Michael Moore is delusional

[Galahad]

However, because Fahrenheit 9/11 may contain some inaccuracies, does not mean that EVERYTHING in the movie is false.

OK. But I'll bet that during the 3 hours that Rush Limbaugh talks each day, that the majority of those things he says are factually correct. Does that knowledge sufficiently mitigate his spin, hyperbole and exaggerations?

 

[faithinkarma]

Perhaps if it were a double feature... Leni Riefenstahl's "Triumph of the Will" and Michael Moore's "Farenheit 9/11"

Remind me again of how liberals think anyone who disagrees with them is stupid?

 

[Galahad]

Originally posted by faithinkarma
Remind me again of how liberals think anyone who disagrees with them is stupid?

How did he ( jrydberg) call anybody stupid?

 

[jrydberg]

I didn't think I had called anyone stupid

 

[faithinkarma]

The comparison of the movies? Too stupid to know when they are seeing propaganda? If it was not the implication, I apologize.

 

[jrydberg]

Well, my apologies since my post seemed to give that impression. That was not my intent.

Moore himself refers to the film as an op/ed piece and hasn't denied it when it is referred to as a propaganda film.

Mind you, I don't use propaganda as a perjorative term (though common usage does have that connotation), just descriptive. It has a political slant and is intended to alter political views. It is propagating a particular set of beliefs. That's not a bad thing, in and of itself.

I guess my point is if you want to go see it great. But the suggestion that anyone who votes should see it is... well... as off base as suggesting everyone who votes should listen to Rush Limbaugh. That's all.

 

[krissy3483]

Originally posted by ripleysmom
Personally I think that this movie should be required viewing for anyone before they vote.

The very thought of that is terrifying. Clearly, this movie is not one hundred percent accurate, or completely based on factual information. It is a film which depicts the thoughts and beliefs of Michael Moore. That is totally fine - he made a movie to make money and create controversy, and that is exactly what he accomplished. The fact is, this is just one person's opinion, and it should not affect the minds of millions of others. I personally think that if you do not even have a basic idea of what the issues are, you shouldn't be voting anyway, but everyone's vote should be based on their own beliefs, not those of someone who displays theirs in the public eye.

 

[Nancy]

Originally posted by ripleysmom



Personally I think that this movie should be required viewing for anyone before they vote.

I guess I wouldn't be voting then because I will never pay 1 cent to see any of Michael Moores film's. I think he is a big blowhard with a big mouth to go along with his big ego that thinks everyone in the world wants to hear his point of view. And no I haven't seen any of his movies, but I have seen enough of him on TV to give me my reasons why I won't.

 

[cati]

xx

 

[wvrevy]

It truly amazes me how many people know ever-so-much about Mr. Moore and all of his beliefs, but then go on to say that they've never bothered seeing one of his movies.

So, in other words, they are accusing him of being uninformed...by remaining uninformed themselves

Oh, and Moore's movies do NOT play fast and loose with the facts, as everything in the movie that is stated as fact IS a fact. It's his conclusions that should be questioned (whether you're inclined to believe him or not). Not even Shrub and his gang of pundits dare attack the FACTS...but they'll call him fat, make fun of his looks, and everything else to try to marginalize him.

The facts are there for anyone to see....if only they could be bothered to look.

 

[bsears]

Originally posted by wvrevy
It truly amazes me how many people know ever-so-much about Mr. Moore and all of his beliefs, but then go on to say that they've never bothered seeing one of his movies.

So, in other words, they are accusing him of being uninformed...by remaining uninformed themselves

Oh, and Moore's movies do NOT play fast and loose with the facts, as everything in the movie that is stated as fact IS a fact. It's his conclusions that should be questioned (whether you're inclined to believe him or not). Not even Shrub and his gang of pundits dare attack the FACTS...but they'll call him fat, make fun of his looks, and everything else to try to marginalize him.

The facts are there for anyone to see....if only they could be bothered to look.

I could not agree more. Facts are facts. Conclusions are something else. I have this vision of a short time after a Kerry win, people scratching their heads and saying " maybe I should have learned more for myself first hand. I might have made a difference."

 

[septbride2002]

I just read the transcript - Neither of them did a very good job, in my opinion. They were to busy trying to "catch" the other one that they didn't debate anything.

~Amanda

 

[Laz]

Originally posted by septbride2002
I just read the transcript - Neither of them did a very good job, in my opinion. They were to busy trying to "catch" the other one that they didn't debate anything.

~Amanda

 

[christineann]

What concerns me is that there are actually people (and I do NOT mean everyone who sees the movie) who will go see this movie and believe what Moore says without really looking into the facts, which would take some effort beyond sitting in a movie theater. This is nothing more than "entertainment" and one man's efforts to make a lot of money. I would not allow what is simply a movie to affect my political views one way or another.

 

[bsears]

And then there are those who have not seen it, but are perfectly willing to claim that everything in it is a lie, without looking into the facts, which would take some effort beyond just spewing out the opinions of other people who have not seen the movie either.

 

[christineann]

I feel the same way about someone who would listen to Rush Limbaugh and believe everything they hear. It's just entertainment!

 

[ElizK]

Originally posted by wvrevy
It truly amazes me how many people know ever-so-much about Mr. Moore and all of his beliefs, but then go on to say that they've never bothered seeing one of his movies.

So, in other words, they are accusing him of being uninformed...by remaining uninformed themselves

Oh, and Moore's movies do NOT play fast and loose with the facts, as everything in the movie that is stated as fact IS a fact. It's his conclusions that should be questioned (whether you're inclined to believe him or not). Not even Shrub and his gang of pundits dare attack the FACTS...but they'll call him fat, make fun of his looks, and everything else to try to marginalize him.

The facts are there for anyone to see....if only they could be bothered to look.

My fact finding missions will never begin or end with Michael Moore. There are lots of much more reliable sources out there, sources that do not have the reputation of taking things out of context and using implication and innuendo.

 

[luvthatduke]

You're right about considering the source. You're all talking like O'Reilly is more than the traveling side carnival that he is.

Ummm...
Excuse me, Doug123, but you're assuming that
by presenting MM's admitted LIE on Letterman I am
defending O'Reilly??

Nope... The man annoys me, but he does ask the
good questions.
However, I heartily agree with Lisajl
that O'R should just be quiet for a moment
and let the people answer him!

Now, let's all take a deep breath and
thank God we live in a country where we
can agree to DISagree (pun intended).

Oh wait, now I'm going to get flamed
because I asked someone to thank God...

Just can't win for losin'

 

[Nancy]

I won't see the movie, but I also won't make comments about the movie...my comments are based on my impressions of MM in his interviews...which I have seen. I won't see movies with Tom Cruise in them because I don't like him as an actor...same thing in my book.....it's my opinion. I've probably missed some good movies that he has been in...but oh well, I'll get over it. I didn't see The Passion of Christ even though everyone told me that I HAD to see it. I did not want to sit through what the reviews said were graphic and disturbing scenes...not my type of movie.

Why can't people be allowed to have their opinions without being told unless they have seen the movie they aren't entitled to an opinion. I'm not basing my opinion on the actual movie, I don't have an opinion on the actual movie..I'm basing it on the person making the movie. My DH would like to see it because he thinks MM is funny! I told him he can by himself...I don't think he's funny.

And my comment on MM thinking everyone wants to hear his point of view was based on his speech he tried to make at The Oscars....at least I think it was the Oscars...all those award shows blend into each other after awhile and I don't want to be jumped all over if I have mistaken the award show that he got booed at and then the music started to get him off stage.

 

[caitycaity]

Why can't people be allowed to have their opinions without being told unless they have seen the movie they aren't entitled to an opinion.

maybe i missed it, but i didn't see anyone say you weren't entitled to an opinion, just that if you haven't seen the movie, your opinion of the movue is uninformed.