S18.E04: Steve Bannon, Fareed Zakaria, Andrew Gillum, Ezra Klein, and Sarah Isgur

[Guest]

Airs February 7, 2020

Quote

Guests: Steve Bannon, Fareed Zakaria, Andrew Gillum, Ezra Klein, and Sarah Isgur

 

[Iris987]

I normally stay away from this forum because of the "no politics" rule and I don't trust myself. But can I just go on the record as saying Steve Bannon, Bill? Go fuck yourself.

[Robert Lynch]

Bannon.....Why? I had to fast forward his discussion. It was too much to handle. I needed a bath after that. Ugggh.....

Edited February 8, 2020 by Robert Lynch

[Caseysgirl]

Bill, Steve Brannon just played you!  You couldn’t get a word in.  So please, don’t give him a forum on a show that I watch or Ill have to stop watching.

[bobbyjoe]

Steve Bannon this week and Alan Dershowitz next week.  Plus the Both-siderist’s bothsider Fareed Zakaria tonight and next week New York Times conservative columnist Bret Stephens, best known recently for being called out for using an article by a race-baiting white supremacist in one of his columns.
 

Yeah, I think I’m gonna take a break from Maher’s show for awhile.

Edited February 8, 2020 by bobbyjoe

[Pearson80]

Steve Bannon, no words!  what the hell was Bill thinking? Steve looked awful as always like he had slept under a bride after a three day bender, yuck!

Edited February 8, 2020 by Pearson80

[ottoDbusdriver]

18 minutes ago, Pearson80 said:

Steve Bannon, no words!  what the hell was Bill thinking? Steve looked awful as always like he had slept under a bride after a three day bender, yuck!

"slept under a bride after a three day bender" -- that made me snort out loud for some reason. 

[Milburn Stone]

As if Bannon weren't bad enough, the opening moments of the panel were unbearable, with so much meaningless, desperate yammering over each other that it was maddening. The cacophony was too much for us to take, and we switched it off.

[Pike Ludwell]

If you're gonna have Steve Bannon on you have to be prepared to get "rude". You have to interrupt him, shout over him, call him a liar. Tell him to keep his answers shorter so you can correct all of his errors. Do what it takes to control the conversation, and that might mean it totally degenerates to a shouting match, but if you are not prepared to do that don't have him on.

I love Bannon's frequent use of ESP as an arguing technique. Like "this attitude of you and the audience right here is why you are going to get clobbered in Nov." And the he talks fast to keep the floor and lets that idiocy go uncorrected.

[Pike Ludwell]

Bill is fervently pushing (along with too many others in the media) the talking point that this was Trump's "best week ever". I don't get why Bill is so happy to accept the results of that 49% poll. It is clearly an outlier or at best a one time sort of sympathy reaction. Why be so eager to jump in on that? And the partisan "acquittal" has been expected for  months.

[scrb]

13 hours ago, Caseysgirl said:

Bill, Steve Brannon just played you!  You couldn’t get a word in.  So please, don’t give him a forum on a show that I watch or Ill have to stop watching.

Yeah Bannon had some specific talking points he wanted to get out.

When Fareed came on Bill was saying you also had Bannon on and got criticized for it.

He did an eye roll about being accused of "platforming" Bannon and the like.

Gillum called out the bullshit opening interview.  Forget the word he used.  He was also on the money about Trump using black people as props in the SOTU, not to get the black vote but the white suburban women vote, to show that he has black friends, that he isn't this awful racist.

[sistermagpie]

17 minutes ago, scrb said:

He did an eye roll about being accused of "platforming" Bannon and the like.

Yeah, eye-rolling it doesn't make it less true, Bill. Particularly since the two of them just took the stuff they agreed with and promoted it (He's right, immigration is a problem and liberals just want the whole country full of foreigners!) More and more it seems like that's why Bill likes having these guys on. It's not about listening to the enemy. He can't find liberals who agree with him on this stuff.

 

21 minutes ago, scrb said:

Gillum called out the bullshit opening interview.  Forget the word he used.  He was also on the money about Trump using black people as props in the SOTU, not to get the black vote but the white suburban women vote, to show that he has black friends, that he isn't this awful racist.

And Bill seems to show that it works given that to him this looked like a genuine appeal to black voters like he's not racist anymore.

[Tachi Rocinante]

I kept getting distracted by Sarah Isgur because she looks and sounds like Judy Greer.

[Pike Ludwell]

1 hour ago, scrb said:

Gillum called out the bullshit opening interview.  Forget the word he used.  He was also on the money about Trump using black people as props in the SOTU, not to get the black vote but the white suburban women vote, to show that he has black friends, that he isn't this awful racist.

Notice how Bill reacted with sort of astonishment that this argument would be made (trump using black people as props), because this countered the point Bill was making that trump is a genius, effectively going after the black vote and democrats are morons and never act as genius as trump. Maybe he'll get over his simple minded negativity after the Democrat is decided upon and we then see the pathway clearly.

Edited February 8, 2020 by Pike Ludwell

[kicksave]

15 hours ago, bobbyjoe said:

Steve Bannon this week and Alan Dershowitz next week.  Plus the Both-siderist’s bothsider Fareed Zakaria tonight and next week New York Times conservative columnist Bret Stephens, best known recently for being called out for using an article by a race-baiting white supremacist in one of his columns.
 

Yeah, I think I’m gonna take a break from Maher’s show for awhile.

This is why I quit watching...he seems so desperate to have these alt righters validate him as a "truth" teller, a political renegade that gets the same treatment that they do from college speaker forums and the media. When he had Jordan Peterson on last year, the alt right leader from Canada that he elevated and fawned over, I was disgusted and quit watching. It's bad enough that he has Anne Coulter on every season and glosses over the horrible, racist things she has said and written but now he's giving a platform to the likes of 
Bannon, Peterson, Ben Shapiro, etc.etc. and rarely debates them...mostly he tries to find common ground with them! He's had Bannon on before...he put his Alt Right conspiracy bullshit out there and Maher didn't push back. Bill's show is tired and worn out and Bill might want to cut back on his pot intake...it seems to be making him a little nuts.

[Lifesabeach]

Well at least Bill got in a pretty good shot at the end of the fuckface  bannon piece saying that he wished we had someone as evil as him on our side.  I agree. Someone to kick ass and not worry about re-election and their own personal status.  And Bill was just not in control of that interview as he should have been.  

Yeah, maybe it’s the pot.  🦠🐉

And I completely agree with Andrew Gillum, it’s all about the courts and the judges.  Nancy MacLean, author of Democracy in Chains, and previous guest on this show, lays it all out starting from the first white man landing here to this final plan, so far.  Boosted by the billionaires.  Why do you think the stock market is doing so well?  Manipulation.    Ooehh....I need more pot🧞‍♀️

[Marci]

The one thing I like about Bill is his willingness to put on the “other” side. I like that he listens. I LOVED that he called Romney out, instead of being a kiss ass Democrat. Thank you, Bill.

I was disappointed that Gillum felt it necessary to say he needed his brain cells to recover after Bannon.  I found it silly...your brain cells die when you listen to a differing opinion? Bannon may be buffoonish, but a politician should be able to hold on to his brain cells while listening to him.

[sistermagpie]

25 minutes ago, Marci said:

The one thing I like about Bill is his willingness to put on the “other” side. I like that he listens. I LOVED that he called Romney out, instead of being a kiss ass Democrat. Thank you, Bill.

I was disappointed that Gillum felt it necessary to say he needed his brain cells to recover after Bannon.  I found it silly...your brain cells die when you listen to a differing opinion? Bannon may be buffoonish, but a politician should be able to hold on to his brain cells while listening to him.

No, he didn't mean he couldn't listen to a different opinion, he meant listening to Bannon and Bill talk as if Bannon was speaking in good faith about a reality we all share took him a while to work back to normal conversation.

[kicksave]

2 hours ago, Marci said:

The one thing I like about Bill is his willingness to put on the “other” side. I like that he listens. I LOVED that he called Romney out, instead of being a kiss ass Democrat. Thank you, Bill.

I was disappointed that Gillum felt it necessary to say he needed his brain cells to recover after Bannon.  I found it silly...your brain cells die when you listen to a differing opinion? Bannon may be buffoonish, but a politician should be able to hold on to his brain cells while listening to him.

Bannon being "buffoonish" is hardly how I would describe him. He has spent the last year traveling all over Europe speaking at rallies and in lecture halls to white supremacist groups and supporters of Neo fascism...yelling his support of keeping Europe white and Christian...even saying that they should "wear the label of being a racist as a badge of honor".  He's a dangerous man who is spinning conspiracy theories on everything as fast as he can make them up. He's a misogynist, an anti semite and a racist. Saying he has a "differing opinion" is absurd...his "opinions" are what's fueling hate...never mind his view of blowing up our government and the constitution. 

[Marci]

7 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

No, he didn't mean he couldn't listen to a different opinion, he meant listening to Bannon and Bill talk as if Bannon was speaking in good faith about a reality we all share took him a while to work back to normal conversation.

Exactly.  Poor guy.

[Marci]

5 hours ago, kicksave said:

Bannon being "buffoonish" is hardly how I would describe him. He has spent the last year traveling all over Europe speaking at rallies and in lecture halls to white supremacist groups and supporters of Neo fascism...yelling his support of keeping Europe white and Christian...even saying that they should "wear the label of being a racist as a badge of honor".  He's a dangerous man who is spinning conspiracy theories on everything as fast as he can make them up. He's a misogynist, an anti semite and a racist. Saying he has a "differing opinion" is absurd...his "opinions" are what's fueling hate...never mind his view of blowing up our government and the constitution. 

I think that may be largely spin. For example, he didn’t mean wear your racism as a badge of honor, he said let them call you racist, xenophones, nativists, wear it as a badge of honor. His meaning being if they need to resort to name-calling, know that comes from a place of weakness.  Big difference in interpretation there.

 

[Victor the Crab]

28 minutes ago, Marci said:

I think that may be largely spin. For example, he didn’t mean wear your racism as a badge of honor, he said let them call you racist, xenophones, nativists, wear it as a badge of honor. His meaning being if they need to resort to name-calling, know that comes from a place of weakness.  Big difference in interpretation there.

 

Telling the truth about certain groups of people being racist is NOT name calling or being weak. That's what trolls try to do when they have no defence for their words and deeds.

As despicable as Steve Bannon is, there is something about him saying that Republicans would love to have Bernie Sanders as the Democrats' nominee for president. But Bill, being the clueless bunghole that he is, fails to grasp the situation that could happen, as the end of his New Rules sermon shows.

[monakane]

On 2/7/2020 at 11:20 PM, Robert Lynch said:

Bannon.....Why? I had to fast forward his discussion. It was too much to handle. I needed a bath after that. Ugggh.....

I did the same thing.  Bannon leaves a trail of slime wherever he goes.  

[sistermagpie]

6 hours ago, Marci said:

I think that may be largely spin. For example, he didn’t mean wear your racism as a badge of honor, he said let them call you racist, xenophones, nativists, wear it as a badge of honor. His meaning being if they need to resort to name-calling, know that comes from a place of weakness.  Big difference in interpretation there.

I don't think it's a very big difference in interpretation. He's saying they should wear the word as a badge of honor that people call them racists because it means they're protecting the white race against the hoards of non-white people and their race traitor allies. He and his critics have the exact same understanding of what he's doing, which is textbook white supremacy. He's pushing back against the idea that anyone should feel bad about other people thinking they're racist--iow, remove the social stigma that's one of the checks against blatant racism, genocide etc. "It's just name-calling" is for people who want to support white supremacy but still have bad associations with the word.

6 hours ago, Victor the Crab said:

As despicable as Steve Bannon is, there is something about him saying that Republicans would love to have Bernie Sanders as the Democrats' nominee for president. But Bill, being the clueless bunghole that he is, fails to grasp the situation that could happen, as the end of his New Rules sermon shows.

To be fair, you can't necessarily take Bannon seriously there either because he was saying that everything the Dems were doing or could conceivably do was going to make the R's win. Even the crowd booing him was making Trump win. And those kind of threats work very well--Dems are always telling each other they need to be afraid of their own values.

With Sanders Bannon might think he'd be a great opponent because he's too far left, but from the interview it seemed to me his main point was to push the conspiracy theory that the primaries were rigged against him in order to get Bernie supporters to not vote or vote for Trump out of spite. His primary goal is probably sewing distrust wherever he can even before he moves on to attacking candidates as candidates.

 

[Victor the Crab]

7 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

To be fair, you can't necessarily take Bannon seriously there either because he was saying that everything the Dems were doing or could conceivably do was going to make the R's win. Even the crowd booing him was making Trump win. And those kind of threats work very well--Dems are always telling each other they need to be afraid of their own values.

With Sanders Bannon might think he'd be a great opponent because he's too far left, but from the interview it seemed to me his main point was to push the conspiracy theory that the primaries were rigged against him in order to get Bernie supporters to not vote or vote for Trump out of spite. His primary goal is probably sewing distrust wherever he can even before he moves on to attacking candidates as candidates.

 

That's what my point is. If someone like Steve Bannon is saying this, then it's a giant red flag that needs to be seriously heeded.

[sistermagpie]

5 minutes ago, Victor the Crab said:

That's what my point is. If someone like Steve Bannon is saying this, then it's a giant red flag that needs to be seriously heeded.

Ah! Yes, I agree. Bill loves listening to advice from the right wing about what the left should do, especially when it's something he already agrees with himself.

[kicksave]

2 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

I don't think it's a very big difference in interpretation. He's saying they should wear the word as a badge of honor that people call them racists because it means they're protecting the white race against the hoards of non-white people and their race traitor allies. He and his critics have the exact same understanding of what he's doing, which is textbook white supremacy. He's pushing back against the idea that anyone should feel bad about other people thinking they're racist--iow, remove the social stigma that's one of the checks against blatant racism, genocide etc. "It's just name-calling" is for people who want to support white supremacy but still have bad associations with the word.

To be fair, you can't necessarily take Bannon seriously there either because he was saying that everything the Dems were doing or could conceivably do was going to make the R's win. Even the crowd booing him was making Trump win. And those kind of threats work very well--Dems are always telling each other they need to be afraid of their own values.

With Sanders Bannon might think he'd be a great opponent because he's too far left, but from the interview it seemed to me his main point was to push the conspiracy theory that the primaries were rigged against him in order to get Bernie supporters to not vote or vote for Trump out of spite. His primary goal is probably sewing distrust wherever he can even before he moves on to attacking candidates as candidates.

 

Bingo on both of your replies...Bannon is a professional shit stirrer. His goal is to make people distrust candidates and election results. He's a part of a system of conspiracy theorists, Q Anon and Four Chan followers, white nationalists and lone wolf types that follow him on Brietbart and social media outlets. He's no genius...just another white guy with a grudge against women, Jews and people of color.

[b2H]

On 2/8/2020 at 12:31 PM, Pike Ludwell said:

Notice how Bill reacted with sort of astonishment that this argument would be made (trump using black people as props), because this countered the point Bill was making that trump is a genius, effectively going after the black vote and democrats are morons and never act as genius as trump. Maybe he'll get over his simple minded negativity after the Democrat is decided upon and we then see the pathway clearly.

The point that was missed or severely delayed was, after touting all the black people he had as guests, Trump then has Melania tying the MOF on Rush, who was one of the biggest bigots of the period.  And yes, that point wasn’t missed by me, but was by millions of others, including the media.

[heatherchandler]

On 2/8/2020 at 8:20 PM, Marci said:

The one thing I like about Bill is his willingness to put on the “other” side. I like that he listens. I LOVED that he called Romney out, instead of being a kiss ass Democrat. Thank you, Bill.

I was disappointed that Gillum felt it necessary to say he needed his brain cells to recover after Bannon.  I found it silly...your brain cells die when you listen to a differing opinion? Bannon may be buffoonish, but a politician should be able to hold on to his brain cells while listening to him.

I agree with you.  And Gillum should listen to what the other side is saying, it's just a good idea to know your opponent.  Pretending that the other side doesn't exist, or putting your hands over your ears doesn't make them go away.

 

 

[sistermagpie]

1 minute ago, heatherchandler said:

I agree with you.  And Gillum should listen to what the other side is saying, it's just a good idea to know your opponent.  Pretending that the other side doesn't exist, or putting your hands over your ears doesn't make them go away.

I don't think he was pretending they didn't exist or putting his hands over his ears, though. I think he was acknowledging that you don't get to know the other side by listening to what somebody like Bannon (or practically any other Republican at this point) is saying. 

[izabella]

I deleted as soon as I saw Bannon was the main guest.  Nope, nope, nope. 

[Guest]

I'm sorry that Bill didn't ask scab-face Bannon about the meth and the porns he made in his former home. I'd have watched had Bill brought that up as I'm not much interested in anything else that racist has to say.

[GHScorpiosRule]

There's having people from the other side, and then there's just having the batshit crazies on again and again and praising them for their "bravery" to appear on this show. I don't give any two fiddedity fucks about the batshit loonies.

[ahpny]

Although I sadly agree with Bill that there's a significant risk (maybe even a certainty) that Trump will not concede a loss and refuse to leave the White House, I don't get what Bill expects democratic presidential candidates to say when he asks them what they would do about this? He replayed Mayor Pete's response from the prior week ("well, that's going to be pretty awkward when Chasten and I move into the White House..."), but what response is Bill looking for? Does he want the candidates to say, well, I would send in the marines to take him out by force? What exactly would Bill propose to do? He's never explained his solution to this problem. Maybe there isn't one that anyone wants to contemplate.

[DXD526]

I have no interest in anything that bloated pussbag Bannon has to say, so I skipped the interview. I don't understand Bill's insistence in having these extreme right wingers on the show, all they do is lie and obfuscate and endlessly push their talking points. I can see that on Fox 'news', but choose not to subject myself to it. It's getting to the point where I won't want to subject myself to this show anymore. And I would miss it, because I've been watching Bill since PI in the 90s, but he's grown much too fond of these obnoxious guests who only show up to be trolls. 

[Sam Spayaid]

Bannon reminds me of a pile of slow-moving laundry and what does he use to get such a glowing complexion? So typical of these people. Ever seen Kelly Ann Conway on a show? She comes out, takes a deep breath and does not exhale for the entire time she's on. Like Stevie No Wonder, she's rude, obnoxious and doesn't believe in letting the other party get one word in. 

I wish Bill would explain this logic to me - you are wasting 10 minutes of the show on this clown who hasn't listened to one syllable you've said and all he's concerned with is pushing his own agenda. 

It's one thing to indulge in a healthy debate when there is the possibility to actually learn something but that is impossible with these people. You can't reason with cult members.