S21.E11: Ben Mckenzie; Katie Porter; Piers Morgan

[tessaray]

Air Date:  April 14, 2023

Bill’s guests are Ben Mckenzie, Rep. Katie Porter, and Piers Morgan.

[revbfc]

I started out knowing this episode was new, and then he had the dude explain to him what NFTs are and my brain did a double take.

Thanks, Bill Maher for being eternally out of touch.  I’ll check back with you in a year to hear your hot take on Chat GPT.

 

ETA: Bill followed up his screed against young people by not knowing how to pronounce “Mifepristone.”

The McLaughlin group was more relevant in John’s final years than this show.

 

Edited April 15, 2023 by revbfc

[Tiggertoo]

I enjoyed the show. Piers Morgan was bang on about women’s’ rights and sports.  I like Katie Porter usually but she didn’t come off well here. 

I watched the interview thinking the author looked like an actor, then I realized he is the actor. Pretty impressive.  I’m with Bill on the NFTs.  It’s because they make no sense. I still don’t understand mining for bitcoin. 

[Milburn Stone]

I wasn't crazy about Piers Morgan having all of his "best lines" on paper in front of him, pre-packaged and ready to go.

[sheetmoss]

Piers didn't annoy me which was a plus.

   Did enjoy  Katie  calling Bill out on his old man-ism

       Bill really can't handle he's not the coolest/edgiest/relevant comedian these days

[Pike Ludwell]

Virtually everything Bill said in his "New Rules" segment about the Trump indictment was wrong.  His big point about Dems not learning from the repubs' Clinton sex scandal treatment was just plain stupid. Apples and oranges. No, Bill, the Trump indictment isn't about the sex. It's about paying hush money to hide a story which coming right after the Access Hollywood story and within two weeks of the election, would very likely have cost him the election. It was a big deal for that reason, -- stealing an election -- not at all like Clinton's mere lying about sex.

And instead of the ridiculously convoluted way Bill described the indictment, how about just "mere days before the election paying hush money and falsifying documents to steal the election".

And so many more things Bill got just plain wrong. Just one more: lambasting them for bringing this when Trump has done so many worse things. Bill, you need to understand how the judicial system works. This was for various reasons the first that was ready to issue an indictment. The courts don't coordinate to determine "hmmm what should be the order of our indictments". This was the first to be ready. The others will come. Is the NY court supposed to just drop this crime because Trump did worse things? No. 

Bill is really losing it. He's still articulate and able to talk confidently and forcefully, but his thinking truly makes less and less sense. And he gets into these "things" about certain topics where he stubbornly persists, can't be persuaded he's wrong, and twists reality to support his "thing". He really needs to stick to comedy and not get into matters that are over his head.

Edited April 21, 2023 by Pike Ludwell

[Welshman in Ca]

11 minutes ago, Pike Ludwell said:

Virtually everything Bill said in his "New Rules" segment about the Trump indictment was wrong.  His big point about Dems not learning from the repubs' Clinton sex scandal treatment was just plain stupid. Apples and oranges. No, Bill, the Trump indictment isn't about the sex. It's about paying hush money to hide a story which coming right after the Access Hollywood story and within two weeks of the election, would very likely have cost him the election. It was a big deal for that reason, -- stealing an election -- not at all like Clinton's mere lying about sex.

And instead of the ridiculously convoluted way Bill described the indictment, how about just "paying hush money and falsifying documents to hide a story which would very likely have cost him the election"

 

But the general American public just see the headline that he paid off a porn star to keep her mouth shut and think so what, big deal. Now Bill might say the same thing in his usual convoluted way but the point is the same in my opinion, the general American public will see this as diluting any further indictments he may face.

[Pike Ludwell]

31 minutes ago, Welshman in Ca said:

But the general American public just see the headline that he paid off a porn star to keep her mouth shut and think so what, big deal. Now Bill might say the same thing in his usual convoluted way but the point is the same in my opinion, the general American public will see this as diluting any further indictments he may face.

It's a simple matter for Dems to clarify all this (e.g., repeat over and over he likely won the 2016 election via this) , and even so it is no reason to not indict Trump for a crime. There's always been "clever" 3D chess thinking and worries of one sort or another that has always saved Trump from criminal charges. Now, FINALLY he's got a criminal indictment. Take it when they can get it! And then educate the public if need be. Waiting for a perfect case on Trump is no good any more.

And I don't buy the idea it will dilute further indictments. I think the cumulative impact of numerous indictments will hurt Trump exponentially. And also, we have not seen the massive gains for Trump that people were predicting. The weak links in Trumps support are those who are fed up with his circus. I'm seeing lots of reports that such repubs are more open than ever to a different candidate.

Edited April 15, 2023 by Pike Ludwell

[Welshman in Ca]

10 minutes ago, Pike Ludwell said:

It's a simple matter for Dems to clarify all this (e.g., repeat over and over he stole the 2016 election via this) , and even so it is no reason to not indict Trump for a crime. There's always been "clever" 3D chess thinking and worries of one sort or another that has always saved Trump from criminal charges. Now, FINALLY he's got a criminal indictment. Take it when they can get it! And then educate the public if need be. Waiting for a perfect case on Trump is no good any more.

But how can you educate people who think they know better & only look at the headline ? The majority of people think they know and then you have maybe 10% like you (and maybe me) who might actually pay attention, read or listen to the facts from both sides and make an informed decision, it's not me or you  that needs convincing, it's the 90% who will go one way or the other no matter what the facts are.

The first guy on annoyed me as he seemed to not know as much as he thinks he knows and Piers Morgan didn't annoy me as much as he usually does and Katie Porter was just sort of there without much substance.

 

[Hanahope]

36 minutes ago, Welshman in Ca said:

But the general American public just see the headline that he paid off a porn star to keep her mouth shut and think so what, big deal. Now Bill might say the same thing in his usual convoluted way but the point is the same in my opinion, the general American public will see this as diluting any further indictments he may face.

But this exactly why someone like Bill, who is supposedly well read and intelligent, to be correct when talking about it.  
 

There is evidence that in 2016 , whoever had their name more in the news had their polling go down.  So this guy paying Daniels off to keep the story out of the news helped keep his polls up, and Hillary’s name in the news more (thanks to Comey’s major wrongdoing) made her polls go down.  The payoff, and subsequent illegal cover up, clearly helped him.  

[Milburn Stone]

2 hours ago, Pike Ludwell said:

Bill is really losing it. He's still articulate and able to talk confidently and forcefully, but his thinking truly makes less and less sense. And he gets into these "things" about certain topics where he stubbornly persists, can't be persuaded he's wrong, and twists reality to support his "thing". He really needs to stick to comedy and not get into matters that are over his head.

I wonder whether the truth is that he's just trapped by his brand. Privately he may be able to entertain some opinions contrary to the ones he espouses. Commercially, he can't.

[DXD526]

Really enjoyed the Ben McKenzie interview. It's a topic I don't know a lot about, and he explained things in a clear, easy-to-understand way. 

Everyone I know is always saying what an a-hole Piers Morgan is, but when I see him interviewed, I usually agree with most of what he says. 

I'm a Katie Porter fan, but in this episode, she was just kind of there. 

[Foghorn Leghorn]

Love Katie Porter but man what was up with her tonight??  She seemed not at all happy and not herself at all.  It was like she was being forced to be there and just wanted to get it over with.  

[canaanite2]

30 minutes ago, Foghorn Leghorn said:

Love Katie Porter but man what was up with her tonight??  She seemed not at all happy and not herself at all.  It was like she was being forced to be there and just wanted to get it over with.  

Between the pushback on her grumpy old men comment and being outnumbered and out-debated on the transgender issue, she had the wind knocked right out of her sails. 

[Tiggertoo]

I know what you mean about Katie Porter.  The first topic Bill brought up, she said nothing.  Neither did Piers.  It was an odd moment. I forget what it was about.

[sugarbaker design]

4 hours ago, Foghorn Leghorn said:

Love Katie Porter but man what was up with her tonight??  She seemed not at all happy and not herself at all.  It was like she was being forced to be there and just wanted to get it over with.  

Considering the two assholes with whom she was on the panel, I don't blame her.

[aghst]

17 hours ago, canaanite2 said:

Between the pushback on her grumpy old men comment and being outnumbered and out-debated on the transgender issue, she had the wind knocked right out of her sails. 

She may not have argued well for transgender rights but the opposite take being pushed by Republicans is grotesque.  They are attacking the liberal and tolerant position by dehumanizing an out marginalized group.

You can’t get more fascist than that.  Morgan and Bill can fuck off with the transgender sports.  There are maybe a half or a dozen athletes in the situation they tried to portray as some widespread trend.

what glory is there for someone born male to compete against women just to win?  What is their motivation, to set some records in a field few people follow outside the Olympics?  A trans athlete setting women’s swimming records, BFD.  There’s no money in that sport and come the Olympics, trans athletes still aren’t going to be allowed to compete against other women.

I realize that some collegiate women swimmers have complained.  So they should all boycott but please stop whining.  They will still be able to c9mpete in the only women’s swimming c9mpetition which matters which are the Olympics games.

And if they’re not good enough to qualify there, they were likely going to be mired in obscuritY anyways.

they do have a right to feel it’s unjust.  But they’re lending support to Republicans’ fascist attacks on a minority or letting a POS like Morgan bloviate and grandstand.

Which is the greater injustice, trans people being oppressed and being told the way they view themselves is invalid or Kimmie not winning some NCAA meets?

Bill can further fuck off comparing the NY case to the Clinton impeachment.  Bragg is a Democrat but that case is not something that all Democrats are pushing, unlike the Clinton impeachment, which was complete partisan BS.

And if Georgia prosecutes, the main principals in that case won’t be Democrats.  Bill is tHe s who wants to both-sides every chance he gets.  He did that shit in 2000, supporting Nader and watching Bush get into the WH and take the country into two disastrous wars, killing hundreds of thousands of civilians.  He claimed he learned his lesson, says Trump can’t get into the WH again.

But he has to be “real” so he’s got to call out the left and especially the young.  Someone really young must have hurt his feelings badly.

 

 

 

 

[sistermagpie]

25 minutes ago, aghst said:

Which is the greater injustice, trans people being oppressed and being told the way they view themselves is invalid or Kimmie not winning some NCAA meets?

 

Also, to hear people talk you'd think a trans athlete always wins. When they place 8th or something--a thing that totally happens!--they just ignore it.

[Avaleigh]

3 hours ago, aghst said:

A trans athlete setting women’s swimming records, BFD.  There’s no money in that sport and come the Olympics, trans athletes still aren’t going to be allowed to compete against other women.

I realize that some collegiate women swimmers have complained.  So they should all boycott but please stop whining.  They will still be able to c9mpete in the only women’s swimming c9mpetition which matters which are the Olympics games.

The athletes don't feel that the Olympics are the only competition that matters. 

I can definitely understand the concern that they aren't on a level playing field especially since people can't seem to agree on what prerequisites should be met before allowing trans athletes to compete in the gender division with which they identify. 

Finally, I think that trans athletes *should* be able to compete in the Olympics and that should be a goal for the next Olympic cycle. What I'm confused about is the pushback against the idea of creating a trans division to ensure fairness. Not only would it give athletes more medal opportunities, but it would shutdown any discussion of a person somehow not being deserving of their placement. In addition to that, there would be a new group of trans athletes who will gain exposure and serve as role models for trans and cis people to look up to. Seems like a win/win to me.

Edited April 16, 2023 by Avaleigh

[heatherchandler]

13 hours ago, aghst said:

I realize that some collegiate women swimmers have complained.  So they should all boycott but please stop whining.  They will still be able to c9mpete in the only women’s swimming c9mpetition which matters which are the Olympics games.

It’s not as simple as that. Collegiate women swimmers train very hard, it is important to them to win competitions.  They shouldn’t have to boycott.  Some may have scholarships, boycotting could put that in jeopardy.  I don’t think they are whining.

[aghst]

Sorry but the blunt truth is that unless they're good enough for Olympics, the most they should get out of college sports is scholarship, opportunity to train and compete within a structure provided by university.

If you want more you simply have to be good enough for the Olympics.

These sports just haven't drawn enough spectator interest, so if they get a college scholarship out of it or to continue what they've been doing since they were little kids, that's a lot more than others who go to college get.

The medals and trophies are nice but they're just decorative unless it's for competitions like the Olympics which people actually care to follow.

 

 

[Hanahope]

There are probably some sports that people follow beyond college.  there are world championships that people can compete in for years.  but yes, the majority of those at that level are also at Olympic level.  and certainly those that are good enough to win world championships are also probably olympians, and that's where sponsorship money comes from. 

I can't imagine that there are more than a handful of trans-athletes that are that competitive in every single sport.  i expect that the vast majority of trans-athletes just want to participate.

[Avaleigh]

On 4/16/2023 at 11:56 PM, aghst said:

Sorry but the blunt truth is that unless they're good enough for Olympics, the most they should get out of college sports is scholarship, opportunity to train and compete within a structure provided by university.

For one thing it isn't just about college sports. Figure skating as an example only has one collegiate level competition. It's not the sport you get into if you're looking for a scholarship where you can skate on behalf of a university. (However, it can be helpful for things like college applications and essays--a lot of skaters get into great schools particularly if they've competed in high profile competitions.)

The second problematic thing here is your belief that any non Olympic competition is of little importance or doesn't matter at all. I can promise you that they matter very much to the athletes. Also, who are we to say what "the most" is that these athletes "should" be able to get out of college sports? There are all sorts of reasons why an athlete might want to compete. Furthermore, the Olympics aren't the only thing that gain an athlete endorsements. Starr Andrews has yet to win a national title, compete in worlds or the Olympics, but she still has multiple endorsements. Winning a medal on the Grand Prix circuit was a huge breakthrough for her--an example of a non Olympic competition meaning quite a lot to an athlete. 

As someone who follows figure skating and I can tell you that small competitions in the Grand Prix series, or larger competitions like nationals and worlds--they all matter very much to the skaters. Also, skaters who don't make it to the Olympics can still make a nice living coaching among other things. In general, being a national or international competitor is a great thing to have on the resume. 

Edited April 20, 2023 by Avaleigh

[aghst]

No doubt they matter to the athletes.

But do they matter to the general public?  If they don't, why does it matter if a very few -- so far -- trans athletes dominate women's sports?

They're not being denied scholarships or income opportunities.  If there are some documented cases, I'd like to see them.

The point is, Piers Morgan and Bill both tried to make a big deal out of it, like it's outrageous that some young women were beat by a trans athlete.

Like I said, context matters.  Discrimination against LGBTQ have been far more horrific than some 19 year old girl not having x number of medals in college swimming or field hockey.

But if they want to enable and be used as pawns to punch down on trans people, then I guess those medals do matter more than oppression.

[Hedgehog2022]

On 4/15/2023 at 2:16 PM, sheetmoss said:

Piers didn't annoy me which was a plus.

   Did enjoy  Katie  calling Bill out on his old man-ism

       Bill really can't handle he's not the coolest/edgiest/relevant comedian these days

Poor Bill...High Hefner is dead and the Playboy Mansion (his home away from home) has been torn down...it's just too much change for a Boomer who can't relate to anyone under the age of 50. He ceased to be the coolest/edgist/relevant comedian about 10 years ago. Even Sarah Silverman called Bill "Grandpa" the last time I saw her on the show...😂

[Hedgehog2022]

On 4/16/2023 at 12:34 PM, aghst said:

She may not have argued well for transgender rights but the opposite take being pushed by Republicans is grotesque.  They are attacking the liberal and tolerant position by dehumanizing an out marginalized group.

You can’t get more fascist than that.  Morgan and Bill can fuck off with the transgender sports.  There are maybe a half or a dozen athletes in the situation they tried to portray as some widespread trend.

what glory is there for someone born male to compete against women just to win?  What is their motivation, to set some records in a field few people follow outside the Olympics?  A trans athlete setting women’s swimming records, BFD.  There’s no money in that sport and come the Olympics, trans athletes still aren’t going to be allowed to compete against other women.

I realize that some collegiate women swimmers have complained.  So they should all boycott but please stop whining.  They will still be able to c9mpete in the only women’s swimming c9mpetition which matters which are the Olympics games.

And if they’re not good enough to qualify there, they were likely going to be mired in obscuritY anyways.

they do have a right to feel it’s unjust.  But they’re lending support to Republicans’ fascist attacks on a minority or letting a POS like Morgan bloviate and grandstand.

Which is the greater injustice, trans people being oppressed and being told the way they view themselves is invalid or Kimmie not winning some NCAA meets?

Bill can further fuck off comparing the NY case to the Clinton impeachment.  Bragg is a Democrat but that case is not something that all Democrats are pushing, unlike the Clinton impeachment, which was complete partisan BS.

And if Georgia prosecutes, the main principals in that case won’t be Democrats.  Bill is tHe s who wants to both-sides every chance he gets.  He did that shit in 2000, supporting Nader and watching Bush get into the WH and take the country into two disastrous wars, killing hundreds of thousands of civilians.  He claimed he learned his lesson, says Trump can’t get into the WH again.

But he has to be “real” so he’s got to call out the left and especially the young.  Someone really young must have hurt his feelings badly.

 

 

 

 

Thank you for bringing up the ridiculous comparison Bill made between the NY case and the Clinton impeachment. The Clinton impeachment was not about a blow job. I get tired of my fellow Democrats always saying that. It was about lying under oath about having a sexual relationship with an intern. He lied under oath...end of issue. The NY case isn't about Trump banging a porn star...it's about Trump giving her hush money so she won't expose their affair during his campaign for the Presidency...a clear violation of the law. Bill can't even make coherent legal arguments and simplifies the legal issues that he clearly misinterprets. 

[Mr. R0b0t]

Piers returned to his usual horses arse persona in Overtime.  He just couldn't help himself.  He's still upset Megan Markle turned him down for a date.

[WendyM]

16 hours ago, Hedgehog2022 said:

Thank you for bringing up the ridiculous comparison Bill made between the NY case and the Clinton impeachment. The Clinton impeachment was not about a blow job. I get tired of my fellow Democrats always saying that. It was about lying under oath about having a sexual relationship with an intern. He lied under oath...end of issue. The NY case isn't about Trump banging a porn star...it's about Trump giving her hush money so she won't expose their affair during his campaign for the Presidency...a clear violation of the law. Bill can't even make coherent legal arguments and simplifies the legal issues that he clearly misinterprets. 

Just like Watergate was about the cover-up, not necessarily the crime.

I was really, really surprised how wrongheaded Bill was being about it, and then I remembered he thinks this is an edgy take and his right-wing friends will totally invite him to their...whatever they do for fun. Gun shows? 

Re Katie Porter: when she was on in 2019, she pissed off Bill and I couldn't forget that while I saw how subdued she was this time:

"Rep. Katie Porter (D-Calif.) drew laughs from the audience while defending a woman’s right to choose Saturday night, after Real Time host Bill Maher joked about being “squishy” on his “pro-choice” views. 

'They told my mother after my sister, very difficult birth, she shouldn’t have another one. So knowing I could’ve been on the cutting room floor…why is that so terrible?' Maher said.

Porter quipped back at the comedian: 'Your mom made her choice, and we’re all here with the consequences of that choice.'

'I just want to say God bless Ms. Maher, God bless her for having you. I’m sure it wasn’t easy,” Porter said, adding the point is “she made her choice.'"

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/447644-rep-katie-porter-ribs-bill-maher-during-abortion-discussion/

[Chalby]

On 4/17/2023 at 10:03 AM, aghst said:

But if they want to enable and be used as pawns to punch down on trans people, then I guess those medals do matter more than oppression.

I would think the Olympics/ competitions have stringent rules about what athletes put in their bodies. If a transgendered person makes it on a team of their identified gender, then let them compete. No way is estrogen (or whatever) making anyone a stronger athlete, and as for the strength enhancing stuff... Don't the top exes know all the meds and test accordingly? What's the real complaint? Sorry if I appear ignorant.

[ahpny]

On 4/15/2023 at 9:46 AM, Tiggertoo said:

 I like Katie Porter usually but she didn’t come off well here. 

Same here. I usually find her compellingly correct and articulate in ways few others are. But at least two issues seems to throw her off here. 
 

First, is it really that hard to agree that sending - to a women’s prison - a convicted rapist born male but now identifying as a women may not be the best plan? Yes, men can be raped and, but is there no difference in this fear between men and women? To assert there is no such difference - which was implicit in her comment - just sounds wrong to most people and the type of comment that plays into anti-woke arguments.

Second, whatever amount of unreasonableness Bill’s “kids are just stupid” comments may have, Kate’s “old guys are just out of touch” comments are equally offensive and inaccurate. 

 

 

[heatherchandler]

4 hours ago, ahpny said:

First, is it really that hard to agree that sending - to a women’s prison - a convicted rapist born male but now identifying as a women may not be the best plan? Yes, men can be raped and, but is there no difference in this fear between men and women? To assert there is no such difference - which was implicit in her comment - just sounds wrong to most people and the type of comment that plays into anti-woke arguments.

Especially since it’s already happened.  An inmate at Logan Correctional Center was raped by a trans woman. Not really any coverage for some reason.

[aghst]

25 minutes ago, heatherchandler said:

Especially since it’s already happened.  An inmate at Logan Correctional Center was raped by a trans woman. Not really any coverage for some reason.

No coverage yet you're claiming something happened.

Either it's been reported somewhere or you were there in person?

 

 

[realityplease]

On 4/19/2023 at 12:54 PM, Chalby said:

I would think the Olympics/ competitions have stringent rules about what athletes put in their bodies. If a transgendered person makes it on a team of their identified gender, then let them compete. No way is estrogen (or whatever) making anyone a stronger athlete, and as for the strength enhancing stuff... Don't the top exes know all the meds and test accordingly? What's the real complaint? Sorry if I appear ignorant.

I don't think it's a matter of meds or hormones.  But in a sport like swimming, for example, someone born a male will typically have greater lung capacity, strength, or arm span than someone born a woman.  That's why through the decades, the stats on speed, for example, have typically been different for male competitors than female competitors.  Sure there might be exceptions, but it's an unfair advantage (or let's say, difference) that someone gains at birth. And carries over when they transition. 

Edited April 21, 2023 by realityplease