Michael Moore, Hero or Rogue

nimh wrote:

... has Moore "persuaded"? Or is he merely confirming people who go see his movies in opinions they already had - and quite plausibly, turning people who didn't already have those opinions further off?

I can speak briefly to this. Several of the people I went to see the film with went with the expressed purpose of gathering proof of Moore's evils and lies. One of them came out insisting that Bush and Cheney should be assassinated. Shocked

The rest came out, perhaps as affected by the film, but more rational in their ability to discuss what we'd experienced. The theatre I saw the film at, is smack dab in the middle of stockbroker-land, not a lot of left-leaning 'granola' Bush-haters in that neck of the wood. Full theatre - and lots of very sombre reaction on leaving.

There wasn't anything really 'new' in the film for me, other than the marine recruiters. It was just a matter of organization.

0 Replies

This was my experience as well, Beth. And as I understand it, there were focus groups before the movie was released. These things are done scientifically these days. It seems that all the undecideds that attended, made up their minds, some time during the two hour film to work diligently to defeat Bush. I can only hope this is true.

Quote:

"And it's not just a hope," the Oscar-winning filmmaker said in a phone interview last week, describing focus groups in Michigan in April at which, after seeing the movie, previously undecided voters expressed eagerness to defeat Mr. Bush. "We found that if you entered the theater on the fence, you fell off it somewhere during those two hours," he said. "It ignites a fire in people who had given up."

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/20/movies/20SHEN.html?ex=1092283200&en=35134aafb6b368f5&ei=5087&nl=ep

0 Replies

Quote:

I mean, I hope he can help get rid of Bush and all but I think this is waxing a wee bit... silly....

Then again, fanhood tends to be silly

Sorry Craven,

I didn't see this response from you until just now. Bear in mind, please that it is you pronouncing that my pleasure with the movie has to do with "fanhood." This is your own fantasy. You would have to ask me if this is the case to make an accurate statement about it. And it is a bit condescending........but then I'm no angel on that score either. So you're forgiven. Laughing

0 Replies

Lola,

If you call Bush a bad president will you cede that you need him to agree to it for it to be true?

Of course not.

0 Replies

'"Granola" Bush haters'?

0 Replies

Lola wrote:

And as I understand it, there were focus groups before the movie was released. These things are done scientifically these days. It seems that all the undecideds that attended, made up their minds, some time during the two hour film to work diligently to defeat Bush. I can only hope this is true.

Isn't this what is really at the heart of the matter? It does not matter that Moore made this movie... it is a free country, he can say what he wants. What is scary to me is that seemingly intelligent people take Moore's word for it because it is what they want to hear. Someone once said "Question everything." I am a Bush supporter yet I still question his reasons for war. Yet, so many are ready to join the lynch mob and Moore just uses this to his advantage. He doesn't care if what he says is truthful... he knows it will illicit the type of responses that we are seeing posted here. No one should take Moore's movie as the truth as no one should take the nightly news as the truth. Do some research, talk with friends, read books on both sides of the spectrum... but for goodness sake at least try to realize that the "stupid Americans" Moore is talking about are you. You blindly follow where he leads you... which is to help fulfill his own agenda.

0 Replies

Craven,

You may regard my support of Moore as "fanhood." But your claim is different from a belief that Bush is or is not a good president. The latter is a value judgement based on personal values and only applies to my own belief. If you think I'm a fan of Moore's, I think you need more information than you have at present to make that claim.

I don't agree with you that my pleasure with the film has anything to do with being a fan of Moore's. I think he's good at what he does....but I'm not sure this idea of mine qualifies as a "silly fanhood." I think I've expressed my opinion and preferences without undue dependence on hero worship. I just think he did a good job on this documentary and I'm hopeful it will be effective in disposing of Bush. You really don't have to call me silly to make your point. But I'm sure, if you were running for office and you did so in an effective way, calling me silly might win you the election. That's just the way it works.

I could make a lot of unresearched conjectures about your motivations as well. But if I did, they would be more about my fantasy than anything resembling a good educated guess. To speculate about your motivations, I'd have to ask you some questions about why you believe certain things, what they mean to you and how you came to those opinions. And even still, it would still be my own conjectures based in part on my own ideas. I don't think you've clarified anything with me about whether I'm a fan of Moore's. Besides, it was an ad hominem.....admit it.

0 Replies

jpinM, Just to give some balance to your statement " I am a Bush supporter yet I still question his reasons for war," what exactly have you questioned, and what was your response? Are there other statements that Bush has made that you question as deligently as you do Moore? If so, what are they? I'm not a supporter of Bush or Moore, so I'm sincerely interested.

0 Replies

I question a lot of Bush's policies. I think we can all agree that Saddam not being in power makes the world a better safer place (for those who still doubt check out this website of an Iraqi dentist and his brother http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/archives/2004_06_01_iraqthemodel_archive.html#108844493302892357 ) what I question is Bush's reasons for war. The talk earlier is was that Bush was a "true believer" and I think that he truly did believe that it was his mission to get rid of Saddam. If that meant exaggerating the threat against us then that is what he did. I question his policies on immigration and free-trade and what ever happened to no child left behind (I come from a long line of teachers so this one is close to my heart)? That being said I feel that he is a moral man (won't cheat on his wife and lie to the public about it), he has the courage to stand up and fight for what he believes in even when many think he is wrong (I think it is the sign of a great leader). What is most sad about all of this is I don't really want to be a Bush supporter. For the reasons mentioned above I feel he has some faults... but the alternative I feel is worse (Kerry). What a sad state of affairs it is when we have to vote based on who we think will mess up the country the least! But to get back to Moore, does anyone else get mad hearing him threaten to sue anyone for slandering him or his pets about F/911? This man just made an intensely critical movie about the most powerful man in this country (and some believe the world) and all that happened is he made a lot of money from it. He then turns around and threatens to sue anyone who is critical of him. He hides behind the freedoms of this country and then threatens to sue when someone turns the tables. What a hypocrite!

ps. He also once called the cops on a fired employee who was following Moore around with a bull horn (A tactic Moore often uses to get attention) demanding to know why he was fired.

Hope this answers your question.

0 Replies

jpinM, Thanks for your sincere answer to my questions. I'm not a supporter of Bush because 1) his "leave no child behind" is a failed mandate without the funding, 2) the no-bid contracts to Cheney's old company (ever hear of conflict of interest?), 3) all the justifications used by this administration to go to war have been proven false, we now have almost 900 dead soldiers and $200 billion spent on a war that sees no end, 4) the war in Iraq has rewarded bin Laden with more recruits and suicide bombers, 5) Bush said in his SOU speech that he would fund HIV/AIDS by $15 billion dollars, but very little of that money has actually gone to Africa while thousands die, 6) his style of administration that threatens anybody that disagrees with their agenda (remember General Shinseki and the public revelation of a intelligence officer?), 7) his policies that "damages" our environment, 8) lost US credibility in the international community, 9) his inability to speak coherently, and 10) terrorism around the world has increased contrary to what Bush keeps repeating that the world is a safer place. I'm not that thrilled about Kerry, but in this case it's a choice between bad and worse. Although I'm a believer in "free trade," NAFTA has been destructive to Mexico. Their economy is probably worse off today than before NAFTA.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

j 2) the no-bid contracts to Cheney's old company (ever hear of conflict of interest?)

What I hear from friends in the military is that Haliburton is simply providing services which our military used to provide for itself, and which nobody and nothing else in the world is any longer capable of providing, and that this situation is a consequence of Clinton's radical cutbacks to our military. In other words accusing Bush of granting no-bid contracts to Haliburton is like accusing somebody of giving Richard Wagner a no-bid contract to write operas for Beyreuth.

I don't know what the situation is now, but our military used to have a number of large depots which were set up to produce things which the free enterprise system did not normally produce. I was inside one of the smallest of these once and I can tell you that it was a building complex significantly larger than the pentagon, which existed to produce radio gear, radar equipment, and certain kinds of mobile computers.

Aside from Chinagate, it seems likely that Slick was also selling off more ordinary kinds of military equipment (than H-bomb technology) for DNC cash or whatever. We should have gone into Iraq the day after 9-11 and we were not able to. Even simple things like machinegun barrels which we should have warehouses full of simply were not there. I remember hearing in late spring of 2002 thast a friend had called one of the nation's barrel makers, probably Lillja or Krieger to ask about a barrel for a target rifle and was told that they "didn't have time for any sort of civilian firearms ****" because they were working 24/7 making machinegun barrels.

The Clinton regime was a disaster of titanic proportions. We're all lucky to be alive.

0 Replies

Quote:

Michael Moore, Hero or Rogue

Typical hits from a google search on "Michael Moore"

Quote:

...Hey, I have a "future son-in-law" over there, DUDE. Asshole. I have no - no, absolutely none, can't for the life of me imagine - NO idea where this fat wanker gets his ideas from. Maybe I haven't spent enough time as a coddled, rich, fat piece of s**t[/b]. I'm sure that's it, it's all my fault.

...Back to my point... I HATE MICHAEL MOORE. His bulls**t should not hinder my right to own a handgun and have the ablity to defend my wife and home if need be. He is a liar, a fat piece of s**t[/b], and WILLFULLY deceptive. Let's look at words from the horse's mouth...

...f**k you and f**k michael moore, that douche bag is a piece of s**t liar. All he does is lie to make some money cause hes a fat piece of s**t[/b] with no real job.

...Who cares what the rest of the world thinks of us the Brits along with the rest of communest loving Europe can go F**k themselves, As for that fat piece of s**t[/b] Moore If he hates his county so much why the hell doesnt he leave. the french (frogs) would welcome him with open arms.

...First there was disgusting fat piece of s**t[/b] Michael Moore. Today Ted Rall, who has been an America hating low life for several years, tried to top himself and all the other bedwetting leftist. His 'toon was so offensive MSNBC s**t canned it post haste. The human garbage on the left, all Kerry supporters, are tripping over each other to see who can go the furthest in sodomizing Pat Tillaman's corpse.

...# Michael Moore...you no talent, fat piece of s**t[/b]! I can't believe you won an Oscar for capitalizing on someone else's misery. Quit using my oxygen!!! # Jesse Jackson # Jane Fonda # Barry Bonds

...This fat piece of s**t[/b] dared to make light about the terrorism of 9/11/01. This fat f**k who hides behind a camera actually had the balls (although I don't think a pussy like him actually has balls) to say places that voted for Bush should have been the targets for terrorism, not places that voted for gore. This fat piece of s**t[/b] needs to be arrested for treason, or at least for poor judgement. If there is a God, this disgusting obese pile of horse s**t will eventually explode, hopefully he'll explode in an area that voted for gore. FAT f**kING PIECE OF DISGUSTING s**t.

Somehow or other, one suspects that Americans don't like this guy as much as the french do.

Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life...

0 Replies

Lola wrote:

Craven,

You may regard my support of Moore as "fanhood." But your claim is different from a belief that Bush is or is not a good president. The latter is a value judgement based on personal values and only applies to my own belief. If you think I'm a fan of Moore's, I think you need more information than you have at present to make that claim.

Well Lola, we'll have to agree to disagree. You speak of Moore glowingly, and say the whole country, sorry the whole world, may owe him a great debt.

I'm no sure how much value you place on the word "fan" but to me you certainly qualify. And quite frankly, I do not understand why you object to it.

I'm a fan of many things and people and do not consider it a pejorative.

Quote:

You really don't have to call me silly to make your point.

I didn't Lola, and you shouldn't have to lie to make yours. This is even sillier than the previous exhange I called silly.

You are taking a very innocuous comment very sensitively. And if you wish to continue to bristle at it, you can do so on your own, I really don't see any profit in pursuing it.

Quote:

I don't think you've clarified anything with me about whether I'm a fan of Moore's. Besides, it was an ad hominem.....admit it.

Quite frankly Lola, this is absurd. You said the world "may eventually owe him a great debt" and I said the comment was silly (not you, as you lie about earlier) and that fanhood often is.

And for whatever reason you obsess on it. You'll probably have to do so alone, as I can't imagine it being interesting or profitable to continue to discuss this.

0 Replies

jpinMilwaukee

Quote:

That being said I feel that he is a moral man (won't cheat on his wife and lie to the public about it), he has the courage to stand up and fight for what he believes in even when many think he is wrong (I think it is the sign of a great leader).

I have heard your pitch or something similar to it before. First let me say I couldn't care less whether he cheats on his wife or not. That aside what makes a great leader is one that makes the right decision for his country not one who leads it into an abyss. In addition there is no value in a leader who makes the wrong decision and is not man enough to admit a mistake. Hitler by your standards would have been a great leader since once he made his mind up there was no changing it. Anyone as rigid as Bush is not a great leader but a fool.

As for Kerry it is apparent that you have bought the Bush propaganda about him.
This post is littered with protests about as film that allegedly distorts fact, take statements out of context and exaggerates and as some would have us believe are complete fabrications. However, where is it any different from the lies, distortions, statements taken out of context made by the Bush campaign in their attack adds. Where is the indignation?

0 Replies

Swolf in response to your picture of Michael Moore and his Ministry Of Truth: socialism is not the same as marxism. A common mistake it seems.

0 Replies

Rick d'Israeli wrote:

Swolf in response to your picture of Michael Moore and his Ministry Of Truth: socialism is not the same as marxism. A common mistake it seems.

It's not my picture, just something I found which seems to express most people's sentiments about the guy fairly well. I'd have added tusks if I was drawing it.

Between Michael Moore, Richard Clarke, and Joe Wilson, the dems are doing pretty lousy in the hero department these days. I mean, it's pretty obvious they've run out of ideas, and the main thing they're selling right now is pure hatred.

0 Replies

Swolf,

It's ironic, very much so, to say the Dems are selling hatred after your previous deposit on the thread (filled with vulgarities and hatred against Moore).

0 Replies

Wolf
This is not a defense of Moore but I would like to know who would you consider a republican hero. Bush, Ashcroft, Rumsfeld, Condi,Cheney, Powell? No heros in that bunch.

0 Replies

Quote:

I have heard your pitch or something similar to it before. First let me say I couldn't care less whether he cheats on his wife or not. That aside what makes a great leader is one that makes the right decision for his country not one who leads it into an abyss. In addition there is no value in a leader who makes the wrong decision and is not man enough to admit a mistake. Hitler by your standards would have been a great leader since once he made his mind up there was no changing it. Anyone as rigid as Bush is not a great leader but a fool.

And I have heard your pitch: comparing Bush to Hitler. Let me ask you this... how is it when Bush lies (about Kerry or Moore or anything else for that matter) it is wrong and propaganda, but when Moore does it he is a great man for calling out this dark evil that is Bush? There is no difference between one mans propaganda and another... what I am saying is that don't just believe it because it is what you want to hear. Go out and find out for yourself what is truthful and what is propaganda or else you are just playing into their hands. Second it is not a matter of Clinton cheating on his wife, it is a matter of lying about it. I think this shows a great deal about a man. I for one take my vow of marriage very seriously... obviously he doesn't. But to lie about it also just show what kind of character he has. 3.) Hitler WAS a great leader. That is different from him being an evil man. He inspired an entire country... but led them down the wrong path.

Cicerone,

Although I agree with you about some of your responses for not supporting Bush, I feel your #8 is just a continuation of presidents past. Take this quote for example: "We can not accept either a politically unipolar world, nor a culturally uniform world, nor the unilateralism of a single hyper-power." While that fits todays circumstances, that quote was made in 2000 by a French foreign minister about Clinton. What I don't understand is how liberals are so quick to jump on Bush for things that they said we should forget about Clinton. Clinton acted just as unilateral in 1999 against Milosevic as Bush did in Iraq. Clinton was a draft dodger that we were supposed to forget about but the liberals tried real hard to make a point of Bush missing some meetings while he was in the guard.

Free trade i'm afraid is another subject but is to broad to cover here. While I agree that it helps create higher paying more skilled jobs here while keeping costs of production low it also allows for outsourcing of the more skilled jobs to other countries. I know a man that was an engineer making 6 figures who is cleaning carpets now to make ends meet for his family.

0 Replies

jpinMilwaukee
I did not compare Bush with Hitler was only speaking about leadership. You however, have missed the point entirely regarding the Moore film and propaganda. People at least republicans are decrying Moore's movie as lies and propaganda. But eat up the lies and distortions put out by the Bush campaign in their attack adds. A lie is a lie no matter who tells it.

Regarding Clinton, to begin with He is not the president nor has he been for almost four years. The constant republican ploy of pointing a Clinton to defend Bush won't play any longer. In addition what is worse someone who tried to beat the draft which is a game played by thousands or someone who shirks his duty by going AWOL
Regarding Bosnia, Clinton acted in concert with the European nations to stop the ongoing genocide. Do you think that is wrong? In no way does that compare with Bush's preemptive attack upon Iraq.

0 Replies

Michael Moore, Hero or Rogue

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know