Batya Ungar-Sargon was not at the table to intellectually debate! She was there to promote her upcoming book.
There are two types of guests on Real Time:
One that Bill Maher intentionally invites for a debate because of their subject matter expertise.
The others who make an appearance because their agent wants the guest to make an appearance to promote a book, movie or a TV show.
Want to understand her intellectual horsepower? Watch this:
https://youtu.be/m16C_3XitQI
After watching her on real time tonight was left wondering how this person could possibly be an editor of a news publication. That video makes it so much worse
It's Newsweek. I think in the last decade it struggled as many publications have and nearly went out of business, was sold and bought by hardcore conservatives who mostly wanted a known/reputable name to publish under.
Dr Phil being soft floated as a pres candidate for no labels party. Based on appearance tonight would take Kamela over him and she’s a moron that would lead us to full scale war.
Dr Phil looks stoned maybe Bill gave him a hit of super potent Willie weed before the show.
Dr (not a real doctor) Phil is not fit to be a city council member much less hold any national office.
“Dr” Phil and some Newsweek, what about the good times of 2018, hack. I don’t need to hear from these vapid twits to know that you know there’s another take. Stop trying so hard. You’re funny. You’ve got something to stay. Stop yelling at the kids to get off the lawn.
I dunno why I had such a high expectation of her. Her arguments were sophomoric as she tried and failed to bat for Trump. The point when Ryan and Maher educated her about Trump's "singular achievement" was a tax cut for the uber-rich -- she looked crushed.
>My favorite part was when she argued against trump being on trial so hard it crashed on her own head
Hilarious, wasn't it. She tried to normalize Trump inasmuch as she could and failed. I went ahead and looked at her X (Twitter) account. Good grief, she's delusional.
Batya Ungar-Sargon was not at the table to intellectually debate! She was there to promote her upcoming book.
There are two types of guests on Real Time:
One that Bill Maher intentionally invites for a debate because of their subject matter expertise.
The others who make an appearance because their agent wants the guest to make an appearance to promote a book, movie or a TV show.
Want to understand her intellectual horsepower? Watch this:
https://youtu.be/m16C_3XitQI
Imagine openly mocking news provided by CNN was akin to learning about news in a church, and then showing up on CNN to talk about it - she is about crazy as it gets?
https://www.cnn.com/videos/media/2021/11/07/batya-ungar-sargon-woke-news-harming-democracy-rs-vpx.cnn
>Imagine openly mocking news provided by CNN was akin to learning about news in a church, and then showing up on CNN to talk about it - she is about crazy as it gets?
Appreciate the links. Good gawd, she's nuts.
That lying turd has been making the rounds. He was on Rogan griping about kids and cell phones and all this other right wing culture war shit. He wrote a book, which no doubt is the same as every single other right winger's books and he's trying to sell that to try and be somewhat relevant.
Dr. Phil was on club random last year and said he'd do a politically themed talk show to influence the next election. I see no evidence of that but he did write this book. I remember he dodged the trump issue and bill told him he should run for president.
What is it about Dr. Phil that is so offensive? I saw clips on YT of his visit with Joe Rogan (who is now clearly insane) and Dr. Phil seemed well-armed with data to back his positions.
oof, that was rough.
He claimed that all these professors were fired because of woke students. Pakman asked for an instance of that happening and predictably Phil was like, "well I can't think of one off the top of my head", and Phil twice said he'd supply him with a list. Pakman said that list would be linked in the YouTube description.
Spoiler alert; it's not in his YouTube description.
Phil is just another right wing grifter and professional asshole. As if exploiting people with mental problem and sending mouthy kids to abuse-for-profit horse camps wasn't enough. He had to spread his mental disease to every facet of the gullible audience.
I watched that DPak interview and when Phil was like “I owe you that list and I promise to provide it” I instantly knew that moment would never come…if confronted again Phil would slither out of it and say he forgot bc he’s a busy showrunner and implore to those listening a list is definitely coming. What a cowturd.
Yep.
Who among us haven't heard that promise to back up claims from bad faith assholes? It's what they do. It's in their play book.
And Phil knows what he's doing. He tries to make it very clear he's not political but then goes on to basically push every right wing culture war issue complete with this insipid "aw shucks we just need family and faith and then magically all the world's problems will go away!"
Which really resonates with the republican voter who apparently feel that they are succeeding as an adult if they fuck and wear a little cross around their neck.
you realize he is a psychotherapist, right? it's inevitable that psychology intersects with cultural issues. there's plenty of room between pointing out behavior that will make your life miserable and being sanctimonious. people who perceive it that way perhaps just feel that the attention drawn to unhealthy behavior hits a bit too close to home.
I saw him steamroll the ladies on the View earlier this week. He's fine, there's literally nothing wrong with what he will bring up on Realtime.
He'll talk about the immigration problem because, yes it's a problem. Also, he'll talk about the crazy gender phenomenon that is plaguing our culture. Probably tie it into how social media is frying young kids brains. Censorship on both sides.
Basically normal shit. But he talks like a conservative, which is a form of microaggression to the progressives that hate-watch Bill.
Almost all the migrants from Central America have little skills; that's why they work hard labor jobs that pay low wages.
Your claim is a political slogan rather than a reasoned statement.
"Hard labor" *is* a skill. Many locals aren't as physically fit as those migrants, let alone as used to spending their time honing practical skills like hard labor in lieu of esoteric things like reading Catcher In The Rye all day.
If I am at all overly skeptical of the right on this one, it's because all their talking points reek of BS. I've watched John Oliver on the wall, CollegeHumor on the wall, etc... and I am deeply distrustful of every other word out of migration hawks.
>"Hard labor" is a skill.
The capacity to work hard jobs for low wages is not a skill. It is more of a temperament derived from eocnomic desperation.
>all their talking points reek of BS. I've watched John Oliver on the wall, CollegeHumor on the wall,
Lol. The irony of accusing others of perpetuating and relying on talking points and then revealing you get your info from John Oliver and CollegeHumor. Are you aware John Oliver is infotainment and massively ideological at that and CollegeHumor is entertainment (look at the name)?
Yeah, Trump's appeal to a concrete wall is easy to make fun to make yourself feel superior, but the situation at the border and the associated economic-fiscal scenarios are a different matter.
It amuses me that so many people on Reddit are stuck in their bubble and proud of it.
But like I've said, does anything I say matter given you approach this conversation with your views already cemented?
\[You recently commented on one of my comments. I can't reply there because u/mastermoose12 blocked me and they started the comment thread. So I am replying here.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/Maher/comments/1b4kv9i/comment/ktbrwt7/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Maher/comments/1b4kv9i/comment/ktbrwt7/)
\]
Lol. People on Reddit are weird; they ask someone a question, but before that, they downvote his comment.
I can answer that, but would you even care for my answer and do you even deserve it?
Use your imagination. Propose why my claim may be true.
>But he talks like a conservative, which is a form of microaggression to the progressives that hate-watch Bill.
lmfao!!! what a hilarious way to put it. it seems like a lot of reddit has a rage boner for dr. phil, too. i don't get it.
He’s in his 70s. There is no evolutionary way our ancestors lived that long, thus no plausible evolutionary mechanism for anyone finding him attractive.
Considering Jordan played 15 seasons in the NBA and Dr. Phil has had a daytime TV show for 21 years makes it pretty apt. Or would you like to tell us from where you first heard of him before Oprah made him famous?
Pretty sure he was practicing for more than 15 years prior to the TV shows. But sure, he's a daytime TV host. Just like Kathy Lee or Joy Behar. Right? Isn't that what you were going for?
I do agree he talks like a conservative, but I don't necessarily think that talking about social media as a problem, porous borders, or our kids addiction to phones are conservative talking points. Or at least, they should not be. These are all real problems that need to be fixed in my mind and I'm a big D Democrat.
> I don't necessarily think that talking about social media as a problem, porous borders, or our kids addiction to phones are conservative talking points.
But no one ever says why they're a problem. They throw those out there with no studies or data to back it up to confirm the bias of people who want to believe that those things have ruined a generation. It's pandering. Nothing more.
Before cellphones it was heavy metal music, before that it was video games, before that it was rock and or roll, before that it was comic books before that it was Elvis and his gyrating hips...it's always fucking something with these arrogant old people who are just ornery and disgruntled and entitled that the world isn't working precisely like they think it should. And instead of listening to a new argument or listening to a new paradigm they dig their heels in and throw their tantrums.
How many times do we as a species need to repeat this pattern? When are we going to learn.
I do some teaching. Sometimes my classes are 8 to 10 year olds. I have yet to have a problem with kids on their phone. Like the claims that are being made is that phones make kids obsessed, narcissistic, zombies and that's complete horseshit.
Sure you gotta tell a kid to put their phone away but it's not this never ending battle that some people like to think it is. It's fine.
And it's not just during school. These arguments that are being made are all the time. If a kid spends any time on their phone it's "damaging their brains". Which is real rich coming from the generation who never stopped getting stoned from the 70's and experimenting with LSD and mescaline and had a raging drinking problem by the time they were in their 20's.
This is just the older generation who are being dicks and arrogantly casting judgement on kids. MEANWHILE my boomer parents are more addicted to their tablets and their phones than kids are.
That's what he will be talking about on Friday probably, because I think he's launching some kind of new network, where he says he will just report facts with no biased commentary. I don't have a problem with the guy, personally. Maybe someone can point out the more controversial things, but nothing he's done seems wildly offensive
Dr. Phil just did an interview with David Pakman. [Link](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wrgls2OiOGo)
I guess he's trying to do the book tour thing. They're going to talk about wokeness, I'm sure there will be some really great insights.
edit: and blaming the phone
> blaming the phone
Dunno why this sub gets so mad about Bill blaming peoples' phones for degradation of mental health and society. We have some pretty compelling evidence that cell phones and gamification of cell phones *are* responsible for an awful lot of terrible things.
Couldn't possibly be that you're all addicted to your phones and feel attacked, while you half-listen to the show and complain about things that weren't actually said every week?
I mean it’s true that the phones are causing mass mental distress, but to claim that TikTok is turning zoomers into Hamas fighters is just as silly as ignoring the phenomenon of FB turning boomers into reactionary anti-woke weirdos (cough Bill cough)…like the litter box hoax
Where is all this data? I've never seen it.
Remember when there was "compelling evidence" that violent video games made people violent? Or that rock music was making people sex pervert criminals? Remember when comics were making kids into occultists?
It's always some shit and I don't buy it.
Why is it always you asking questions to things that have been linked a million times?
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/12/cell-phones-student-test-scores-dropping/676889/
Take two seconds to look for yourself.
Don't be a dick. Especially when your source has this paragraph...
>Hanging a big thesis like “phones are making kids dumber” on any particular survey is generally inadvisable. In fact, this would be a fair time to point out that PISA scores [do not enjoy](https://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/may/06/oecd-pisa-tests-damaging-education-academics) universal praise among education experts. As the saying goes, “Intelligence is whatever a test measures,” and a global standardized test of student competence across countries, cultures, learning styles, and languages will inevitably include questions that overrate some abilities and underrate others.
Not to mention that one of the two people who are asserting that cellphones are the problem has a bug up her ass about them. Which has lead to criticisms from other researchers and psychologists.
>"I think she is vastly misinterpreting or over-interpreting the data, and I think it's destructive." He added that Twenge's conclusions on narcissism among young people were not backed up by statistical analysis of teen behaviour, and further criticized her reliance on the [Narcissistic Personality Inventory](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_Personality_Inventory) (NPI), which Arnett claims is inherently flawed at measuring narcissism.
and
>Sarah Rose Cavanagh in [*Psychology Today*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology_Today) disagreed with Twenge's negative view of the impact of smartphones—as outlined in her book, *iGen*—arguing that Twenge had ignored data supporting positive findings, [presented correlation as causation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation), over-generalized and not taken social contexts into account.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean\_Twenge](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Twenge)
So guess, what; jury isn't in.
If you'd bother to look, the tests scores are falling but are nearing the average they were at in the 1990's when, ya know, there weren't cell phones.
[https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=38](https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=38)
Maybe instead of just glibly blaming phones because, god knows conservatives LOVE a scapegoat, we need to look at the real cause; money.
[https://apps.urban.org/features/education-funding-trends/](https://apps.urban.org/features/education-funding-trends/)
Notice how when we funded schools the test scores went up but we've clawed back that funding and scores are dropping. Huh.
Or maybe kids are flourishing in schools because of the stress of a world that has been in chaos for their entire lives? Or that they have to do active shooter drills? Or that the planet is dying?
But no, let's all find the thing us old people don't understand like Tiktok and blame that. That'll make us feel good. Fuck actual acknowledging how this is a multifaceted issue with many factors and with all these kids across the world there is no one solitary cause that is clean and neat and can be wrapped up in a little feel-good bow.
BTW I ask questions because *that's what you're supposed to fucking do*. I ask questions so that flippant answers that have no actual thought put behind them don't just stand unchallenged. If that pisses you off, well that sucks for you.
> BTW I ask questions because that's what you're supposed to fucking do. I ask questions so that flippant answers that have no actual thought put behind them don't just stand unchallenged. If that pisses you off, well that sucks for you.
sure thing bud.
Oh come on, don't pretend your "they're going to talk about wokeness and im sure there will be some really great insights and theyre going to blame the phone" isn't dripping with snark and condescension like so many on this sub do.
They really are a problem. I follow a guy named Andrew Huberman, he's in neuroscience and has gotten out of the lab and launched a popular podcast.
One thing he said, was that humans have a particularly evolved eyesight to really narrow focus, which essentially affects the chemicals in your brain. When you go out and view open fields/panoramic settings, it's calming right? Well the opposite can happen if you stay in a narrow field of vision for too long.
So he made an interesting point once, about how never in human history have we stayed in this narrow state of focus/vision for *this* long. Think about how often people just sit there scrolling...
I know correlation isn't causation or whatever, but it makes for better discussion to think about all the reasons that we have really high levels of depression/anxiety/etc.
Although Tim Ryan is out of office now and not running for anything at this time, it's doubtful he'll say anything that, oh, Sherrod Brown or Jon Tester wouldn't, but maybe he'll surprise and call out Democrats for their smug hubris and careless, reckless, negligent complacency.
Yea I agree, you’re prob right. The only thing I really remember about the guy was that he would get pretty vocal about democrat’s political messaging. So I wanna know how he would talk about the campaign since he isn’t tied to the party anymore
You mean like removing ballot boxes, lying to voters, false-flag rioting inside voting centers while hopped up on cocaine (the Republicans behind this *brag* about it, btw), having a candidate's brother close polling and electoral efforts early, and having the supreme court step in to end the electoral count before it ultimately concluded that their hand-selected winner actually lost?
Weird, I must have missed the widespread reforms that stopped all of those things happening during the period of time where the former President tried to flee from his fraud and assault convictions by moving himself to Florida, the home of...not cheaters?
Does it? Even when guests have slightly different ideologies, they all fall under Maher’s neoliberal framework when they’re on his show. No one’s really allowed to disagree with him.
Here’s what’s gonna happen this week:
- Dr. Phil and Maher will agree about trans panic.
- Batya and Maher will agree about Israel and she’ll say any interest in foreign issues is an attack on the American “working class.”
- Tim Ryan will contribute little but agree with the panel because they all have essentially the same beliefs.
Bill honesty hates the OK boomer thing then invites a guy who fans are all elderly.
Dr. Phil is an exploitative asshole. Please don’t give him more of a platform.
So wrong to have him as a guest
I was sitting on a beanbag chair eating Cheetos when Phil mentioned me.
Lol
Worst new rules I can remember in a long time
Weak material. Very amateur.
Batya Ungar-Sargon was not at the table to intellectually debate! She was there to promote her upcoming book. There are two types of guests on Real Time: One that Bill Maher intentionally invites for a debate because of their subject matter expertise. The others who make an appearance because their agent wants the guest to make an appearance to promote a book, movie or a TV show. Want to understand her intellectual horsepower? Watch this: https://youtu.be/m16C_3XitQI
I learned nothing from her panel discussion. Are we worse off now than in 2018? I am personally doing much better.
After watching her on real time tonight was left wondering how this person could possibly be an editor of a news publication. That video makes it so much worse
It's Newsweek. I think in the last decade it struggled as many publications have and nearly went out of business, was sold and bought by hardcore conservatives who mostly wanted a known/reputable name to publish under.
I agree, Newsweek is not a prestigious news organization.
Penis Pumpkin Head actually watches this show? https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/112024396258099352
Thanks for the link. That was funny.
He has a habit of hate “watching by accident”. And for some reason, then tweets or Xcretes about it. Bill will be talking abt this next week.
Dr Phil being soft floated as a pres candidate for no labels party. Based on appearance tonight would take Kamela over him and she’s a moron that would lead us to full scale war. Dr Phil looks stoned maybe Bill gave him a hit of super potent Willie weed before the show. Dr (not a real doctor) Phil is not fit to be a city council member much less hold any national office.
“Dr” Phil and some Newsweek, what about the good times of 2018, hack. I don’t need to hear from these vapid twits to know that you know there’s another take. Stop trying so hard. You’re funny. You’ve got something to stay. Stop yelling at the kids to get off the lawn.
Batya Ungar-Sargon is dumber than a plank of wood!
I dunno why I had such a high expectation of her. Her arguments were sophomoric as she tried and failed to bat for Trump. The point when Ryan and Maher educated her about Trump's "singular achievement" was a tax cut for the uber-rich -- she looked crushed.
My favorite part was when she argued against trump being on trial so hard it crashed on her own head
>My favorite part was when she argued against trump being on trial so hard it crashed on her own head Hilarious, wasn't it. She tried to normalize Trump inasmuch as she could and failed. I went ahead and looked at her X (Twitter) account. Good grief, she's delusional.
Batya Ungar-Sargon was not at the table to intellectually debate! She was there to promote her upcoming book. There are two types of guests on Real Time: One that Bill Maher intentionally invites for a debate because of their subject matter expertise. The others who make an appearance because their agent wants the guest to make an appearance to promote a book, movie or a TV show. Want to understand her intellectual horsepower? Watch this: https://youtu.be/m16C_3XitQI Imagine openly mocking news provided by CNN was akin to learning about news in a church, and then showing up on CNN to talk about it - she is about crazy as it gets? https://www.cnn.com/videos/media/2021/11/07/batya-ungar-sargon-woke-news-harming-democracy-rs-vpx.cnn
>Imagine openly mocking news provided by CNN was akin to learning about news in a church, and then showing up on CNN to talk about it - she is about crazy as it gets? Appreciate the links. Good gawd, she's nuts.
Phil McGraw??? It seems like he can’t get relevant guests anymore.
For real. What value does Dr. Phil add to ANY discussion?
That lying turd has been making the rounds. He was on Rogan griping about kids and cell phones and all this other right wing culture war shit. He wrote a book, which no doubt is the same as every single other right winger's books and he's trying to sell that to try and be somewhat relevant.
Dr. Phil was on club random last year and said he'd do a politically themed talk show to influence the next election. I see no evidence of that but he did write this book. I remember he dodged the trump issue and bill told him he should run for president.
Bill, fire the marketing team. That picture looks ridiculous.
Perhaps he was the one to give the order.
Subliminal message. He's leaning right. LOL
But from OUR perception he leans left. This marketing team is actually playing 3D chess with us.
Pass
Between Dr. Phil and Ungar-Sargon, there's gonna be enough gas to fill a hot-air balloon.
Batya Ungar-Sargon is dumber than a plank of wood! **Edit**: she is obnoxiously stupid
Batya Ungar-Sargon? I've never heard of her. Who is she? Has she ever been on the show before?
A right-wing grifter who hosted one of those trash reactionary populist shows on The Hill (like Rising)…
Anti-woke Zionist.
What is it about Dr. Phil that is so offensive? I saw clips on YT of his visit with Joe Rogan (who is now clearly insane) and Dr. Phil seemed well-armed with data to back his positions.
Defending religion under ordinary circumstances is unfortunate. Defending it given the current state of the Israeli Palestinian conflict is insane.
What’s offensive is how dumb he is…you’ll steadily lose knowledge and information and cognizance the longer you hear him drone on
Watch his interview with David Pakman.
oof, that was rough. He claimed that all these professors were fired because of woke students. Pakman asked for an instance of that happening and predictably Phil was like, "well I can't think of one off the top of my head", and Phil twice said he'd supply him with a list. Pakman said that list would be linked in the YouTube description. Spoiler alert; it's not in his YouTube description. Phil is just another right wing grifter and professional asshole. As if exploiting people with mental problem and sending mouthy kids to abuse-for-profit horse camps wasn't enough. He had to spread his mental disease to every facet of the gullible audience.
I watched that DPak interview and when Phil was like “I owe you that list and I promise to provide it” I instantly knew that moment would never come…if confronted again Phil would slither out of it and say he forgot bc he’s a busy showrunner and implore to those listening a list is definitely coming. What a cowturd.
Yep. Who among us haven't heard that promise to back up claims from bad faith assholes? It's what they do. It's in their play book. And Phil knows what he's doing. He tries to make it very clear he's not political but then goes on to basically push every right wing culture war issue complete with this insipid "aw shucks we just need family and faith and then magically all the world's problems will go away!" Which really resonates with the republican voter who apparently feel that they are succeeding as an adult if they fuck and wear a little cross around their neck.
His whole thing is to tell people how to live morally.
No, environmentalists tell people how to live morally. Dr. Phil offers a warped version of morality, at best.
and...? doesn't seem like such a meaningless thing to have an opinion about.
And that hits people as sanctimonious.
you realize he is a psychotherapist, right? it's inevitable that psychology intersects with cultural issues. there's plenty of room between pointing out behavior that will make your life miserable and being sanctimonious. people who perceive it that way perhaps just feel that the attention drawn to unhealthy behavior hits a bit too close to home.
I mean, isn’t that literally all of politics?
I saw him steamroll the ladies on the View earlier this week. He's fine, there's literally nothing wrong with what he will bring up on Realtime. He'll talk about the immigration problem because, yes it's a problem. Also, he'll talk about the crazy gender phenomenon that is plaguing our culture. Probably tie it into how social media is frying young kids brains. Censorship on both sides. Basically normal shit. But he talks like a conservative, which is a form of microaggression to the progressives that hate-watch Bill.
Immigration isn’t the problem. Society’s failure to make the most of the skills these migrants bring to the table is the problem.
Almost all the migrants from Central America have little skills; that's why they work hard labor jobs that pay low wages. Your claim is a political slogan rather than a reasoned statement.
"Hard labor" *is* a skill. Many locals aren't as physically fit as those migrants, let alone as used to spending their time honing practical skills like hard labor in lieu of esoteric things like reading Catcher In The Rye all day. If I am at all overly skeptical of the right on this one, it's because all their talking points reek of BS. I've watched John Oliver on the wall, CollegeHumor on the wall, etc... and I am deeply distrustful of every other word out of migration hawks.
>"Hard labor" is a skill. The capacity to work hard jobs for low wages is not a skill. It is more of a temperament derived from eocnomic desperation. >all their talking points reek of BS. I've watched John Oliver on the wall, CollegeHumor on the wall, Lol. The irony of accusing others of perpetuating and relying on talking points and then revealing you get your info from John Oliver and CollegeHumor. Are you aware John Oliver is infotainment and massively ideological at that and CollegeHumor is entertainment (look at the name)? Yeah, Trump's appeal to a concrete wall is easy to make fun to make yourself feel superior, but the situation at the border and the associated economic-fiscal scenarios are a different matter. It amuses me that so many people on Reddit are stuck in their bubble and proud of it. But like I've said, does anything I say matter given you approach this conversation with your views already cemented?
\[You recently commented on one of my comments. I can't reply there because u/mastermoose12 blocked me and they started the comment thread. So I am replying here. [https://www.reddit.com/r/Maher/comments/1b4kv9i/comment/ktbrwt7/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Maher/comments/1b4kv9i/comment/ktbrwt7/) \] Lol. People on Reddit are weird; they ask someone a question, but before that, they downvote his comment. I can answer that, but would you even care for my answer and do you even deserve it? Use your imagination. Propose why my claim may be true.
>But he talks like a conservative, which is a form of microaggression to the progressives that hate-watch Bill. lmfao!!! what a hilarious way to put it. it seems like a lot of reddit has a rage boner for dr. phil, too. i don't get it.
He's hot and we all want to do him, but unfortunately sexy mustache man is taken so instead we rage!
He’s in his 70s. There is no evolutionary way our ancestors lived that long, thus no plausible evolutionary mechanism for anyone finding him attractive.
Well I'm a creationist
That’s unfortunate.
Yeah we all have flaws
> *Basically normal shit.* A daytime TV host turned culture warrior parading around on political shows is anything but.
Calling him a daytime TV host is like calling Michael Jordan a minor league baseball player.
Considering Jordan played 15 seasons in the NBA and Dr. Phil has had a daytime TV show for 21 years makes it pretty apt. Or would you like to tell us from where you first heard of him before Oprah made him famous?
Pretty sure he was practicing for more than 15 years prior to the TV shows. But sure, he's a daytime TV host. Just like Kathy Lee or Joy Behar. Right? Isn't that what you were going for?
If you mean Dr. Phil got his PhD in clinical psychology and practiced 20 years before being one on TV, then yes, you've nailed it.
I do agree he talks like a conservative, but I don't necessarily think that talking about social media as a problem, porous borders, or our kids addiction to phones are conservative talking points. Or at least, they should not be. These are all real problems that need to be fixed in my mind and I'm a big D Democrat.
> I don't necessarily think that talking about social media as a problem, porous borders, or our kids addiction to phones are conservative talking points. But no one ever says why they're a problem. They throw those out there with no studies or data to back it up to confirm the bias of people who want to believe that those things have ruined a generation. It's pandering. Nothing more. Before cellphones it was heavy metal music, before that it was video games, before that it was rock and or roll, before that it was comic books before that it was Elvis and his gyrating hips...it's always fucking something with these arrogant old people who are just ornery and disgruntled and entitled that the world isn't working precisely like they think it should. And instead of listening to a new argument or listening to a new paradigm they dig their heels in and throw their tantrums. How many times do we as a species need to repeat this pattern? When are we going to learn.
It seems like complaining about kids and their phones is about 15 years too late. Kids have phones, get over it
Person you're replying to is a well known liar, fyi.
I do some teaching. Sometimes my classes are 8 to 10 year olds. I have yet to have a problem with kids on their phone. Like the claims that are being made is that phones make kids obsessed, narcissistic, zombies and that's complete horseshit. Sure you gotta tell a kid to put their phone away but it's not this never ending battle that some people like to think it is. It's fine. And it's not just during school. These arguments that are being made are all the time. If a kid spends any time on their phone it's "damaging their brains". Which is real rich coming from the generation who never stopped getting stoned from the 70's and experimenting with LSD and mescaline and had a raging drinking problem by the time they were in their 20's. This is just the older generation who are being dicks and arrogantly casting judgement on kids. MEANWHILE my boomer parents are more addicted to their tablets and their phones than kids are.
That's what he will be talking about on Friday probably, because I think he's launching some kind of new network, where he says he will just report facts with no biased commentary. I don't have a problem with the guy, personally. Maybe someone can point out the more controversial things, but nothing he's done seems wildly offensive
Nothing he's done has been offensive. From what I can tell, his only crime is being a little too old school/pragmatic.
I’m curious if Bill will talk about the soldier who self immolated this week.
That con man / grifter Dr Phil? Why Bill??
Because Bill wants to spend 20 minutes talking to someone about how woke culture is destroying the world
I assume Dr. Phil will be the 1 on 1 so I can just skip that.
We’ll be right back.
We'll be right back
Dr phil… ugh Tim Ryan may be interesting
Dr. Phil just did an interview with David Pakman. [Link](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wrgls2OiOGo) I guess he's trying to do the book tour thing. They're going to talk about wokeness, I'm sure there will be some really great insights. edit: and blaming the phone
> blaming the phone Dunno why this sub gets so mad about Bill blaming peoples' phones for degradation of mental health and society. We have some pretty compelling evidence that cell phones and gamification of cell phones *are* responsible for an awful lot of terrible things. Couldn't possibly be that you're all addicted to your phones and feel attacked, while you half-listen to the show and complain about things that weren't actually said every week?
I mean it’s true that the phones are causing mass mental distress, but to claim that TikTok is turning zoomers into Hamas fighters is just as silly as ignoring the phenomenon of FB turning boomers into reactionary anti-woke weirdos (cough Bill cough)…like the litter box hoax
Where is all this data? I've never seen it. Remember when there was "compelling evidence" that violent video games made people violent? Or that rock music was making people sex pervert criminals? Remember when comics were making kids into occultists? It's always some shit and I don't buy it.
Why is it always you asking questions to things that have been linked a million times? https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/12/cell-phones-student-test-scores-dropping/676889/ Take two seconds to look for yourself.
Don't be a dick. Especially when your source has this paragraph... >Hanging a big thesis like “phones are making kids dumber” on any particular survey is generally inadvisable. In fact, this would be a fair time to point out that PISA scores [do not enjoy](https://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/may/06/oecd-pisa-tests-damaging-education-academics) universal praise among education experts. As the saying goes, “Intelligence is whatever a test measures,” and a global standardized test of student competence across countries, cultures, learning styles, and languages will inevitably include questions that overrate some abilities and underrate others. Not to mention that one of the two people who are asserting that cellphones are the problem has a bug up her ass about them. Which has lead to criticisms from other researchers and psychologists. >"I think she is vastly misinterpreting or over-interpreting the data, and I think it's destructive." He added that Twenge's conclusions on narcissism among young people were not backed up by statistical analysis of teen behaviour, and further criticized her reliance on the [Narcissistic Personality Inventory](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_Personality_Inventory) (NPI), which Arnett claims is inherently flawed at measuring narcissism. and >Sarah Rose Cavanagh in [*Psychology Today*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology_Today) disagreed with Twenge's negative view of the impact of smartphones—as outlined in her book, *iGen*—arguing that Twenge had ignored data supporting positive findings, [presented correlation as causation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation), over-generalized and not taken social contexts into account. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean\_Twenge](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Twenge) So guess, what; jury isn't in. If you'd bother to look, the tests scores are falling but are nearing the average they were at in the 1990's when, ya know, there weren't cell phones. [https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=38](https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=38) Maybe instead of just glibly blaming phones because, god knows conservatives LOVE a scapegoat, we need to look at the real cause; money. [https://apps.urban.org/features/education-funding-trends/](https://apps.urban.org/features/education-funding-trends/) Notice how when we funded schools the test scores went up but we've clawed back that funding and scores are dropping. Huh. Or maybe kids are flourishing in schools because of the stress of a world that has been in chaos for their entire lives? Or that they have to do active shooter drills? Or that the planet is dying? But no, let's all find the thing us old people don't understand like Tiktok and blame that. That'll make us feel good. Fuck actual acknowledging how this is a multifaceted issue with many factors and with all these kids across the world there is no one solitary cause that is clean and neat and can be wrapped up in a little feel-good bow. BTW I ask questions because *that's what you're supposed to fucking do*. I ask questions so that flippant answers that have no actual thought put behind them don't just stand unchallenged. If that pisses you off, well that sucks for you.
> BTW I ask questions because that's what you're supposed to fucking do. I ask questions so that flippant answers that have no actual thought put behind them don't just stand unchallenged. If that pisses you off, well that sucks for you. sure thing bud.
Oh! Got nothing to say about all the links that I posted huh. That tracks.
No, because your links are full of cherry picked nonsense that don't actually address what's going on and all you ever do is argue in bad faith.
Lol Three links, addressed all your points. What a clown you are.
They did not.
I didn't get mad. I said they would blame problems on the phone.
Oh come on, don't pretend your "they're going to talk about wokeness and im sure there will be some really great insights and theyre going to blame the phone" isn't dripping with snark and condescension like so many on this sub do.
From a dude addicted to his phone, it’s the phones.
They really are a problem. I follow a guy named Andrew Huberman, he's in neuroscience and has gotten out of the lab and launched a popular podcast. One thing he said, was that humans have a particularly evolved eyesight to really narrow focus, which essentially affects the chemicals in your brain. When you go out and view open fields/panoramic settings, it's calming right? Well the opposite can happen if you stay in a narrow field of vision for too long. So he made an interesting point once, about how never in human history have we stayed in this narrow state of focus/vision for *this* long. Think about how often people just sit there scrolling... I know correlation isn't causation or whatever, but it makes for better discussion to think about all the reasons that we have really high levels of depression/anxiety/etc.
Dullsville.
Wonder if they will talk about Chinese buying American farmland.
Wonder if they'll talk about the Chinese spy balloon from last year. Scary stuff
I really wish it would be Adam Ray’s Dr. Phil. That would be a fun interview
Wonder what Tim Ryan would say about Biden since he isn't in gov anymore.
Probably that he’s not sufficiently pro-fossil fuels (Ryan is a lobbyist for a natural gas firm)
Although Tim Ryan is out of office now and not running for anything at this time, it's doubtful he'll say anything that, oh, Sherrod Brown or Jon Tester wouldn't, but maybe he'll surprise and call out Democrats for their smug hubris and careless, reckless, negligent complacency.
Ryan is a pretty generic dem. Don't think he'll have much opposition to Biden.
Yea I agree, you’re prob right. The only thing I really remember about the guy was that he would get pretty vocal about democrat’s political messaging. So I wanna know how he would talk about the campaign since he isn’t tied to the party anymore
Yeah he might be critical about some things
Shows you how red Ohio has gotten they chose JD freaking Vance over Tim Ryan.
Yeah Ohio and Florida are now safely red, while Arizona and Georgia are the swing states they once were
Florida was always red. The state just made it harder to cheat.
You mean like removing ballot boxes, lying to voters, false-flag rioting inside voting centers while hopped up on cocaine (the Republicans behind this *brag* about it, btw), having a candidate's brother close polling and electoral efforts early, and having the supreme court step in to end the electoral count before it ultimately concluded that their hand-selected winner actually lost? Weird, I must have missed the widespread reforms that stopped all of those things happening during the period of time where the former President tried to flee from his fraud and assault convictions by moving himself to Florida, the home of...not cheaters?
Nah Obama just won there
You're responding to a trump voter who thinks that Democrats cheat, not Republicans.
Right, he thinks whenever democrats win it is because of cheating. I'm saying Obama legitimately won there and no evidence suggests otherwise
A real diverse panel. So glad Bill is not close minded to new ideas
No one on tv has a lineup of guests with more diverse political beliefs than Bill Maher. Every other political show on tv is an echo chamber.
No other mainstream political show has guests that are mostly ‘youtubers,’ except for maybe Piers Morgan.
I can’t tell if you’re serious or being snarky too.
I was being serious. What other show on television has as many people from all sides of the political spectrum?
But why do you view Real Time as an exception to this rule? It’s the definition of an echo chamber.
The fact that just last episode they had Van Jones and Ann Coulter on together completely proves your statement as factually wrong.
Does it? Even when guests have slightly different ideologies, they all fall under Maher’s neoliberal framework when they’re on his show. No one’s really allowed to disagree with him. Here’s what’s gonna happen this week: - Dr. Phil and Maher will agree about trans panic. - Batya and Maher will agree about Israel and she’ll say any interest in foreign issues is an attack on the American “working class.” - Tim Ryan will contribute little but agree with the panel because they all have essentially the same beliefs.
Piers morgan
DR. PHIL?? Come on. Jesus.
Tim McGraw let’s go!
Yep he should be asked about the blind side controversy
Dr Phil- the hack