Maher: 'If a Brick Came Through Rupert Murdoch’s Apartment' Fox 'Would Be a Lot More Gentle' to Protesters
It appears Bill Maher and Rachel Maddow have now totally forgotten the new civility edict issued after Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords' (D-Ariz.) was shot this past January.
On The Rachel Maddow Show Tuesday, Maher said of the protesters demonstrating near the homes of some New York millionaires earlier in the day, "If a brick came through Rupert Murdoch’s apartment, yes, I have a feeling Fox News would be a lot more gentle on the Wall Street people." Maddow thought that was funny (video follows with transcript and commentary):
RACHEL MADDOW, HOST: I wonder though if you just think back on this year, even just the year in stupid punditry, and the amount of power that has been ascribed to the Tea Party movement. I mean, they're seen as essentially driving all Republican political decisions at this point. Is that in part because they were seen as being so potentially, because they were seen as being potentially violent, because they were seen as an unruly mob?
What kind of nonsense is that?
There wasn't any violence at Tea Party events. Quite the contrary, they were so peaceful that police forces around the country gave attendees far more leeway than they do most protesters.
But Maddow like so many of her MSNBC colleagues isn't one to let facts get in the way of her point:
MADDOW: I was thinking about that as we see Eric Cantor and these other Republican Congressmen denouncing the Occupy Wall Street people as, you know, an angry mob and somehow dangerous to the country. I wonder if a sense of dangerousness is what gives them power.
BILL MAHER: Well, yeah, I think so. I don't think anyone feels that we're in a country like so many in the world. Let's remember we are luckier than most where violence is really going to rule the day and effect policy. But, yeah, people can be intimidated by that kind of thing. I mean, this idea that they're marching now on millionaires' homes, I couldn't help but think of that scene in the Martin Scorsese movie "Gangs of New York" where the riots break out in New York and Martin Scorsese has that cameo where he plays the rich guy. You know, he's in his Fifth Avenue apartment and a brick comes through the window. Well, you know, if a brick came through Rupert Murdoch’s apartment, yes, I have a feeling Fox News would be a lot more gentle on the Wall Street people.
MADDOW: [Laughs]
I guess it's okay for a liberal media member to suggest damage be done to someone's property - even in jest - if the innocent victim is a rich conservative.
What should we expect from a man who back in 2007 expressed remorse that the Taliban's assassination attempt of former Vice President Dick Cheney failed.
As for Maddow's laughter, just remember that she's considered by most of her admirers in the press to be one of MSNBC's finest commentators.
Need I say more?
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Inciting Violence?
Submitted by dscott on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 1:26am.
So if a brick does go through Murdoch's window, will Maher proclaim, I WAS JUST KIDDING.
What will MSNBC's response be? Suspend a commentator for inciting violence? Sounds to me like a great (PR) lawsuit by NewsCorp against NBC and it's parent company - GE, Comcast and Universal Studios.
Let the corporate wars begin.
Tom Metzger Democrat
Submitted by Injest on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 3:48am.
I guess it's okay for a liberal media member to suggest damage be done to someone's property - even in jest - if the innocent victim is a rich conservative. No that’s called insighting violence Tom metzger
What should we expect from a man who back in 2007 expressed remorse that the Taliban's assassination attempt of former Vice President Dick Cheney failed.
As for Maddow's laughter, just remember that she's considered by most of her admirers in the press to be one of MSNBC's finest commentators.
Need I say more?
The group was eventually bankrupted as the result of a civil lawsuit centered on its involvement in the 1988 murder of Mulugeta Seraw, an Ethiopian man who came to the United States to attend college. In 1988, white power skinheads affiliated with WAR were convicted of killing Seraw and sent to prison. Kenneth Mieske said he and the two others killed Seraw "because of his race." Metzger declared that they did a "civic duty" by killing Seraw.Morris Dees and the Southern Poverty Law Center filed a civil suit against him, arguing that WAR influenced Seraw's killers by encouraging their group East Side White Pride to commit violence.
Well, you should probably add that Metzger in the past has
Submitted by Jer on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 4:18am.
been welcomed by the Democrats very much like David Duke was welcomed by the Republicans: Get outta here, you racist scum.
from wiki...
Metzger has registered at various times as a Republican or Democrat. In 1964, he served as a precinct worker for the Republican presidential candidate Barry Goldwater.
In 1980, Metzger won the Democratic Party nomination for the U.S. House of Representatives with over 40,000 votes in a San Diego-area district.[27] He had changed his party registration from Republican to Democrat earlier in the year. The local Democratic Party chairman disavowed his candidacy, instead endorsing incumbent four-term Republican Clair Burgener.[28] Metzger lost by over 200,000 votes in November 1980 to a several-term incumbent in a heavily Republican district.
Jer
Hay, Jer...
Submitted by CobraMan on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 1:58pm.
Hay, Jer, in addition to David Duke, let's toss in Woodrow Wilson's name as another totally irrelevant, and, therefor, unnecessary point of discussion. He was, after all, probably the most raciest Democrat, and a "Progressive," none the less, ever to hold office as President. I wonder how many Democrats supported Wilson? It was pretty much all of them, wasn't it?
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Hi, Cobra...
Submitted by Jer on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 7:29pm.
Since when is it appropriate to dismiss a reasonably analogous scenario such as the Duke and Metzger comparison as an irrelevancy--which it is clearly not, unlike your tossing Wilson into the mix which is of no instructive value at all.
Jer
Here's the reason, Jer
Submitted by CobraMan on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 9:11pm.
Here's the reason, Jer: Because he wan't rejected by the democrats as you claim. HE WAS ACCEPTED.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
sigh....
Submitted by Jer on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 10:34pm.
Electoral history
California's 43rd Congressional District Democratic Primary election, June 3, 1980[30]
Party Candidate Votes Percentage
Democratic Tom Metzger 33,071 37.1%
Democratic Ed Skagen 32,679 36.6%
Democratic Hubert Higgins 23,462 26.3%
Totals 89,212 100.0%
Voter turnout %
****************************************
United States House of Representatives elections, 1980[31]
Party Candidate Votes Percentage
Republican Clair W. Burgener (incumbent) 298,815 86.6%
Democratic Tom Metzger 46,361 13.4%
Totals 345,176 100.0%
Voter turnout %
************************************************
United States Senatorial Democratic Primary election, June 8, 1982[32]
Party Candidate Votes Percentage
Democratic Edmund G. "Jerry" Brown, Jr. 1,392,660 50.7%
Democratic Gore Vidal 415,366 15.1%
Democratic Paul B. Carpenter 415,198 15.1%
Democratic Daniel K. Whitehurst 167,574 6.1%
Democratic Richard Morgan 94,908 3.4%
Democratic Tom Metzger 76,502 2.8%
Democratic Walter R. Buchanan 55,727 2.0%
Democratic Bob Hampton 37,427 1.4%
Democratic Raymond "RayJ" Caplette 31,865 1.2%
Democratic William F. Wertz 30,795 1.1%
Democratic May Chote 30,743 1.1%
Totals 2,748,765 100.0%
Voter turnout %
Please focus on the first entry under "Electoral History" i.e. the Democratic Primary in June 1980.
Jer
David Duke was publicly
Submitted by dscott on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 10:45pm.
David Duke was publicly ejected from the GOP
Metzger by your Wiki link is a former Grand Wizard of the KKK and then moved on to form another hate group. On another site I see he was temporarily associated with David Duke whom Metzger didn't consider serious at all about his committment to the KKK. http://www.johnnyleeclary.com/files/page.php?p=159
Let's not forget Robert Byrd, Senator of West Virginia, a former Kleagle and Imperial Wizard of the KKK, yet for some reason the Dem party NEVER ejected him??? Do we see a pattern here?
It's interesting to note.
Submitted by CobraMan on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 2:11pm.
It's interesting to note that, despite your "get outta here" claim, Metzger actually WON the Democratic nomination. So, who actually rejected him, the democrats who nominated him or the republicans and independents who voted in the "heavily Republican" district? It looks to me as if the democrats were on the losing end of that decision! So much for your "get outta here" claim. It was more like "Welcome Aboard!"
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Thanks for making my point, Cobra...
Submitted by Jer on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 7:39pm.
Look at the numbers and the facts. Metzger eked out a primary win in 1980 by a razor-thin margin receiving far less than 50% of the votes. He was rejected by the Democratic establishment and subsequently trounced in the general election in which almost half of the Dems who had voted in the primary either stayed home or voted for the Republican candidate.
Two years later, Metzger received a rousing 2.8%!!! of the vote in the Democratic primary. Quite a Welcome Wagon rolled out by the Dems for the racist scumbag Metzger.
Jer
A what, Jer?
Submitted by CobraMan on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 9:30pm.
I would hardly call a 40 THOUSAND plus vote advantage a "razor thin margin." But, then again, I'm not trying to spin that obvious victory into some kind of refutation.
He WON the nomination, they WANTED him as their candidate. He was accepted by the democrats, so much so that they wanted him to represent them in Congress. That's more than just a Welcome Wagon. That's the democrats hoisting him up on their shoulders and attempting to carry him all the way to DC. There's no way you can ever possibly try to change that into something less that the acceptance of a racist as their preferred Representative, try as you might.
Oh, and as for his subsequent loss in the next election cycle, do you think that his trouncing in the previous general election had ANYTHING to do with that? I do, for that fits the democrat's voting patterns to a Tee. They always reject the previous losers. Look at Al Gore for a perfect example. He lost his one and only bid for President, so, what did he do? He stopped trying altogether. WHY? Because, as a looser, he knew he couldn't get the support of the democrats. That's how the "modern" democrats work: "Loosers" need not apply.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Okay, Cobra...What would you call
Submitted by Jer on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 9:41pm.
a 392 vote advantage? 3-9-2. Because that was the margin of Metzger's landslide.--not forty thousand. "Razor thin" sums it up pretty well in my book, but maybe you have a better suggestion. Re-examine the actual numbers and facts. Then go ahead and spin them any way you like.
But what's your objective here, Cobra? Do you want me to concede the Democratic party was the dominant party of the KKK, segregation and racism? No problem. It is conceded. Do you want me to admit there are still racist Democrats? So admitted. Do you think the Republican party is completely devoid of racists? If so, you're dreaming.
Jer
Jer, read your own post
Submitted by CobraMan on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 10:31pm.
Jer, read your own post, where it showed a 40,000, that's forty thousand, vote victory in the nomination. WHERE did you come up with this "392" vote advantage?
In case you missed it, here it is again: "In 1980, Metzger won the Democratic Party nomination for the U.S. House of Representatives with over 40,000 votes in a San Diego-area district."
And my point? That's obvious: despite your claims that the democrats didn't want the guy, they SELECTED HIM TO REPRESENT THEM IN CONGRESS! I don't know about you, but most people don't select someone they don't want to represent them.
Jer, stop trying to make the claim that the democrats rejected this man because of his racism. His victory in the nomination proves that claim false.
Oh, and Jer, please, do me a favor. Name a single known racist that the Republicans have selected in any primary in the last 40 to 50 years. Just one, please. Your attempt to equate the KNOWN racism of the democratic party with the ASSUMED racism of the republican party is disingenuous at best, and down right fraudulent at worst.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Or to turn it around . . .
Submitted by Galvanic on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 8:19am.
. . . What if protesters vandalized the corporate property of Comcast? Would Maddow laugh? Would Schultz cheer them on? Would Sharpton call the protesters and congratulate them?
If a brick
Submitted by theduck6 on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 8:34am.
went through Bill Maher's face, how could you tell?
Thank God for alternative media to counterbalance all the one sided sycophantic drivel from the left and has been comics and TV sitcom cast offs.
Who Has A Car...
Submitted by Winghunter on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 1:29am.
....that has Maher's apartment name on it?
Worse Than Ed Schultz
Submitted by rammingspeed on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 2:03am.
Bill Maher is pond scum. No principles. No morality. Just selfish demands that he get his way, with no regard for decorum. But as bad as he is, it is the overarching media structure that personifies evil itself. Maher is allowed (and at least tacity encouraged) to say and do whatever he wants. The people who pull the trigger on Sarah Palin (pun intended) go silent with someone like Maher. And Maher is far, far worse than ANYONE on the right. He is a soul brother of Michael Moore, who is an unreconstructed Marxist. The math from there is easy.
Lefties...
Submitted by adamsmith on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 11:07am.
including Bill Maher are slipping into mental retardation....It's a Brave New World...
She will proclaim
Submitted by Prisondog1776 on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 2:15am.
that she said "potentially violent". I did not say they were violent, i said "potentially violent. Just as Maher says that he is a comedian, its a play on words.
I"ve known bricks that have
Submitted by killa37 on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 2:36am.
I"ve known bricks that have more sense than Donkeyface..............
Bricks....
Submitted by GeneralAl on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 7:28am.
"I"ve known bricks that have more sense than Donkeyface.."
In that case, that brick just might knock some sense into this Dumb Ass!
"Old Soldiers never die, they just fade away"!
Maher
Submitted by NewLife56 on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 6:16am.
Maher:'If a Brick Came Through Rupert Murdoch’s Apartment' 'Would Be a Lot More Gentle' to Protesters
Me: "If a brick smacked you on the head, Global Warming may stop"
This isn't going to be very Christian of me to post but
Submitted by gmaniac1 on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 6:17am.
if the proverbial brick comes back to physically harm Maher for his incendiary comments all I can say is "you reap what you sow."
I'm not wishing it by all means but I won't weep for him or people like him if their own bullcrap comes back to harm them.
Can't wait to see maher on
Submitted by LAM SON 719 on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 6:30am.
Can't wait to see maher on his knees begging allah for forgiveness and renouncing atheism for islam, useless coward.
If a brick came crashing down on your head
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 6:54am.
I would be more than happy to piss on your grave, billy.
Just sayin'.
Not me, Restless.
Submitted by UpNorth on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 10:37pm.
After eating in Army mess halls for 3 years, I refuse to stand in line, ever again.
2 Hour wait for a two minute thrill
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 11:16pm.
Precisely why I don't ride roller coasters.
In this case, the thrill just might be worth it.
Change "Hour" to "Month" and you've just described
Submitted by Jer on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 11:28pm.
my sex life.
Jer
Jer
Submitted by hydrodynDM on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 11:36pm.
A little too much information on that one, buddy.
By the way... so, um, you want to catch a movie or something this weekend?
I'll pay... I mean bi... I mean buy.
Better yet, hydro...
Submitted by Jer on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 11:57pm.
I could put on some Classic Judy Garland, uncork a fine Cabernet, and well, I could just listen to you talk about that science stuff all night long.
Jer
Jeez Jer.................you
Submitted by killa37 on Thu, 10/13/2011 - 3:42am.
Jeez Jer.................you goin' metro-sexual on me, or sumpin???
And if Kanye West and Russell
Submitted by motherbelt on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 7:15am.
And if Kanye West and Russell Simmons got verbally abused, or physically attacked for being two of the "1%" when they went down there, the attitude of liberal Hollywood elites would be a whole lot different too.
If any violence ensues from
Submitted by kareling on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 7:29am.
If any violence ensues from the Occupy crowd, they'll say it's because Eric Cantor incited them to it with his talk of mobs, etc. It will always, one way or another, be the fault of conservatives/Republicans/Tea Party.
Who's preaching violence?
Submitted by motherbelt on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 8:11am.
[Tea Party] potentially violent, because they were seen as an unruly mob?
You mean like THIS, Rachel???
You know I bet Maher's
Submitted by DaChew on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 9:17am.
You know I bet Maher's commentary would definitely change if someone were to hilariously cave-in his face with a baseball bat and then laughingly smash both his kneecaps. But I kid, I kid.
Hey, Bill's right. Fantasizing about committing violence on people we disagree with is comedy gold. It's gold, I tell you!
Not so sure
Submitted by octavioj on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 10:17am.
Was not Mr. Murdoch attacked with a pie in England? And did that change his positions and opinions? It will only reinforce his convictions.
HBO
Submitted by Upland_Patriot on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 11:21am.
I already boycott movies by other liberal pukes, i.e. Matt Demon, bucket head Rosie O'Donnell, Morgan Free-ride etc. Now I am considering dropping HBO, not for just this one idiotic comment by Maher, but it never stops! Progressives are such hypocrites.
And here's the inherent Risk
Submitted by Galvanic on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 9:39pm.
http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/10/11/occupy-l-a-speaker-violence-wi...
There are violence advocates within the ranks of the peaceful protesters. They are looking for the opportunity to provoke a violent reaction from law enforcement in front of television cameras, and they will sacrifice the health and even lives of any peaceful protesters for the cause.
Now that the Occupy movement has begun, and considering there is no consensus on its goals -- in other words, when does it end? -- the potential for provocateurs to instigate violence grows with each passing day.
"[T]he amount of power that has been ascribed to the Tea Party
Submitted by Quasi-socialist on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 12:48pm.
movement. I mean, they're seen as essentially driving all Republican political decisions at this point."
Key word: "ascribed". Yes, the Tea Party has been "ascribed" as being powerful enough to cause a downgrade in the US' credit rating, as having an iron grip on the Republican party.
This is called selling a narrative on the success (or buy-in) of a previous narrative. Yes, once you've subscribed to the narrative, other narratives are possible implications of it.
The Tea Party has this amazing capability to be dictator and dying all at once. Astounding!
If a brick went through
Submitted by ex buff e-dub on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 12:56pm.
If a brick went through Murdoch's window, I'd expect him to staunchly defend his life / home / property. Time to unlock the gun safe, remove the trigger locks, and stand by...
Socialists understand their problem
Submitted by Fredy on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 1:36pm.
Every time major socialist movements take hold, tens of millions of people that support the existing system must be eliminated. While the signs in the current ows call for just 1% to be eliminated, the truth is they all know it will be many more.
I suspect that they will need to 'remove' more than 75 million to achieve their goals. Mahr is just pointing out how it all starts with a brick tosser.
It's funny how the Nazi-obsessed Maher
Submitted by Quasi-socialist on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 4:09pm.
avoids any acknowledgement that he's talking about Breaking Glass, just as an OWS fool is talking about Long Knives (really Madame Guillotine, but that's a pretty long blade).
Hay, Bill...
Submitted by CobraMan on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 1:56pm.
Hay, Bill, if a brick really smashed through that window, would you denounce it as a violent act, an act of violent intimidation? Or would you celebrate it as an expression of "free speech?"
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Can any of those Protesters Shoot? Bill Wahts To Find Out.
Submitted by Avitar on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 3:08pm.
Bill is an idiot and then some. I know that Bill Mahr knows that Oliver North works for Fox and knows more snipers than anyone else in television. Encouraging the fleabag protesters to engage in violence is like demanding that unarmed soldiers charge machine guns.
Maddow endorsed everything
Submitted by tombaker on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 5:38pm.
Maddow endorsed everything that Mahr was saying. The entire interview went much further, although this snippet was amazing that she did not challenge Mahr advocating violence to gain political advantage.
Maddow also joined in when Mahr said that Tea Party was named after a gay sex act.
Maddow endorsed Mahr contention that Republicans are evil hearted in the many ways that Mahr expanded on.
Maddow endorsed Mahr as he professed hatred and comtempt for all religions, as they attacked Mormons also.
Maddow does comercials on CNBC talking about what harms splitting the nations does, THEN on her own program she gets giggly excited as misogynist attacks 1/3rd of the nation.
Maddow sees the world as US vs THEM, she uses hate speech buddled up in giggles. Its all okay for her endorsement of Mahr hate, as she believe one thing only, and that this one thing makes everything she does okay, she thinks she is right....and the harm she does to others, is justified.
"people can be intimidated by that kind of thing"
Submitted by Newsbubba on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 8:51pm.
Yeah, Billy, they can. It is usually liberals who are easily intimidated.
I have a feeling that Mr. Murdock would just increase his level of security and keep right on hammering away at what he believes.
Bambi is a perfect example of "liberal courage" right now with Iran. First He reached out to them. Remember that. They Shiite right in his face. Now they literally launch an attack on the US. Want to bet we don't do one damned thing but yak, yak, yak?
We should have been blowing away their training camps today, just to send them a message.
No, Billy. Most conservatives I know are armed. Most liberals I know aren't. That pretty much sums it up.
So when you turn your mobs loose on the rest of us with their "pitchforks in the street," just remember we may be packing .357 and up. I really like the "street sweeper."
Proof of evolution
Submitted by Robersire on Wed, 10/12/2011 - 9:05pm.
Bill Maher is proof of evolution he is the missing link