This article also provides context, including why NYT decided to publish Larry David's essay: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/21/opinion/larry-david-dinner.html I think the paragraph at the end...
This article also provides context, including why NYT decided to publish Larry David's essay:
I think the paragraph at the end summarizes things nicely:
Larry David, in a provocation of his own, is arguing that during a single dinner or a private meeting, anyone can be human, and it means nothing in the end about what that person is capable of.
Thanks for the context! I'm surprised the article describes him as liberal (even by Forbes standards), do other folks think Maher is liberal? I watched one of his newer shows when they started...
Thanks for the context!
I'm surprised the article describes him as liberal (even by Forbes standards), do other folks think Maher is liberal? I watched one of his newer shows when they started back up and yeah he had Trump criticism but the rest sounded like a conservative's playbook with railing on the dang kids ruining the golden age of America. Even a couple of the points he says he agrees with Trump on quoted in the article are not moderate stances by any means.
I realized he's an obnoxious blowhard after he said the push back against SOPA (or some other similar bill) was because kids wanted to pirate his books.
I realized he's an obnoxious blowhard after he said the push back against SOPA (or some other similar bill) was because kids wanted to pirate his books.
Bill Maher is proof that you don't have to be regressive to be conservative; you can instead freeze your liberal beliefs from forty years ago and refuse to adapt them to modern times.
I've often had the impression that Maher tries to play both sides. He sort of reminds me of the inverse of Jeff Daniels character in The Newsroom, where in that show Jeff Daniels character is...
I've often had the impression that Maher tries to play both sides.
He sort of reminds me of the inverse of Jeff Daniels character in The Newsroom, where in that show Jeff Daniels character is positioned as a traditional Republican but the rise of the Tea Party movement and the rising lunacy of the Republican party and conservative ideology is too much for him to ignore so he constantly rails against them, but he comes across more like someone who wrote the character to espouse more liberal or anti-conservative viewpoints rather than a Republican that is disappointed in his party.
In that way Maher being the inverse means he seems to lack genuine liberal viewpoints but uses the identity as a way to boost his faux centrist takes as being more independent which allows him to play both sides. His personality as being more of a blowhard (as I see him anyhow) further ingratiates him with people who prefer style over substance.
Larry David's article is okay as satire. It is unremarkable and not very original. Watching the video by Bill Maher, I can understand why Larry David felt the urge to write it. I empathize. It's...
Larry David's article is okay as satire. It is unremarkable and not very original.
Watching the video by Bill Maher, I can understand why Larry David felt the urge to write it. I empathize. It's not great comedy, it has a trivial premise from start to end. It doesn't develop into anything more. But I am certainly on his side.
Context for people not following everything happening in the USA too closely:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/timlammers/2025/04/12/bill-maher-details-dinner-with-gracious-and-measured-trump-at-white-house/
This article also provides context, including why NYT decided to publish Larry David's essay:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/21/opinion/larry-david-dinner.html
I think the paragraph at the end summarizes things nicely:
Thanks for the context!
I'm surprised the article describes him as liberal (even by Forbes standards), do other folks think Maher is liberal? I watched one of his newer shows when they started back up and yeah he had Trump criticism but the rest sounded like a conservative's playbook with railing on the dang kids ruining the golden age of America. Even a couple of the points he says he agrees with Trump on quoted in the article are not moderate stances by any means.
I realized he's an obnoxious blowhard after he said the push back against SOPA (or some other similar bill) was because kids wanted to pirate his books.
I once heard Maher described something like this:
I've often had the impression that Maher tries to play both sides.
He sort of reminds me of the inverse of Jeff Daniels character in The Newsroom, where in that show Jeff Daniels character is positioned as a traditional Republican but the rise of the Tea Party movement and the rising lunacy of the Republican party and conservative ideology is too much for him to ignore so he constantly rails against them, but he comes across more like someone who wrote the character to espouse more liberal or anti-conservative viewpoints rather than a Republican that is disappointed in his party.
In that way Maher being the inverse means he seems to lack genuine liberal viewpoints but uses the identity as a way to boost his faux centrist takes as being more independent which allows him to play both sides. His personality as being more of a blowhard (as I see him anyhow) further ingratiates him with people who prefer style over substance.
Larry David's article is okay as satire. It is unremarkable and not very original.
Watching the video by Bill Maher, I can understand why Larry David felt the urge to write it. I empathize. It's not great comedy, it has a trivial premise from start to end. It doesn't develop into anything more. But I am certainly on his side.
This is some masterful satire.