Bill Maher: the crude sound-bite csar...

[norwegianwood]

 

 Who doubts the power

source in his electric car

Thinks his smarts unsurpassed

By those who know

Theirs run on gas

He thinks only those

With letters post their names

should be heeded on things

Like global warming/ climate change

Which HE declares to be a fact

And cites the drought out in the west

Sorry Mr. Maher that doesn't

Pass the Delta Smelt test

He makes claims he's citing polls

With no provision of sources

And draws conclusions from only some

 

But not ALL  the relevant forces

 

That impact on such things

 

As climate, death and disease

 

Might we see YOUR

 

Credentials, if you please?

 

And, also, how about those

 

Of your invited guests

 

Who give up gleefully high-fives

 

To all of your sneers and jests

 

And not just anyone, but a Democrat

 

Who had just admonished

 

While citing things from Israel's past

 

That somehow should astonish

 

Opponents here into a

 

Discourse up to his standard

 

He exposed himself partisan

 

Who in 2010 should be fired

 

Or the Ohio Dem

 

Dripping with soft bigotry

 

With all of her "I have Muslim friends

 

Look at them, they need me."

 

And, then, in all of her glory

 

Janeane Garafalo

 

Her two most favorite gigs

 

Keith Olbermann and your show

 

Where she smears Republicans

 

For the company of a few

 

Who are radical and hateful

 

To minorities, it's true

 

But she ignores the simple fact

 

That Marxist, Communist radicals

 

Follow the Democrats

 

That this woman is a racist

 

Could not be any clearer

 

Perhaps she could benefit

 

From the provision of a mirror

 

Great gathering Bill!

 

Party of the ‘Big Tent'

 

All gathered for one purpose

 

To rant, decry, sneer and lament

 

The freedoms of anyone, you deem

 

Less intelligent than you

 

And to suggest that they

 

Should be silenced, censored or subdued

 

And to attempt to give

 

A swift kick and a flailin'

 

To the success and following

 

Of former Gov. Palin

 

You condescend

 

Palin's intellect and such

 

Like the adage goes, Bill

 

You protest too much

 

As to your demand

 

That we heed the advice

 

Of those with degrees

 

I agree t'would be nice

 

So, I offer you these

 

For your edification

 

http://www.businessandmedia.org/specialreports/2007/globalwarming/SkepticalScientists.asp

 

And ask that you give them

 

Due consideration

 

As to those polls

 

On what Americans say

 

About government provision

 

Of healthcare today

 

I don't know what numbers

 

You were given to cite

 

But according to mine

 

Yours just aren't right

 

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/october_2009/fear_of_losing_private_health_insurance_trumps_public_option

 

(The first question finds that 46% favor the creation of a government-sponsored non-profit health insurance option that people could choose instead of a private health insurance plan. Thirty-seven percent (37%) are opposed.

The second question asked about the creation of a public option if it encouraged companies to drop private health insurance coverage for their workers. Given that possibility, support for the public option falls to 29%, and opposition rises to 58%.

Even if it encourages employers to drop private health insurance for their workers, 51% of Democrats still support the public option. Eighty-two percent (82%) of Republicans and 61% of voters not affiliated with either party are opposed. )

 

Shame on you Bill

 

Lying like that

 

63% want it, you say

 

But that's not supported by facts

 

But not much of your crude

 

Drive-by sound-bites display

 

A tolerance for discussion

 

Challenge or debate

 

Evidenced in your panel

 

Well, in truth, more a CHOIR

 

Murmuring ALL heretics

 

Be burned on a pyre

 

Thus is the irony

 

So obvious to us

 

The zealous religion

 Of Reverend "Religulous"

 

 P Way

10/04/2009

in response to this show

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZ5V9vyqIQs&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YoOrYaenM0&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZ5V9vyqIQs&feature=related

(you can find the rest of the show...)

OH..I almost forgot...Janeane...GUESS what? An African American DID show up at a PROTEST...a protest OF the people you say are RACISTS...NO outcry...just a MISREPORTING by your sainted CNN.

P

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Jafra_mommy]

Oct. 4, 2009 at 2:43 PM

Just an FYI, Rasmussen Report is notorious for providing incredibly biased information. Personally, if I was trying to prove a point, I would NEVER use them. You're better off going with Gallup, their numbers are still in favor of your cause.

As for Bill Maher... he's just as quick to criticize liberals as he is conservatives. To me, he's kind of like the Penn and Teller show Bullshit. He's more interested in pointing out stupidity than he is on converying a certain political point.

That said, I still don't watch his TV show. And Sarah Palin is an idiot.

[norwegianwood]

Oct. 4, 2009 at 2:55 PM

LMAO...well, forgive me if I disagree with you on Gallup Versus Rasmussen:

Grading The National Polls: Rasmussen In First, Gallup And Zogby Last

By Eric Kleefeld - November 5, 2008, 2:46PM

So looking back on our polling obsession about this race, which pollsters actually did the best job of calling this race, comparing the final polls to the actual results?

Taking a look at the national polls, who was correct in predicting Barack Obama at around 52%, and who got the right margin of a six-point popular vote win over John McCain?

Take a look at these final polls:

Rasmussen: Obama 52%, McCain 46%

GWU: Obama 49%, McCain 44%

Research 2000: Obama 51% McCain 46%

Zogby: Obama 54%, McCain 43%

IBD/TIPP: Obama 48%, McCain 42%

ABC/WaPo: Obama 53%, McCain 44%

CBS: Obama 51%, McCain 42%

Fox News: Obama 50%, McCain 43%

Ipsos/McClatchy: Obama 50%, McCain 42%.

Hotline/Diageo: Obama 50%, McCain 45%

Gallup: Obama 53%, McCain 42%

 

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/11/grading_the_national_polls_ras.php

(Original Poster)

[Jafra_mommy]

Oct. 4, 2009 at 4:13 PM

No offense, but that article proves nothing. It's just stating that as far as the national election goes, they were all RIGHT (because they all give a certain number of points in which they could err), but Rasmussen gave the best guess in regards to the election.

And? Rasmussen was closest on that guess, but? That doesn't prove that they are ALWAYS right, nor does it prove that they're not. However, they have a history of being more biased with their results than other polling places.

[realtorshelly]

Oct. 4, 2009 at 4:21 PM

BRAVO, P ! :o)

I hate Bill Maher...he's just another Garafalo enabler. *barf*

 

[norwegianwood]

Oct. 4, 2009 at 5:38 PM

haha NOT no almost DOUBLE to the one side BIASED...Sorry,

http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/stuff_for_blog/Evidence%20of%20Systematic%20Bias%20in%202008%20Presidential%20Polling%20(1).pdf

We performed a permutation test by means of simulation to assess the statistical significance of the period in which the difference was positive for 11 out of 12 days. In each simulation we created a random permutation of the percentages given above. In only 31 out of the 100,000 simulations we ran did we find a period in which the differences were positive at least eleven out of twelve consecutive days. Although we acknowledge that this is a

 

post hoc analysis, the smallness of the significance probability that we found (p

= .00031) still provides evidence that, for at least some portion of the study period, there was relative bias between the Gallup and Rasmussen polls. It is our impression that both of these polling agencies are diligent in their efforts to combat bias. Our findings illustrate that even under these circumstances, bias can arise. Bias is not an anomaly in polling, it is the natural state.

cheers

P

(Original Poster)

[norwegianwood]

Oct. 4, 2009 at 5:38 PM

Thanks Shel!

(Original Poster)

[Malapertinent]

Oct. 4, 2009 at 9:33 PM

LOL @ Shell's Garafolo comment.  Mahr claims to be unaffiliated.  Guess that's like saying Col. Sanders prefers the Big Mac...NOT!

Thanks for the post!

[realtorshelly]

Oct. 5, 2009 at 9:56 AM

You're welcome , P. xoxo

LOL Mal. :o)

At least Garafolo owns the world's smartest dog. LOL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVSifr4RhiQ

 

[Jafra_mommy]

Oct. 5, 2009 at 10:22 AM

haha NOT no almost DOUBLE to the one side BIASED

Ok... seriously, wtf is that? Not no almost... what? And again, I'm not referencing presidential polling, but polling in general. There is a DIFFERENCE between the two and Rasmussen Reports results always lean towards the right more than all the others.

So, if you do choose to respond to this I have two requests. First, stop bringing up articles that solely reference presidential polling because that's not even the subject of your journal. Second, use proper English so that I can understand what you're attempting to communicate. What you actually wrote from your previous post makes absolutely NO sense. It's like saying "Yes, absolutely, maybe".

[norwegianwood]

Oct. 6, 2009 at 12:11 AM

LMAO thanks for the video Shel

Jafra? yeah. Sorry, but what is REALLY not related to the freaking post? Your opinion on the reliability of Rasmussen. I posted you a study that was done that shwed that ALL of them have BIAS, but WORK diligently to mitigate it. I don't think you can prove that it would be different per TOPIC. And frankly...I'm no longer interested in engaging you on the topic. You don't trust them, fine. I do. And I will continue to feel them more credible, your opinion not withstanding.

All but ONE sentence was written by someone else. Mine was simply in response to yours as if IN conversation. Alluding to Gallup being OFF by almost DOUBLE the actual numbers--i.e. they are biased to the NTH degree. LOL

P

(Original Poster)