McGentrix wrote:snood wrote:McGentrix wrote:Cycloptichorn wrote:McGentrix wrote:snood wrote:McGentrix wrote:edgarblythe wrote:The one reason that crazy person can't be ignored is because so many others take heed of her raving. Some possibly even believe she is truthful. This affects the way her targets are perceived by thousands of people. It's a travesty of truth, but it's there, given credence by dolts of the same mentality as the swift boaters. Her words don't get knocked down as they should be by true journalists.
Like Michael Moore and Al Gore for example. People believe their lies and spread their words as gospel despite much of their "truth" having been proven as lies.
What things are you saying have been "proven as lies", McGentrified?
Or are you just orating from your rectal sphinchter again?
None as blind as those that will not see Snood. It amazes me that you even have to ask such a stupid question. Well, maybe amaze is too strong a word considering the other idiocy you post.
But, no specifics offered, I see.
Predictible trolling
Cycloptichorn
As much as has been written on these forums while he and obviously you have been members here, I wouldn't suspect specifics would be needed.
Your response is equally predictable though. Backing up a like minded person ignoring the facts and spewing your predictable insults.
Oh, I see. So, you expect to be able to pass of pronouncements like saying "much of" what Gore and Moore have said are lies- without any challenge to provide what exactly the hell it is you're talking about.
Uh, no. That ain't happening.
There have been alternate ideas put forth that contradict some of the information that Gore has championed about global warming, if that's what you're blathering about. But to try to characterize those differences between scientists as some halfassed kind of definitive proof that Gore and Moore are lying is contemptible, even for a slackjawed halfwit like you.
RE: Sicko
http://newsbusters.org/node/13699
http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/Movies/06/28/review.sicko/index.html
RE: Fahrenheit 9/11
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5335853/site/newsweek/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10713-2004Jun27.html
RE: An Inconvenient Truth
http://www.slate.com/id/2142319/
http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/450392,CST-EDT-REF30b.article
I'll not search through all the threads here regarding these topics, feel free to do that yourself if you actually care about this rather then just continuing the lip-service you usually provide.
Very good, in that you actually attempted to do something other then trolling. I applaud your efforts.
But, do your links actually support the proposition? Let's just look at the Sicko links, as it is the main topic of discussion -
You stated that:
Quote:
Like Michael Moore and Al Gore for example. People believe their lies and spread their words as gospel despite much of their "truth" having been proven as lies.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/Movies/06/28/review.sicko/index.html
The only part of the review that is critical of Moore?
Quote:Having "enjoyed" first-hand experience of two of these three health systems -- the British and the Canadian -- I can attest that they're not quite as idyllic as Mr. Moore paints them. Except in comparison with the U.S. system, of course, and that's the point.
...
If Moore missteps, it's in the one sequence he and the Weinstein Company have made sure everyone has already heard about (with a little help from the U.S. government): the boat lift to Cuba for three ailing 9/11 heroes. It's Stunt Man Mike at his crudest, and not as effective as he intended.
Okay, that's a good point; but is it disproving 'much' of the truth of the movie? Nope.
http://newsbusters.org/node/13699
This is a link to a USA Today article.
Quote:Sicko uses omission, exaggeration and cinematic sleight of hand to make its points. In criticizing politicians, insurers and drug makers, it says little about the high quality of U.S. care.
Sigh. The care is great, if you
have the money. That's the whole point.
Quote: Some facts and figures in Sicko are misleading. The film says nearly 50 million Americans have no health insurance; 44.8 million people were uninsured in the USA in 2005, including non-citizens, the Census Bureau says. The film says health care costs $7,000 a person each year; the World Health Organization says it costs $6,100.
So he said 'nearly 50 million' instead of '45 million?' 7k instead of 6.1k? Big whoop.
Are Moore, or Gore's, movies perfect? No. Any documentary or non-fiction piece can be disputed or argued with. But to say that
Quote:much of their "truth" having been proven as lies.
Is complete bullsh*t.
You didn't troll in your last post, so I'll leave off the insult I would have added here at the end.
Cycloptichorn