RE: Clinton campaign declined Bill Maher's help cause he's an atheist.
September 20, 2018 at 9:21 pm
(This post was last modified: September 20, 2018 at 9:38 pm by Joods.)
(September 20, 2018 at 8:51 pm)mh.brewer Wrote:(September 20, 2018 at 8:44 pm)Joods Wrote:
Are you trying to give me a headache?
What are you talking about?
(September 20, 2018 at 9:18 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote:(September 20, 2018 at 8:44 pm)Joods Wrote: That's blatantly false CA and you know it. Here's some parts of the article:
Documentarian Michael Moore revealed this week that he made efforts to help Hillary Clinton (who he called "the smartest person to ever run for president") by enlisting Amy Schumer, Chris Rock, and Bill Maher "to form a Justice League of satire and comedy" to take down Trump with jokes during the 2016 presidential debates—an effort the Clinton campaign rejected.
As Moore recounted to Milano ():
Nowhere in any of this does it specifically say the reason was because of Bill Maher's atheism. It could very well be Chris Rock, but CA conveniently misrepresents the article for anyone who won't bother looking at it to fact check it.
In case there was any doubt about Chris Rock:
Freedom From Religion Foundation autobiography of Chris Rock
No it doesn't implicitly say Bill Maher, but since nothing in your link says that Chris Rock is an atheist, he doesn't talk about being one, and Bill Maher is well known for commenting on religion and made a movie about it, it's a safe assumption that was referring to him.
It also doesn't matter which one it is referring to anyway.
Also: irony for saying I misrepresented a link there. Yours doesn't say that Chris Rock is an atheist. I'd be happy if he were one, as I love Chris Rock, but I didn't find anything like that on Google. Just some quotes critical of Christianity, but that doesn't make one an atheist.
Quit playing stupid. Why would the FFRF do a bio on someone that was religious? Answer: they wouldn't. And they haven't. Anyone who visits the FFRF website knows they don't promote religion of any kind. So, as you put it, "it's safe to assume" that he is one. So your whole post here was nothing more than a Strawman.
Disclaimer: I am only responsible for what I say, not what you choose to understand.