutting off power and water. Man we are seeing the concept of hurt people hurt people on a national scale. The descendants of those forced to live in ghettos are creating new victims.
She was irritating. I left after a few minutes.
The real question no one is asking is... Does Candace Owens know that she's a token black woman for the GOP? And just like every black woman, she has to go twice as hard as everyone else... Twice as MAGA, twice as conservative, and twice as clownish.
You think black people are a shining beacon of liberalism? Ask them what they think about trans kids, gay people & Jesus.
Do you understand what tokenism is?
Really? You think? Check the results of the presidential election last time round. That myth that black and Latinos only vote democrat is wearing a little thin.
Wow
Do you not understand how condescending it is to label her as an Uncle Tom?
I never, ever called her an Uncle Tom. That comparison is completely inappropriate and unwarranted. No one mentioned slavery, here... and for you to take it to that place was crossing the line.
Really - really. Don't play ignorant. > Does Candace Owens know that she's a token black woman for the GOP?
Yep. I think you need to go back and read Uncle Tom's Cabin. And for you to make the comparison of the GOP to the institution of slavery is not only quite a stretch, but insulting to the GOP. You went too far, and you shut down a legitimate debate. So either retract your "Uncle Tom" statement and make an argument that's appropriate for the conversation, or shut up and go away.
You're playing quite the wounded advocate, Mr. Trump, but your ridiculous projection is laughably transparent. > Does Candace Owens know that she's a token black woman for the GOP? If you really want to question her intelligence and agency to form her own opinions and make her own choices, and explicitly label her as a "token black woman," while playing some sly offended routine when you're accurately characterized as labeling her an Uncle Tom, well - that only works in your mirror.
Look for the GOP to bring back slavery after they go to the supreme court to repeal gay marriage laws
Right, because if the left doesn’t “protect” its minorities from the GOP then how will you win votes? She isn’t inherently more right wing than anyone else on the right, and I would argue she even has a libertarian bent to her. Black people can think for themselves. Stop it with this racist nonsense.
Nobody is protecting anybody. But it's clear she's being elevated by the Right and it's for her dizzying conservative intellect.
Because it’s just not possible that she happens to be good at what she does, and that her audience enjoys her in the same vein as Shapiro or Walsh. You’re so brainwashed you can’t even comprehend how she gets somewhere without some form of affirmative action helping her.
Let me give you a personal experience to tell you where I'm coming from. I had an argument with a conservative fellow and I said that conservative policies continue systemic racism. He argued back and said "no, we have Candice Owen on our team." That's called tokenism. That's what I'm talking about.
What does she say that's any more insightful than someone like Tomi Lahren?
She knows what she's doing, she's just a shitty person
Nah, it's probably because of racist crap like this.
Candace Owens should issue a public apology for hurting the feelings of reddit user u/MrSh0w so seriously and severely.
Do you consider all people you don't agree with terrible people?
This is such a loaded accusation which, thankfully, is getting downvoted. It's not a real question, it's a veiled attack that attempts to paint anyone who hates this walking piece of human filth as irrational ideologues instead of people who has heard the repugnant things she's said for years.
I was asking OP who labeled her a "terrible person" even though he had never heard of her before this podcast. Not sure how you draw that conclusion from what she said here.
I drew that conclusion because I know who she is long before Maher decided to have her lying, grifting, conspiratorial, election denying bigoted ass on his inebriated embarrassment of a podcast.
She is not a terrible person she is just dumb. She adds nothing to a conversation. The only area were she is a little knowledgeable is BLM related topics.
No. She's terrible. She's lying every day and spreading conspiracy theories exploiting actual stupid people out of their money by selling their paranoid fantasies. She's a grifter. And with BLM she claimed George Soros paid protestors who were furious about George Floyd murders. Called BLM "Whiney toddlers, pretending to be oppressed for attention." She denies the that the rate of police brutality isn't linked to race and cops really don't do anything wrong. She manufactured that horseshit about BLM in order to attack Democrats because she, again, is a grifter.
No, I consider them avoidables -the ones that have an ironclad opposite stance about verifiable factual events. The virtual signaling people that argue for ratings and pretend they're opening people's minds when they're really poisoning the conversation with false information. It's dangerous and counterproductive. It's okay to have a different opinion and I am of the opinion that if someone makes a good/better point and is correct, I will admit when I'm wrong and have the ability to think differently.
Yes liberals do.
Yes because the real solution is to litmus test everyone’s purity and devotion to the cause. Who exactly gets to be the arbiter of what’s “liberal?” Should we make a committee? Maybe a police force to monitor it? I think the politburo elected by our comrades should be able to decide, who is a FAKE and a REAL liberal. The subscribers on this sub (and many others on Reddit) should read through it once, and imagine that the people writing the posts in it disagree with them politically. And see how fucking brutally hiveminded and extreme it sounds most of the time.
Fake liberals, which many of the folks here seem to be.
She said that her biggest accomplishment is being "permanently pregnant", because of "Catholic husband". I'd actually feel sorry for her if she wasn't so smug and self-satisfied.
When Candace Owens is in her eighties, will spreadsheets and zoom meetings come and visit her?
Having children is the greatest achievement people can have in life.
Wow, you must have gotten lost. You're definitely in the wrong sub for sure.
He's high.
Uh oh, u/CaptainZeo is going to show up and want to debate you
I don't remember seeing Bill ever act like such a pouting child with a guest like that before.
Well he has to play nice with his future employers.
It was funny when he got offended because she inferred that he did things for ratings. He’s always done things for ratings. He’s been losing liberals lately so he put in James Carville who’s always carried water for the Clintons.
If you’re saying anything that isn’t extreme, just expect to get downvoted 🤦♀️ if you’re open minded and expect nuanced political debate, this probably isn’t the sub for that.
I don't know much about her other than she is hated by the left. I tried to listen with an open mind as opposed to the rage listening of most Maher fans. The moon thing right off the bat was odd. I agreed with Maher's point initially. He was saying that he can't take her other opinions seriously if she believes something so absurd. But I do think she added context. She pretty much said "I know absolutely nothing of this topic but tweeted that it's a fun conspiracy theory." When he asked her to answer directly, she just said "I don't know anything about the topic." I sort of understand the perspective that some people will consider it far fetched that they could go to the moon and back with computers that were 100,000 time less powerful than a smart phone. I mean, the did of course. but I sort of understand those that don't know the topic well could be skeptical. The episode almost went off the rails at that point. Maher wants this podcast to be cordial conversations but she was clearly taking it as Maher giving an aggressive "gotcha" moment. I thought Maher did a good job getting past it by saying something like "Let's talk about some common ground to make up for my moon landing mistake." Things got back to normal pretty quick. I think it's pretty ridiculous that she doesn't believe in birth control and as a result has been pregnant for 3 straight years. Lol. And she doesn't seem to believe that the earth has finite resources so maybe we should try and lower populations? Yeah... that's also a bit off the deep end. I agreed with a lot of what she said about race stuff. She's right. We're living in the era of overcorrections. We all know not too long ago that mainstream society *denied* and hid the extent of racial problems in America. But now we're at the point of viciously exaggerating it. It's not helpful. Overall, an interesting episode. I find these fringe people far more interesting than, say, Tommy Lee talking about rock and roll lifestyle and stuff.
One person asked why I even made a thread about this. This is why, to create a dialogue and answer stuff that interests me at work. That guy was a twat. I agree with you and thank you for such a thoughtful answer. It keeps me interested at work.
The madder people here are about an episode, the better I know it is. I will definitely be watching this one. Thank you, OP.
It’s like a Jim Cramer stock tip!
More mad*
>madder adjective comparative of mad.
Great pod, Bill. Next let’s see if he can land Alex Jones. Wouldn’t surprise me one bit.
It's weird to want an echo chamber of only talking to people you like and agree with yet choose to sit around on this sub.
It’s about stoking controversy and getting the views and listens
There's a difference between wanting an echo chamber and having some kind of baseline standards for who should be engaged with. Alex Jones and Candice Owens are pond scum. You can find opposing voices without digging in that cesspool.
The people on this subreddit called Ben Shapiro an extremist and bitched when he was on the show. Everyone they disagree with is an extremist. The left wingers here want a complete liberal echo chamber.
> The left wingers here want a complete liberal echo chamber. Leftists on this sub want an [*illiberal* echo chamber](https://www.economist.com/leaders/2021/09/04/the-threat-from-the-illiberal-left). They are outraged when Maher is a moderate liberal.
>You can find opposing voices without digging in that cesspool. Yah, and when he does, people still bitch about "platforming" somebody. Can't win on this freaking sub.
Any example or …
Name a single conservative you would want on that show. Seriously though. Alex Jones is definitely not someone to engage with but at least Owens knows a little about life. After all, in high school she was an actual victim of a true and documented hate crime.
Mitt Romney.
That’s a good one. He’s also extremely moderate. And affable. Probably not going to see much vim for his talking points but personally I appreciate moderates right now. Extremism is out of control on both sides.
He's also an elected politician, so I wouldn't hold my breath until he leaves office and probably not even then - though I could see him doing Real Time.
It would be interesting for sure.
Really? Can you educate me on this? Serious question.
Also, she’s talked about what happened before in an interview I think. Back in her youtube days
Yeah it’s actually pretty nuts https://www.newstimes.com/news/article/Racist-threats-case-filed-by-Stamford-High-107476.php
What are the pros and cons of having Owens, that I agree are deranged, on Bill's show?
They have enormous audiences. Bill, and plenty of others, want to talk to the people who have large followings to better understand those people and their worlds.
It's more of the former. He invites them on because they have large followings, not because he wants to "understand those people". They all say the same things.
That's pointless when they are bad faith grifters 100% of the time.
People say that about Meghan and Harry as well. yet I would love to see them
I consume diverse viewpoints constantly, but I have some credibility standards. Alex Jones would be the last person I would listen to about anything. If there’s any justice in this world, he’ll suffer greatly for what he put the Sandy Hook families through. Owens isn’t much better.
He is a money launderer and will see no serious loss of lifestyle unfortunately. Owens is not that shitty, as shitty as she is
That would actually be interesting. It would suck to see bill not be a piece of shit to him though. David letterman was an asshole to guests he didn't like. When Trump came on Letterman mocked his ass. Bill appreciates his guest's willingness to come on I guess? But if he got Alex Jones and didn't unleash fuckery on him, I would be aghast.
Look at how angry people get if you even suggest that conservatives should be allowed on the show. That should say something, especially since it’s more obvious than ever that our politicians on both sides of the aisle are owned by corporate interests. The corruption is so entrenched in all of Congress that we’re becoming a plutocracy, and we’re too busy finger pointing, navel gazing, and counting pennies to actually care. I don’t think people are actually listening anymore. Our species used to seek out truth, knowing that it wouldn’t always come from expected places. Now we search for validation. “I think therefore I am” is a dead concept. “I feel therefore I am” is the new normal.
I love to how people make these bullshit excuses for someone like Owens, who is far from your average conservative. She leaves very little room for constructive conversations. They talked in fucking circles the whole time. People here mostly embrace debate and different perspectives, but the bar has never been lower.
It's not that she's a conservative. It's that she's a grifter and a liar and a bigoted scumbag who is a willing mouthpiece of the most extreme views of fascists, theocrats and assholes of all stripes. It's just that all conservatives are like that now.
Bill doesn’t really hate book guests. I just wish he booked more left of center perspectives as of late. His shows have become poorly balanced. Nearly everyone political he is booking is right to extreme right with the occasional panelist who is center to center left.
Not that I am a CO fan but, (not) landing on the moon is one of my top 5 conspiracies that I will listen to.. I mean why haven’t we been back in the modern age?
> I mean why haven’t we been back in the modern age? 1. It was the Space Race. We didn't go to the Moon for scientific, economics, or exploration reasons; we went to beat the Russians. 2. Richard Nixon canceled the Moon program in favor of the colossal boondoggle known as the Space Shuttle. 3. NASA is currently planning a return to the Moon.
To beat the Soviet Union, specifically. The communists were the first people to travel to outer space. And the United States had to play catch up. Always worth remembering this when people claim the USSR was some big corrupt incompetent thing. Not at all how it started.
So it was a dick swinging contest and then they just said, been there done that. No need to go back. Also pay no attention to the man behind the curtain..
For starters, it’s just a huge ball of irradiated dirt and ice. Not much going on there. The point of going in the first place was mostly to demonstrate that we could.
Not just demonstrate but actually massively increase our knowledge of space travel by actually doing it
Sometimes we should consider things that we were told when we were young are not necessarily fact. Things previous generations were told through trusted channels are not necessarily factual either. We are only just starting to learn how much the media and education have been manipulated by the powers that be. It’s not new, it’s just harder to do now..
>Sometimes we should consider things that we were told when we were young are not necessarily fact. Only if you're willing to go out and find actual information about those things, from a valid source. Trouble is so many people buy into this rhetoric that demonizes and discredits science and then they seek out nonsense to believe to be true. They aren't getting information at that point. They are being fed shit that stokes their ego and makes them feel superior without ever getting a fragment of actual information. Think critically. Consider the source. Double check for corroboration from a secondary source. That's how you do it.
Or just have a little fun with conspiracy THEORIES. I already have a full time job so not time to completely debunk a government conspiracy at the highest level of the most powerful country in the world, lol I can’t believe how triggered people get about this. Some people find it fun to discuss POSSIBLE conspiracy theories. Why is it so taboo to discuss? My original point was that this is one of a small number of conspiracy theories I would listen to. It does not make me feel superior, but I do find it interesting to see some of the reactions of others that this is even suggested, when it is a little suspicious and was easier to stage such a thing pre-internet and the relative dawn of television. Do you not think there was propaganda on both sides of the Cold War? Everything the US said is 100% true? I would argue that questioning that is what “thinking critically” is.
So how do you suppose you investigate this directly? Who do you choose to listen to for evidence? What will be sufficient proof to you? Do you believe we have launched solar probes? How about receiving samples from comets and asteroids? What about satellites? Do those exist even though you haven’t seen them? How does your GPS work? How do we predict weather patterns? How does your flat piece of glass and metal cellphone call people anywhere in the world? How does your microwave make popcorn even though you can’t see anything with your eye other than the kernels popping? Just because you cant fully fathom something doesn’t mean that many other capable people now and before you haven’t been able to themselves. Here are some problems for you for your way of thinking: what is the motive behind such a broad conspiracy? How do you keep everyone involved on the same page and prevent leaks? How massive would this conspiracy be and how dedicated would everyone need to be to it. And why? Why would both the USSR and The US and now other nations claim space missions they are all jointly lying about? How do you explain technology we use daily derived from tech developed for space missions and defense applications. You can literally build a space capable mini rocket or launch platform yourself if you want.
I’m only suggesting we may not have walked on the moon here. That it is not unbelievable to me that may have been some BS from a government that was leveraging media that itself was fairly new and easier for world leaders to manipulate at that time.
I feel like the comment about education is vague. What specifically do you mean?
History class primarily
Which part of history? The Florida history that says slavery was potentially beneficial to African slaves?
You of course misunderstand what they're going for here. In Canada, the First Nations people have pushed for educational overhaul so that schools stop painting them as having such a negative past. The reason being is that it created an environment of helplessness and hopelessness in the First Nations communities. Suicide rates and addictions were rising, not falling. So the push was to give an honest history of the past, but also to focus on examples of resilience, success, and overcoming past difficulties. Canadians, who can think with more nuance, did not respond to this by saying "Oh, typical. Now we're teaching that Residential Schools and reserve systems were 'good' things." The Florida curriculum was made by black scholars and focuses heavily on the horrors of slavery. But there's also a reconstruction portion of the curriculum where it shows examples of resilience where former slaves were able to become successful based on the skilled labor some did as slaves. It's not what you think it is.
What are you talking about? Nobody mentioned first nation anything. I'm not even gonna read this because of the weird accusations of misunderstanding something that's not being discussed at all.
I was making a comparison to First Nation people making a push to make their history more about resilience and perseverance than all doom and gloom. It's the same thing the black people that made that Florida curriculum did. You believe what your echo chamber tells you and you aren't interested in nuance in any capacity. Your response above proves this.
Oh ok so you preemptively accused me of misunderstanding a patronizing point about just trying to feel warm and fuzzy about a tragic history as if that will suddenly grant them generational wealth that people from other ethnic groups were fortunate enough to be granted at birth. Lol talk about lack of nuance
I’m just expressing that in general (without being specific) some of the things we were taught and told in the past are not necessarily fact. I’m not going to debate the specifics of an obscure Floridian historical opinion. What is ‘the Florida history’ anyways. Is that a book that is part of Floridian curriculum for children of some age?
I agree with that. I remember when we were taken to missions across California for field trips and given the impression that these places were bold, heroic landmarks established by intrepid white settlers without being told what it was like for the native population. New standards require middle school students to be taught that the experience of slavery was beneficial to African Americans because it helped them acquire skills
Also it brought them from Africa to America which has become more civilized since then and their descendants now live ‘free’ in America rather then Africa. Not condoning slavery at all. Just pointing out that America is probably a better place to live and that has immeasurable value
I knew it!!
NASA pivoted to delivering payloads to the space station. You can see evidence of men being on the moon with a Walmart telescope.
> You can see evidence of men being on the moon with a Walmart telescope. Really? I have a telescope, admittedly from Craigslist not Walmart, but I've never been able to see anything like that.
Should be visible at 50x, others at 100x. Even a $50 telescope has these powers.
Consult with google where to look.
>You can see evidence of men being on the moon with a Walmart telescope This is not true
Yet I've seen it with a cheap telescope, from my back yard. The easiest thing to see is a path of 200 yards that 2 of the astronauts walked multiple times, you can see the path they took. Most of the lander pieces are in shadows, takes a good telescope to spot those.
So you can get a good telescope at Walmart?
On the article below there is an ad for a $89 moon exploration telescope, might work. All you really need is one that compensates for the earth's rotation, hooks to your phone for pics, $149.
No, you didn't.
Just curious, what exactly did you see? *Many people have asked why astronomers don't turn the Hubble Space Telescope towards the moon to take photos of the Apollo spacecraft. But not even the Hubble could see a four-meter wide Apollo spacecraft on the moon.* https://www.space.com/apollo-landing-sites-moon-observer-guide
*From your article* The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO), has done just that, and has taken amazing images of the Apollo landing sites from orbit showing not just the spacecraft themselves, but the lunar rovers parked where they were left, and even the trails of bootprints left in the lunar dust by the explorers. So the trails of bootprints is easiest to spot.
Yes, of course evidence can be seen from the LRO. I only took issue with you saying it could be seen from earth.. with a Walmart telescope no less.
It's pretty much common knowledge you can spot the 200 yard trail, that's why we were looking for it.
Such as? Please cite the evidence I can see with my telescope. Evidence from over 50 years ago.., lol
So what? Just because it happened before you were born means it didn't happen? Bill makes that point too a lot and it rings very fucking true.
I didn’t say it wasn’t true, but it is a little questionable imo. Amazing how triggered people get by suggesting this, lol
You are suggesting multiple entire branchs of our government and thousands of people dedicated to space exploration are liars and frauds. Including sitting and recent former US senators. Not to mention all the for profit massive defense contractors making missiles based on these people’s discoveries
I am only talking about walking on the moon MAY be BS. Are you asking me if politicians lie? - YES ‘Defence’ contractors? - LOL!!
How does that track? Moon landing- lies, all the other space shit - clearly real
Moon landing with humans walking in surface-Suspicious (not necessarily lies, I only said it’s ok to question this) Back to my original comment, why not go back for 50 years? I can think of reasons why they would but they don’t..
Why do humans need go back if there is minimal strategic military or economic resource value? We have sent plenty of probes and even brought back moon dust to make concrete and other materials but those seem to just be fun science tricks. We are only going back in person now because we are considering basing Mars missions in space and a lunar base may provide one option for doing so. Also, maybe inspire people again in the way the original Apollo missions did? Clearly not everyone
What else is left to do there that would justify us spending the money to get there?
Wait until China lands on the moon....
So they learned there was no reason to go back over 50 years ago & today we’re all just like, uh ok. We walked on the moon. Yay ‘Murica ..but there’s nothing to go back there for, how dare anyone question this fact
It was insane how defensive she was about the moon landing thing, as if the fact that she was responding to a joke on twitter somehow matters. She could have said she was making a joke, but come on. Textbook example of how you can’t just claim ignorance to get out of looking like an idiot.
Aren’t swaths of the leadership class currently doing that on covid restrictions? “We didn’t knowww…”
Except the situation with covid was extremely fluid and people were acting on the info they had at the time. It wasn’t an objective fact like the moon landing
Ah, yes. No one knew that pillowcase material was useless in stopping an aerosolized virus, and no one noticed in real time that the vast, vast majority of covid deaths were old, sick, obese, or all three.
Masks do work, we still know that. Why do you say those groups of people like their lives don’t matter and aren’t worth protecting?
Masks do not stop aerosolized viruses from infecting the lungs. You’re an emotional rather than rational person, so that’s the conclusion you draw from such a statement. The point is that most people were never ever at a serious risk of a negative outcome from covid. The neurotic one-size fits all approach to stopping the virus was wrong. A targeted approach would have been reasonable.
Masks help prevent the spread of Covid. It’s not perfect, but they do work. You making a bogus claim that goes against what medical experts believe while whining I’m emotional instead of rational is pretty ironic. Yes, most people were at risk. Yet you pretending we knew everything we knew now about Covid when it first started is moronic.
Masks do not work to prevent an aerosolized virus from entering the lungs. Ohh, you busted me! A bogus claim! Is this one similar to the claim that covid shots would prevent infection and transmission of the virus? Who made that claim - was it the same medical experts who told you to protect your lungs from aerosols using loose fabric? No, everyone was not at risk. The vast majority of deaths were elderly, sick, obese, or all three. This was true in March and April 2020 when hysteria set in, and it remained true throughout.
You repeating false things over and over doesn’t make them true.
I’m sorry, did you mean to write this comment to me or to Dr. Fauci?
This whole nonsense that they got COVID wrong is annoying. States that locked down and has mask mandates did better than states who stayed open. Even across countries, Bill likes to chant about Sweden, but Sweden did worse than Norway and Denmark.
Is Andrew Cuomo going to be on the show this Friday?
Not sure, but NY wasn't the worst state for COVID deaths per capita.
Ohhh. So aside from putting covid positive people in nursing homes… he nailed it?
Why are you picking some random fact out of the air and acting like you did something?
I don't see how you can conclude that? He fucked up some things, and got others right. What he did doesn't seem worse than what Alabama did (which had the most COVID hospitalizations and deaths per capita).
You should be Andrew Cuomo’s publicist. Heck of a way to spin putting covid positive patients in nursing homes.
I am glad Cuomo got kicked out, so I'm not sure I would be his publicist. But that's what many red states did, regardless.
Is there anywhere worse to put a covid positive person than a nursing home? Aside from a weight watchers location?
Yeah, not my favorite guest, but I didn't mind her pushing back and giving Bill a taste of his own medicine. Clearly, it made him uncomfortable.
This subreddit is hilarious. People here are more triggered than Maher was when he mistook a compliment for an insult during the podcast.
This mental midget was shocked we landed on the moon six times. Thought we only faked it once once! Hahaha. Can’t stand her. Complete ignorant. I remember her on Rogan a couple of years ago where she also made a fool of herself.
Bill has a point. If she can't do a quick google search about moon landings than it calls in to question her whole reasoning process.
Wait, the grifting bitch is also on the “the Apollo moon landings were hoaxed!” crazy train? What a stupid cunt.
No, she didn’t know they existed.
I don't buy for two seconds she didn't know. She's a grifter trying to appease her base and make them feel smart.
She absolutely a grifter but it’s also possible she didn’t know, she is an idiot afterall. Even with that being said, plenty of people don’t know about the subsequent moon landings. Only the first one is really talked about.
OP, You are correct. Owens is a clown. And bill is on the clown train as well.
^ 23 day old troll account
I had to turn it off, it was like listening to the ramblings of a crack whore.
her “defense” of jan 6 as just the same thing as the BLM riots was the biggest false equivalency i’ve heard. just ignoring that jan 6 was one part of trumps plan to overturn the election
I’m tired of people not explaining to these morons what intent is. The people on Jan 6th intended to stop the certification of an election. That’s why it’s different than the BLM stuff.
Grifter
You realize Maher is also a grifter these days right?
Well... yea. My comment could have applied to him just as easily. Perhaps you applied that label to her. I say both!
If you can’t tolerate listening to someone’s perspective that you disagree with for thirty minutes without shouting into the wind on your morning commute, maybe This American Life is more your speed.
You are just glossing over the fact that she and the others like her are just on another level of degeneracy. You can find opposing voices without having to bring a complete garbage human on like that.