fahrenheit 9/11

Kriista · Post by **Kriista** » June 26, 2004, 3:19 am

saw this tonight with a bunch of friends

theatre was sold out, HOURS in advance, people were passing out kerry stickers and shit in the line

hes gonna become one rich motherfucker thats for sure

the movie itself was good, i felt he stretched himself too thin, lightly touching on too many subjects

and i felt he used 'gag reel' shit as content too much,
but it raises some interesting issues, and more importantly i think, awareness

this movie, and bushs last ad will probably swing OMGIAMRETARDEDCAUSEALOTISTWOWORDS of undecideds toward the 'whoever is most likely to beat bush' camp

its a sad state living in a country where this is how it works, i could only imagine if they were to install that 'vote against' idea mentioned on here a while back, what the numbers would tally up, if any candidate would even get out of the red as it were

overall i felt columbine was a much better movie in all regards, but this is worth watching, id just wait till next week till its not perma sold out

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » June 26, 2004, 10:33 am

ABC Nightly News had an iteresting interview with former White House Terrorism Expert Richard Clarke. He basically said that 2 of the claims in the movie were patently false.

most significantly that the connections between the Bush family and the House of Saud had any impact on the preparedness we had for terrorist attacks.

i think he said something like:

"the relationship with Saudi Arabia had nothing to do with why the Bush White House was not taking the terrorist threat seriously".

anyway, not surprisingly there are things that Moore is not overly responsible to the facts on. But there are some things supposedly that are very relevant too.

I am interested in seeing it.

Akaran_D · Post by **Akaran_D** » June 26, 2004, 11:13 am

I've no interest in watching it after hearing the numerous claims of BS about it.
While I enjoy my fiction, I'm more of a Riddick kind of guy.

Keverian FireCry · Post by **Keverian FireCry** » June 26, 2004, 12:55 pm

Akaran, there is far more truth in this movie than BS. Is there BS? Yes, of course, it is a MOVIE and it was made to make a point. Yah, go spend money on a waste of time like Riddick, when you could spend that time actually becoming aware of certain issues and discussing things brought up by a movie like this. The importance of a film like this is that it gets people talking and actually caring about what's happening outside our little bubbles of ignorance. By ignoring it, and saying that you'd rather watch a horribly rated movie like Riddick, just proves why Americans are so far out there on a lot of issues. You just don't care, unless of course it just backs up what you already believe.

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » June 26, 2004, 1:28 pm

I did like Roger & Me, but I just can't stomach this guy any more. Whatever truths he does use are all wrapped up his 'Look at me, look at me!' soapbox routine.

However, I am sure there will be a cool South Park episode out of this at least.

Akaran_D · Post by **Akaran_D** » June 26, 2004, 1:53 pm

Kev, you're right, I don't care what his "issue" is or what his thoughts about our president are. I don't care what "truths" are in the movie, and I don't even really care about what "lies" he packages in with it.

When I take the little cash I have and seek to watch a movie, I don't care about some spindoctor's thoughts are on the current political situation. I go to be entertained. Weather that entertainment is watching some Hobbits destroy a wing, some bald guy blow shit up, or some creepy middle aged man eat an annoying CIA director - it's entertainment.

When I want to know politics, I look at CNN. I look at Fox. I look at a hundred other credible sources. I'm not going to go see it through the eyes of a glorified media hound that's been bashed seventeen ways to hell on these boards already by both liberals and consertives alike. The trailer shot I've seen for it (the one with Bush golfing) does little to make me beleive that I'll find much in a way of neutral constructive criticism that I'd find useful instead of childish "Liar liar!" hoopla.

I pay for my entertainment. I don't pay for propaganda.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » June 26, 2004, 2:01 pm

People are easily duped. Enjoy your movie and grats to Michael Moore for taking your money.

Krimson Klaw · Post by **Krimson Klaw** » June 26, 2004, 2:02 pm

Keverian FireCry wrote:Akaran, there is far more truth in this movie than BS. Is there BS? Yes, of course, it is a MOVIE and it was made to make a point. Yah, go spend money on a waste of time like Riddick, when you could spend that time actually becoming aware of certain issues and discussing things brought up by a movie like this. The importance of a film like this is that it gets people talking and actually caring about what's happening outside our little bubbles of ignorance. By ignoring it, and saying that you'd rather watch a horribly rated movie like Riddick, just proves why Americans are so far out there on a lot of issues. You just don't care, unless of course it just backs up what you already believe.

Are you saying that in order for Americans to not be "out there on issues" I have to spend money to go see this movie? Would you hold this opinion if there were a pro Bush movie to be released next month Directed by Bill O'Reilly, and I said I did not want to pay money to see that either?

I think your very last sentence answers my question. I am Conservative and I want Bush out of office, that does not mean it is my obligation to my country to go see this movie however. That is no different than calling someone un-American because they oppose the war in Iraq, is it? I dont have anything against Mr. Moore, I just can't see paying money to see a political movie. I never send NPR any donations either and I listen to them daily.

The point of my post is this. If you don't pay to see this movie (raises hand) that does not mean you are lackadaisical towards the upcoming election.

Mak · Post by **Mak** » June 26, 2004, 3:39 pm

As a person that is probably more conservative than not, I'd have liked to see as honest a movie as possible, not one that is just a farce of a "documentary".

I'd like to be able to say that if I were to see this movie, I could walk out of it and be able to add that to my knowledge of everything else that's going on and make a more informed decision in November.

As it stands, I'm left with the impression that a liberal will say anything, make anything up, distort as many facts, and fuck with people's heads as much, if not more, than the President they are accusing it of themselves.

Canoe · Post by **Canoe** » June 26, 2004, 5:09 pm

It's one thing to say it is a movie and therefore it's allowed to have false claims.

It's totally another for the director to claim it as a "documentary" and still have false information in it.

I have absolutely no respect for michael moore anymore as a person - as a money maker he's obviously a genious - but not as a political "voice".

Krimson Klaw · Post by **Krimson Klaw** » June 26, 2004, 8:07 pm

His views are no less extreme than an O'Reilly or a Limbaugh. Let these guys pull out all the stops and make consummate points. It's healthy and you will learn something. Just be careful which pieces you use when putting together your own picture. Don't fall prey to believing one political party's side as gospel.

Hey this is basic stuff here.

Truant · Post by **Truant** » June 26, 2004, 8:25 pm

Winnow wrote:People are easily duped. Enjoy your movie and grats to Michael Moore for taking your money.

People are easily duped. Enjoy your president and grats to George W Bush for taking your money.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » June 26, 2004, 8:29 pm

Truant wrote:
Winnow wrote:People are easily duped. Enjoy your movie and grats to Michael Moore for taking your money.
People are easily duped. Enjoy your president and grats to George W Bush for taking your money.

You've got that turned around : ) Reps cut taxes, Dems take your money : ) You'll find that out if Kerry gets elected!

Dregor Thule · Post by **Dregor Thule** » June 26, 2004, 9:12 pm

Some people here make me mentally vomit all over my screen.

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » June 26, 2004, 9:47 pm

Gotta hand it to the douche though, he has the ultra-lib community hook, line and sinker.... sorta like what Mel Gibson did with 'passion(edit: for the hardcore christians).

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » June 26, 2004, 10:01 pm

I haven't seen it and don't plan to but will say this: It is pretty stupid to argue about the content of a movie without seeing it.

Hence I wont argue either for or against the movie

Fesuni Chopsui · Post by **Fesuni Chopsui** » June 26, 2004, 10:17 pm

Just saw it

It will sway the undecided and liberal repubs towards Kerry, if they are stupid enough to believe everything they saw in the movie

Some of what he says I do believe but some of it is clearly spinned propaganda...I consider myself pretty damn liberal, but I think in some selected examples - Moore went too far

Otherwise, I enjoyed the movie and would recommend it to anyone who either has doubts about Bush or down right wants him out of office

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » June 26, 2004, 10:18 pm

Fair enough Kel...and if this 'film' is anything more than lefty-rhetoric, then I will gladly download an 'evaluation copy' to watch for myself!

EDIT: Don't get me too wrong, although I lean Rep, many of my views on social issues are more liberal.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » June 26, 2004, 10:39 pm

Dregor Thule wrote:Some people here make me mentally vomit all over my screen.

I hope it's me! That would make my day.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » June 27, 2004, 12:27 am

Winnow wrote:You've got that turned around : ) Reps cut taxes, Dems take your money : ) You'll find that out if Kerry gets elected!

democrats take your money to pay for republican tax cuts for the wealthy. what is your point? it took clinton 8 years to balance tbe budger and deficits that reagan and bush sr. pissed all over, and it took bush jr. another 2 years to make it worse than it's ever been before.

when kerry wins I'm sure he will raise taxes again in order to pay for all the damage the GOP did.

fahrenheit 911 is more factually correct about the bush administration than anything the bush administration has offered.

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » June 27, 2004, 1:22 am

Although the Bush admin has its faults, GW would really have to nuke our own country to make it as bad as it would have been should that dumbfuck Gore have been elected.

OK, so we have no real cantidates for the presidency... we have to pick the lesser of 2 evils each and every time.. but let's face it-- Ollie North would make a better prez than any dipshit Dem that has run within the last 20 years.

Clinton was just Clinton...he and his family were OK in my book when I saw them at baseball games in the 80s, but really, they just got bizarre.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » June 27, 2004, 1:33 am

We're still paying for Clintons tech bubble. All was great during Clinton's administration because it was artificially inflated. Pop!

Clinton would have looked like shit if he could have served another term...guess we can blame that one on Greenspan...anyone but a democratic president!

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » June 27, 2004, 1:35 am

it physically hurts me how much little you understand about economics. unless you are just trolling.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » June 27, 2004, 1:59 am

Considering the thread topic I'm not giving much effort to providing the facts.

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » June 27, 2004, 2:09 am

This thread is not about whiney fucks who think they are true filmmakers? Man, I picked the wrong thread... Oh, and have some patchuli oil.

Dregor Thule · Post by **Dregor Thule** » June 27, 2004, 2:13 am

Winnow wrote:
Dregor Thule wrote:Some people here make me mentally vomit all over my screen.
I hope it's me! That would make my day.

Nope, giving your comments weight would be like taking Hee-Haw seriously.

Jice Virago · Post by **Jice Virago** » June 27, 2004, 2:33 am

Well, the movie is having its desired effect. It was booked all weekend so far near where I live (admitedly, hippy liberal douche central) but I was suprised at who exactly was going to see it (and that major chains were even carrying it). These were not all the beatnik flag burning liberal pussies you would think. Wether you hate or like the movie, it sure is making people talk. People actually thinking for themselves is the worst possible thing that could happen to Bush, come November. That, in my opinion, is why team Neocon Inc is working so hard to squash it.

Also, wether the film is opinion or not, is irrelevant. Are we going to start having music pulled off of shelves too because it makes a statement about current events? Good luck with that one.

Cano, you are a bright and likable guy, but some of what you are saying is way off base so far right that I have to wonder if Metanis and Mid hacked your board account. You seriously think that the country would be nuclear slag had Gore been elected (oh wait he was), let alone more fucked up that it is now under GW? Ah well, thats a debate for another forum.

I intend to see the movie once it stops being so packed here. My opinions are well known and unlikely to change over any movie, but I look forward to researching what is presented. You can rest assured that I wont be using the Washington Post or Drudge Report to conduct my research either, heh.

Finally, everyone seems to forget that our divinely appointed president already had his own movie advancing his political agenda long before this one came out. It was called the Passion of the Christ.

Incidently

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » June 27, 2004, 2:34 am

Dregor Thule wrote:
Winnow wrote:
Dregor Thule wrote:Some people here make me mentally vomit all over my screen.
I hope it's me! That would make my day.
Nope, giving your comments weight would be like taking Hee-Haw seriously.

wow...just wow.

Keverian FireCry · Post by **Keverian FireCry** » June 27, 2004, 3:17 am

Are you saying that in order for Americans to not be "out there on issues" I have to spend money to go see this movie? Would you hold this opinion if there were a pro Bush movie to be released next month Directed by Bill O'Reilly, and I said I did not want to pay money to see that either?

No. Good point. Spend money on whatever you want, I just think this is an opportunity for great discussion about what's going on, whether you love the movie or hate it. Look at the discussions brought up already before anyone has seen it, it's beautiful and I wish more movies like this were made, though I wish they weren't spun left OR right.

I just like movies that stimulate thought and I believe more people would like them if they gave them a chance. Riddick...is a fucking stupid movie. It's XXX meets scifi. Americans(other ppl too, but we are the worst) like fucking dumbass movies with big explosions or sex. It's pathetic and it frusterates the shit out of me. You CAN be entertained by thought-provoking movies if you just watch them. When one such movie comes around, I tend to back it up as much as I can.[/i]

Hesten · Post by **Hesten** » June 27, 2004, 7:42 am

I havent seen the movie, not out in DK yet.
But for those that think that the movie is just a lot of BS, you might wanna think again.
Look at it like this: We got a moviemaker making a VERY controversial documentary, one that might push a lot of voters in election year.
Because of that, Bush and company want it stopped. Understandable enough, i would too if it were my ass on the line.
They tried several times so far, to stop anyone from distributing it, to threaten theaters that want to show it, but all to no luck.

The ONLY thing left to minimize the damages done by this movie are to prove that the claims in it are false.
Since the NRA tried the exact same thing with Bowling for Columbine, Moore know better than to have anything that can be dismissed as lies or propaganda in the movie. Being taken in false claims in this movie = hurting its goal.
Whereas on the other hand, we got the Bush camp, who used lies, threats and foul play ever since during the election (sorry to say it guys, but if the last US election had been in some backwater african country, the US would have been all over the country to complain about the fixed election), and they got a BIG interest in minimizing damages done by this movie.

So who do you want to believe, a man who (admittedly, DO suffer from the "see me, see me" syndrome), who make a movie that can NOT have ANY grey areas that the opposition can attack, or the people of a president who more or less cheated his way into the office, and who spend the last 2 years lying at every chance about the war?.

Sorry guys, but i put my money on Michael Moore if i gotta pick the most truthfull person in this conflict.

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » June 27, 2004, 8:09 am

I think my main problem with this is that I do not like to talk politics. I enjoy movies...Moore has broken that boundry between movies and politics and that pisses me off. He uses us for his own means--and that is not cool at all.

I work 60-80 hours per week and sometimes a movie is all I look forward to--sad as that may be, but hey, that is how it goes for me atm.

I want to be entertained, not preached at by some social terrorist.

Jice Virago · Post by **Jice Virago** » June 27, 2004, 4:47 pm

Social Terrorist? Thats a bit out there. So if someone is pushing their opinion in a public forum and it runs counter to the party in power or mainstream, they are now a terrorist? You have to be careful when you throw words like that around these days, senator McCarthy. If information being dispensed is going to cause some sort of revolution, I think you have to look at what that information is and why people in this lazy ass country would even be willing to revolt.

Ultimately, though, since it is America, you have the option of simply closing your mind to it and not going to see it. Thats the beauty of this county, at least until the fundies fully get their way and we have Jesus endorsements plastered everywhere. Its a movie. You can choose not to go no matter how popular or unpopular it is.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » June 27, 2004, 7:04 pm

kyoukan wrote:
Winnow wrote:You've got that turned around : ) Reps cut taxes, Dems take your money : ) You'll find that out if Kerry gets elected!
democrats take your money to pay for republican tax cuts for the wealthy. what is your point? it took clinton 8 years to balance tbe budger and deficits that reagan and bush sr. pissed all over, and it took bush jr. another 2 years to make it worse than it's ever been before.

when kerry wins I'm sure he will raise taxes again in order to pay for all the damage the GOP did.

fahrenheit 911 is more factually correct about the bush administration than anything the bush administration has offered.

Or we could cut foreign aid back to zero dollars, leave every country out there to fend for themselves, get rid of career politicians, eliminate welfare entirely and reap the benefits of it all by being able to take a massive tax cut.

Of course billions of people in 3rd world countries would die, many more would die here because they are too lazy to work....and you would be begging for the GOP to come back into office to throw money around because no other country is going to put out the cash that we do.

Democrats spend more....which means they tax more. More taxes means that people are tighter with their disposable income...or have less of it. Less disposable income means less cash that they will spend on services. Services industries is where the U.S. is going to see the biggest increase of jobs.....the manufacturing is going out of country because no one has the balls to stand up and put a stop to it. So tax us heavier and you will end up crippling the economy in the U.S. This is not the U.S. of the past where manufacturing was the strength of our economy.

Kylere · Post by **Kylere** » June 27, 2004, 7:51 pm

Let me remind all of you that Michael Moore does not even tell the truth about what his home town is, or where he grew up.

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » June 27, 2004, 7:56 pm

Kylere wrote:Let me remind all of you that Michael Moore does not even tell the truth about what his home town is, or where he grew up.

Not Flint?

Keverian FireCry · Post by **Keverian FireCry** » June 27, 2004, 8:53 pm

Kylere, if you are gonna say things like that you need to back it up with proof. Simple as that. Otherwise, I don't want to hear it. If the only thing that he lied about is that the rabbit lady didn't live in Flint, then you were missing the point of the movie. It could easily be that not only Flint was effected by the closing of the GM plant, surrounding areas were too.

Im not trying to say I know as much as you do about the town, just trying to figure why Roger and Me seems to offend you so much. I would think pointing out the injustices done to your hometown by a careless corporation would be something you'd welcome.

List a couple myths he told about Flint along with what really happened, Id be interested to hear about whatever lies he told. I don't want to be lied to by a fellow liberal just as much as I don't want to be lied to by a conservative. I simply do my best to seek out truth, and if a movie I thought to be a great and informative political peice is mostly lies then I want to know what the lies are. Thanks.

Keverian FireCry · Post by **Keverian FireCry** » June 27, 2004, 9:35 pm

nm. taking it to a Current Events thread

Forthe · Post by **Forthe** » June 28, 2004, 4:16 am

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:Democrats spend more....which means they tax more. More taxes means that people are tighter with their disposable income...or have less of it. Less disposable income means less cash that they will spend on services. Services industries is where the U.S. is going to see the biggest increase of jobs.....the manufacturing is going out of country because no one has the balls to stand up and put a stop to it. So tax us heavier and you will end up crippling the economy in the U.S. This is not the U.S. of the past where manufacturing was the strength of our economy.

This has long ago stopped being true. Yes Bush reduced taxes, the majority of those $ saved go to a minority of citizens however, but he spends like there is tomorrow. Deficit spending.

Americans never talk about the national debt (most Canadians are no better but our government is paying down national debt in any case). You will only see it mentioned in passing. But the national debt isn't some random number that only future generations have to worry about, it affects you today as that debt has to be serviced.

As the national debt increases more and more of your tax dollars are going towards just the servicing of that debt while still leaving the burden on future generations. So while the tax breaks have gone mostly to the rich, everyone has to carry the burden of servicing the debt incurred by those tax cuts. As the % of taxes needed to service that debt increases the government must raise taxes or cut programs.

At one point before the Canadian Federal government starting paying down national debt the service cost of the national debt was 26% of all federal government spending. I could have effectively had a 26% tax cut without affecting government services if some fucktards had not overspent.

I've not seen figures for the US but with a higher debt\GDP ratio I would imagine the percentage is similar or higher.

--------------------------------

Anyway I've seen the movie. Not as good as BFC. Anyone that frequents the current events board will know everything that is discussed in it (probably why I didn't think it was as good as BFC as I found it to be mostly rehash).

It does bring some humanity to the discussion, I was choked up watching a couple of the scenes.

The military recruiters kind of freaked me out.

The footage of Bush's deer in the headlights performance during 9\11 was weird.

While he did go overboard on the Bush<->Bin Laden connection the Bin Laden's being flown out of the country without being questioned at all is worth questioning.

I wouldn't pay to see it in a theater (I didn't) but it was worth the time involved watching it. Maybe worth a rental.

Kylere · Post by **Kylere** » June 28, 2004, 12:22 pm

Keverian FireCry wrote:Kylere, if you are gonna say things like that you need to back it up with proof. Simple as that. Otherwise, I don't want to hear it. If the only thing that he lied about is that the rabbit lady didn't live in Flint, then you were missing the point of the movie. It could easily be that not only Flint was effected by the closing of the GM plant, surrounding areas were too.

Im not trying to say I know as much as you do about the town, just trying to figure why Roger and Me seems to offend you so much. I would think pointing out the injustices done to your hometown by a careless corporation would be something you'd welcome.

List a couple myths he told about Flint along with what really happened, Id be interested to hear about whatever lies he told. I don't want to be lied to by a fellow liberal just as much as I don't want to be lied to by a conservative. I simply do my best to seek out truth, and if a movie I thought to be a great and informative political peice is mostly lies then I want to know what the lies are. Thanks.

This guy is the Teflon Mockumentary maker. I trust him about as much as I would trust an LA cop to give an even break to a minority.

Umm Keverian, he grew up in Davison Michigan. A upper middle, lower upper class almost entirely white town outside of Flint. Just like thousands of losers I met in the Army, he selected the next city someone may have heard of rather than admitting to being from Hooterville. He was born in Davison Michigan, if you look at 50 websites, you will see 50 answers for his home town, and he does not choose to clear up the discrepancy IMHO because he benefits from it. He was NOT elected to the Flint Board of Education as some places list it, he was elected to the Davison Board of Education and this is described and elaborated upon in chapter 5 "Idiot Nation" in his book "Stupid White Men." He was not the son of a poor white sharecropper as you may have been led to believe. Factory workers made WAY to much money then for the job skills they possessed, not to slam them for it, but in the 70's my entirely unskilled and drugged out uncle made 42k a year for placing a washer on a bolt all day ( of course like 90% of the UAW employees in the area he only worked once every 10 days or so, the UAW had entirely unrealistic staffing requirements so the employees would all clock in, then 5 of the 100 that should have been on the line would do the work while the rest went and got drunk and high.) I would not own a single vehicle made in Flint from 1970 to 1990 because they are literally death traps. I know the people that made them, and they cared little and worked less. It is easy for someone who was not living here to say otherwise but I am speaking of what I saw not what I heard.

The 1986 GM layoffs in Flint were about 5,000, not the 30,000 implied in the film, which transpired over a greater range of time (as in 10 years). The commercial projects, intended to revive Flint, all opened and failed before the 1986 layoffs, but Moore suggests they resulted from the GM cuts, they did not. Roger Smith offered him 2 chances to have an interview but Moore skipped them all and would only tackle attempt to interview him. Reagan's visit and the pizza shop was in 1980, before he was president and Robert Schuller came to Flint in 1987, after the Great Gatsby party. The government officials that paid for a religious leader to come pray...Democrats, Flint has only had 2 non democratic mayors in the last 45 years, democrats run Flint, and Genesee County, so the political mismanagement part of the crisis is entirely true, but you will never hear MM point out who blew it politically. The Rabbit chick did not live in Flint.

Keep an eye out and see if any of his new wealth (he had a lot of old wealth he admitted on the Fox News Channel show Hannity and Colmes that he lives in a $1.9 million dollar home in New York City, oh yeah and a 1.2 million home on Torch Lake in Michigan) but lets see if the new stuff is spent to help others or spent to further his own waistline.

Here's a guy fired from Mother Jones magazine for being being personally unbearable, he refused to run an article that criticized the Sandinista communists then oppressing Nicaragua lost his job as a result and sued them to get money for it that he used to slander Flint Michigan. Let me clarify he was fired for his views, and won his court case, as a result I am not taking that away from him. http://www.motherjones.com/ Is so liberal it makes my teeth hurt.

The people he worked with at TV Nation seem to have really hated him, check out the Salon.com articles below, he withheld payments worked against unionization etc.

Lies in Bowling for Columbine http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html
Moore's rebuttal and the counter from Hardylaw
http://www.hardylaw.net/MoorereplyHeston.html

About Michael Moore's Stupid White Men in the Vancouver Indymedia (of course be aware this is a liberal site)
http://vancouver.indymedia.org/news/200 ... omment.php

Slates Unfahrenheit 911 Article, Were you aware he REFUSES to go to any show that may include hostile questions? How does he get this standard and not those he interviews?
http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723/

Salon.com covers some of his lies
http://www.salon.com/june97/media/media970606.html
Michael Moore responds to Salon.com reporting, and is counter responded to
http://www.salon.com/july97/moore970703.html

Spinsanity covers moore rather well
http://www.spinsanity.org/columns/20031016b.html

Bubba Grizz · Post by **Bubba Grizz** » June 28, 2004, 12:46 pm

The thing is that everyone knows that this movie is an Anti-Bush movie. No one can really deny that this is true. I really would rather not go to a movie where I know I am going to get hammered with brainwashing whether it is an Anti-Bush or Anti-Kerry movie.

If Moore were so altruistic to make this movie to inform the masses of how concerned he is then why didn't he make it FREE and put it on TV?

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » June 28, 2004, 1:24 pm

If Moore were so altruistic to make this movie to inform the masses of how concerned he is then why didn't he make it FREE and put it on TV?

Maybe because that would be an utterly idiotic idea?

If Bush were so altruistic to lead the USA then why doesn't he do it FREE?

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » June 28, 2004, 1:44 pm

Winnow wrote:
Truant wrote:
Winnow wrote:People are easily duped. Enjoy your movie and grats to Michael Moore for taking your money.
People are easily duped. Enjoy your president and grats to George W Bush for taking your money.
You've got that turned around : ) Reps cut taxes, Dems take your money : ) You'll find that out if Kerry gets elected!

hmm, funny i paid more in taxes but didnt make more money. Sorry, the tax cut propaganda doesnt wash here. Yeah Reagan cut taxes big time in 1981, but in 82 and 83 he rolled back very large chunks of them, because it is intractable to cut taxes massively and spend money the way that he wanted to. The difference with Bush is that he didn't restore the revenue to the government - while committing us to a war that could set us back upwards of a trillion dollars over the next 10 years.

yes that is fiscally responsible.

S&P 500 averages about 9% annual gains during Democratic presidencies and 6% annual gains during Republican presidencies. That is a pretty big difference. My source is a WSJ article Jan 2003.

Bubba Grizz wrote:If Moore were so altruistic to make this movie to inform the masses of how concerned he is then why didn't he make it FREE and put it on TV?

Pinko scumbag, this is the US, the whole point is to make money!

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » June 28, 2004, 1:58 pm

I'm sorry Voro, it's clearly stated in my government handbook that republicans cut taxes and democrats create more taxes!

Much h8 for this thread corrupting out movie forum!

Bubba Grizz · Post by **Bubba Grizz** » June 28, 2004, 2:12 pm

Moore comes off as this big voice of the country with his movies and such while pocketing a boat load of cash. That is why I made the statement I did.

Kylere · Post by **Kylere** » June 28, 2004, 2:44 pm

I would vote to move this to current events, BUT, this is only a movie not a factual documentary and as such is in the proper forum.

Dregor Thule · Post by **Dregor Thule** » June 28, 2004, 3:28 pm

Bubba Grizz wrote:The thing is that everyone knows that this movie is an Anti-Bush movie. No one can really deny that this is true. I really would rather not go to a movie where I know I am going to get hammered with brainwashing whether it is an Anti-Bush or Anti-Kerry movie.

If Moore were so altruistic to make this movie to inform the masses of how concerned he is then why didn't he make it FREE and put it on TV?

If I tell you there's scantily clad women rubbing oil over each other will you go then?

Bubba Grizz · Post by **Bubba Grizz** » June 28, 2004, 3:42 pm

Dregor Thule wrote:
Bubba Grizz wrote:The thing is that everyone knows that this movie is an Anti-Bush movie. No one can really deny that this is true. I really would rather not go to a movie where I know I am going to get hammered with brainwashing whether it is an Anti-Bush or Anti-Kerry movie.

If Moore were so altruistic to make this movie to inform the masses of how concerned he is then why didn't he make it FREE and put it on TV?
If I tell you there's scantily clad women rubbing oil over each other will you go then?

Only if it had a XXX rating or at the very least an NC-17.

Chmee · Post by **Chmee** » June 28, 2004, 4:52 pm

Forthe wrote:I've not seen figures for the US but with a higher debt\GDP ratio I would imagine the percentage is similar or higher.

Not quite that high. For 2002 Net interest was 170 billion out of a 2.01 trillion dollar federal budget, so a bit over 8 percent. Not that I like deficit spending (although I am more concerned overall with the level of spending generally). But I was curious and looked up the numbers so I thought I would pass them along.

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » June 28, 2004, 6:46 pm

IMO, this movie is 70% relevant information, while the other 30% is a mixture of opinion/entertainment/shock.

I find it odd that the Moore haters choose to focus on the 30% while ignoring the 70%. I'm amazed at the way some people think and behave.

I give it a 8 out of 10. As a movie, it delivered a gambit of emotions. As a message, I think Moore made his points quite clear.

Krimson Klaw · Post by **Krimson Klaw** » June 28, 2004, 6:59 pm

Bubba Grizz wrote:The thing is that everyone knows that this movie is an Anti-Bush movie. No one can really deny that this is true. I really would rather not go to a movie where I know I am going to get hammered with brainwashing whether it is an Anti-Bush or Anti-Kerry movie.

If Moore were so altruistic to make this movie to inform the masses of how concerned he is then why didn't he make it FREE and put it on TV?

Haha so you won't go see it for fear of being brainwashed? Sweet.