‘Politically Incorrect’: Maher’s Misnomer

Once a fuzzy ambiguity, the expression “politically correct” has hardened over the years into a rather well-defined screed of far-left liberal political orthodoxy. It continues to seethe and chum at some of the best-known universities throughout the country, often fiercely driven by the tactics of strong-arm radical students and aided and abetted by intimidated faculties and administrations.

The primary hallmark of political correctness is its renunciation of the values and cultural legacies of Western civilization. It foments extremist fanaticism in pursuit of multiculturalism, often ruthlessly suppressing--by force if necessary--the airing of any countervailing views. Instances of college mobs jeering, hooting and shouting down even the most prominent speakers, successfully preventing them from offering reasoned exposition, are not uncommon.

Claiming justification rooted in a murky pseudo-Populism, political correctness rages against meritocracy and seeks to institutionalize an inviolable form of affirmative action that unconditionally and uncritically idealizes and holds sacrosanct everything associated with ethnic and racial minorities, regardless of truth or accuracy.

It asserts that victimhood is both the root cause and also an absolute defense for almost any sociopathic behavior. It imputes unearned self-esteem, and totally rejects and opposes any prescription for individual responsibility and accountability.

With such a tempting, highly visible target, it would be reasonable to expect that a television program that calls itself “Politically Incorrect” would primarily feature views antithetical to its polar opposite. In fact, and not surprisingly, the body of beliefs that have come to define “politically correct” have given rise to a diametrically opposite and equally well-defined set of beliefs that are labeled “politically incorrect.”

Far from espousing that point of view, Bill Maher has simply hijacked the label.

Of course, there is nothing wrong with Maher’s nightly potshots at anything and everything on the American scene that he chooses to put down. It’s just that the name of the program is misleading, suggesting the advocacy of a very particular dogma that he most assuredly does not represent.

It is a strange mix of performers, public figures and “personalities” that gather each weeknight around Maher after the ABC network’s serious “Nightline” program with Ted Koppel to discuss the issues introduced by the host.

Especially in the case of entertainers, the yardstick for selection seems to be their notoriety rather than their sagacity in addressing the topics at hand. Most of them are obviously accustomed to being listened to, and all too often, everyone seems to be yelling unintelligibly at once. The decibel level is usually high, but not much else is.

Maher may be no worse than third behind James Carville and Geraldo Rivera in his heated defense of Bill Clinton’s personal transgressions, particularly the president’s relationship with Monica Lewinsky (which Maher refers to regularly with accompanying groin-directed gestures that many people undoubtedly find offensive), and his apparent dislike of anything conservative or Republican.

Of late, no matter what the subject may be, Maher relentlessly finds a way to introduce one sneering insult after another about George W. Bush, mostly without even the slightest trace of humor. He is equally derogatory in his references to former presidents Bush and Reagan.

On top of that, his selection of guests is usually skewed to place in the minority those who might be representing points of view anywhere to the right of center, usually outnumbering them 3 to 1, or even 4 to 1 if Maher is counted.

What is surprising is the apparent willingness of several of the more thoughtful and serious participants who occasionally appear to continue to return, allowing themselves to be subjected to the frequently mindless yelling of the assorted entertainers and “personalities” who dominate the clamor. (On this show, loud beats thoughtful every time.)

Traditional family-centered values, recognition of individual responsibility and accountability, religion, morality, the sanctity of marriage, conventional lifestyles and views--fundamental elements of normative right-of-center “political incorrectness”--are repeatedly ridiculed by the host and many of the odd assortment of characters he manages to attract who support his more libertine assertions.

It’s too bad. There is ample tinder in “political correctness” to fuel a program featuring a lively expression of “politically incorrect” points of view. But that’s not Bill Maher’s show.