|
Post by DKBUCKLEY on Jul 28, 2004 16:11:47 GMT -5
I witnessed Michael Moore at DNC convention last couple nights, culminating in his interview with Ted Koppel (if nothing else, made me like Ted Koppel more and Moore less, it was a great interview).
But Michael Moore belongs no where near a political party. Not that Larry David, Rob Schneider and all the others are any more qualified -note: Ben Affleck gets interviews about John Kerry, what the f.uck?
Over the weekend I rented the first half of the first season of the AWFUL TRUTH, a two year independent venture by Moore, filmed by his people and distributed on Bravo and BBC channel 4. It was a great show and Moore at his best. It was not really political, but very anti-establishment. Two examples of what I mean: one section has him bringing tobacco victims with voiceboxes on Christmas carols to cigarette HQ and even one executive's home. Sick. but apt, and interspliced with old commercials from the companies literally claiming cigarettes have no ill effects on your health. Second example is some ultra-conservative dude who went on protests at funerals for homosexuals with signs and everything, basically telling the family their loved ones are going to hell for being gay at their damn funeral. This guy was just asking for it. Moore took a pink camper full of gay men and followed the guy around a couple cities, breaking sodomy laws in a vehicle with sticker: "Sodom is for lovers". Anyay, it was 1999 and Clinton was in office and Moore was against most politicians and said bad things about Clinton and s.hit on him for not getting health care coverage for all. I think this format (very TV nation if memory serves) was great. FYI, the AWFUL TRUTH refers to a polling agency he commissioned and their retardec findings are called awful truths; i.e. 49% of Liberals think think "God will save the Queen". It's all tongue in cheek and if you don't get it, that's your problem. He has a knack for going after people, but in my view these are public figures and most deserve at least as much s.hit.
But Moore's going kamikazi about political ideology. Koppel is saying -as yours truly believes- to call Bush a liar is to call many other people liars, including Tony Blair, Vlad Putin, Senators, and Colin Powell. Koppel also pursued the logic that Moore's top issue is getting out of Iraq ASAP and that Kerry is not at all talking about that and is on record for believing in the need for more troops. Moore's got no answers. Moore shouldn't even be asked these questions. Moore is a political satirist and social commentator and that is his fortay.
To date I have not viewed Fahrenheit 9/11. Anything that places blame on Bush, Clinton, or even Hussein for what happened on 9/11 is dead wrong and I want no part of any of these things. Maybe someday I'll get the chance. I'm with Nader on his assessment of Moore: we miss the Michael Moore I from years past who realized he had no place in Washington at all and certainly not in either of the main parties.
|
|
|
Post by larry g on Jul 28, 2004 22:25:34 GMT -5
he doesnt blame bush for 9/11 just for what he did afterwards.he does go into detail about the bushs family connection with the bin lodin family. no one who sees this movie can deny the truth of it. thats why no one has claimed the 10,000 reward for factual mistakes.did any one see his interview with bill o'rielly i saw alittle of it but not enough to form an opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Ken on Jul 29, 2004 11:12:46 GMT -5
Best part of the DNC was the interview with Moore on Bill O'Reilly's The factor. O'Reilly tracked down Moore and asked him for an interview and Moore agreed as long as the interview wasn't edited. Wasn't edited. Wasn't edited. ;D Could this be because Moore knows the power of editing and what can be accomplished with it? Maybe Moore learned a thing or two from the Nazi Propaganda machine. Moore the Nazi and the Democratic Nazi Machine. (Wink Wink) Anyway, Moore's entire argument was based on this retarded question..."Would you [Bill O'Reilly] send your children to fight in Iraq? To secure Fallujah?" Bill's answer, he would go himself to secure Fallujah and to fight in Iraq. Great answer, considering Moore is implying we send children to fight in Iraq, as if against their will. HELLO!!!! Anybody in the armed services has SIGNED UP in the armed forces for whatever reason of their own FREE WILL. The draft hasn't been reinstituted yet dumb a.ss!!!! Moore's second rationalization..."Bush lied about WMD's." HELLO!!! The 9/11 report found the flaw in faulty intelligence. American intelligence, Russian Intelligence, U.N Intelligence. If anything, the President acted on faulty intelligence, which means he didn't lie. But Moore apparently has his own intelligence service more sophisticated than any other intelligence service in the world and he knows better. Whatever....... Bill O'Reilly RULES!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Ken on Jul 29, 2004 11:22:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Rob G on Jul 29, 2004 16:09:36 GMT -5
Thanx for the link Ken,
And i have said all along that Bush acted on Faulty intelligence. This is why i have no beef with Iraq war. If intelligence indicates danger we must act. I just wish he would have went about it a little differently.
|
|
|
Post by larry g on Jul 29, 2004 18:26:47 GMT -5
well,according to several staements by different members of the bush adminastration early in thier term. iraq was not a threat, they might have some small remenants of chemical weapons but had no way to use them. they changed thier story though. i guess this is the flip flop adminastration.
|
|
|
Post by DKB on Jul 30, 2004 10:14:41 GMT -5
So much for separating Moore from the actual political debate
|
|
|
Post by Ken on Jul 30, 2004 11:57:31 GMT -5
Unfortunately, separating Moore from political debate has become impossible at this juncture. He has made himself a political figure, and inserted himself into mainstream culture against our will. What is amazing though, is how the DNC treats Moore as their deformed, retarded, little second cousin that they hide in the dank, dark basement, occasionally throwing him some scraps of leftovers down the stairs from dinner. No one of any noteriety will be seen with him, least of all Kerry or Edwards. One night during the DNC, Moore was seated next to Jimmy Carter and you should have seen Carter's face. He wouldn't look in Moore's direction, just sat there looking straight ahead. Now understanding all this, how come Moore has such a following? Who are these people who seem willing to follow him to certain doom, who push his movie as the ultimate truth, when in fact, it is nothing more then clever editing. Tehir credibility is certainly in question. On another note, O'Reilly interviewed Ben Affleck at the DNC. My respect for Affleck grows daily. He is a moderate Democrat, not given to whims of irrational hatred for Republicans or Bush. He is intelligent, articulate, and very likeable. He went toe to toe with O'Reilly and held his own ground. Even O'Reilly liked him. Maybe Affleck will have a second career in politics or as a pundit after his acting career.
|
|
|
Post by DKB on Jul 30, 2004 15:16:57 GMT -5
Doubt my credibility, I love Michael Moore. But seriously, he attacks politicians for a living, why should any align with himever? His trademark inteview tactic is to come in with compliments and niceties and build up to slamming you hard and getting indignant. Former presidents and Senators will always avoid that direct contact, lest they end up in a movie... never mind UPSETTING THEIR CORPORATE DONORS. That's right, Moore is known for attacking large corporations and these businesses tend to make large donations to political interests. I love that there is someone out there giving those guys crap, wish there was more of it. I think that having him present things in his way is biased, but what of it? I would hope people have a mind to think for themselves and take what is presented as credible as they take other programs they watch. I think Moore with his popular movie represent the Iraq issue very much and that people hate the war and like whoever talks boldly against it. The Dems don't seem to pull together and have a stance of their own that is much different from the Reps and so Moore gets to trance around calling for full recall of all troops in Middle East. Sure, there are other guys out there saying the same thing to some extent, but not as loudly at the national level. And certainly not as brashly and uncensored. I guess that's his perogative for inserting himself there, but it really surprised me to actually see him afforded a seat at the convention and earlier in the year endorsing Wesley Clark for president. I don't see how he gets that opportunity or why he should be, but I concede it is what it is. My bad. Doubt all my credibility, I'm a dopey man and it's Friday!!!! TGIF! I hate Ben Affleck and John Kerry for being from Massachusetts and rooting for the Red Sox and hating my beloved Yankees. Anyhow, women LOVE Afflack and he would win any election held against anyone not named Clinton I hope to check that link and read this infamous interview over the weekend. Sounds like it was good?
|
|
|
Post by larry g on Jul 30, 2004 17:54:54 GMT -5
i dont think that moore is a democrat ,hes an independent/anti establishment. hes going after bush right now but when kerrys elected he will be going after him. keeping him honest. i personaly feel moore is a fighter for the common man, telling us the facts that get centured by the government on a regular basis.
|
|
|
Post by Ken on Jul 30, 2004 19:51:22 GMT -5
Michael Moore is more than someone with a national forum interested in being a rebel and/or going against the grain. He is interested in full-scale rebellion; a total change of government philosophy to some form of socialism/communism/entitlement-ism . He is akin to an anarchist, someone who wants to upset the status quo but who offers no alternative. His only goal seems to be to weaken our country and our society so that we are a race of pacifists. He is now a public figure. He snuggles up with the foreign press and bad-mouths this country. He bad-mouths our president. He bad-mouths our way of life. He does this openly in other countries and to the foreign press. It is easy to see how foreigners may assume a negative attitude towards this country, when such a popular American goes out of his way to denigrate the United States. He is a hypocrite. He denounces Bush for alienating our allies, but does nothing to repair fences, only contributes to America-bashing. I have a huge problem with this . The American way of life and the American public has made him a rich and famous man, with a public forum to speak his mind, and he can do nothing but disparage the United States. Doesn’t this behavior offend anyone? There are plenty of people out there giving people, politicians and corporations crap, and they do it using the truth. Moore bends and twists the truth until it is no longer truth . How can I trust a guy like this, as a source for information? He has less accountability than news organizations do because he is Hollywood. And people do not have minds of their own. I may be cynical, but what about the maxim “if it’s in print, it must be true?” One of the over-arching lessons through four years of college is to question every bit of information, where it came from, how it was presented, and make up your own mind. People read something; watch TV, see a movie based on fact and think it must be true. Sometimes I think the world is made up of automatons. And how does Moore represent the Iraq issue very much? He gets it publicized? It’s on the news every day! Yet Moore still calls Bush a liar, regardless of the 9/11 Report, CIA, Russian intelligence services etc. However, you are correct, it is his prerogative to say whatever he wants in any medium he wants, but how can people take him seriously? He is NOT CREDIBLE! And Moore isn’t keeping anybody honest. No politician is waking up in the middle of the night with the cold sweats screaming Moore’s name out loud for fear he is going to uncover some state secret. If anything, they’re screaming….”NO!!! CNN! MSNBC! FOX NEWS! C-SPAN! ” ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by larry g on Jul 30, 2004 20:19:07 GMT -5
which part of bowling for culimbine do you think is the most america bashing, oh wait you've never seen it or anything else hes doen , so in fact you have no idea what your talking about ,you just regugitating thigns you heard on bill orielly, instead of watching it and making up your own mind (kinda like an automation) the term glass houses comes to mind . i love ya man but until you watch any of his movies your not qualified to speak on this what so ever. i already know what bill orielly thinbks because , i watch his show even know i disagree with him . im not scare to listen to opposing viewpoints.
|
|
|
Post by Ken on Jul 30, 2004 20:29:10 GMT -5
I have a mind of my own and I choose not to watch his propaganda movies, contribute to his money coffers, and contribute to his hypocrisy regarding this country. You keep following the pack, I'll lead it.
Your Bill O'Reilly references are already old. I listen to your view points, regardless of how much they give me a headache. You like to listen and follow liars, that's your prerogative, leave me out of it.
|
|
|
Post by larry g on Jul 30, 2004 20:45:24 GMT -5
how do you know what you are saying is true if you never saw it. or maybe you dont care if your right or not.
|
|
|
Post by Ken on Jul 30, 2004 20:53:25 GMT -5
Are you saying Moore doesn't lie or "Spin?"
|
|