Michael Moore and Freedom

i saw bowling for columbine and loved it.
but im not going to go see farenheit 9/11 becuase i think it would be way over my head becuase alot of the things they talk about dont afect me yet at an age of 15. but ill go see it when i understand more.
im realy starting to get less involved in politics becuase thats starts wars in it selfand thats just lame.
i think when i become able to vote ill just vote for whos right and not pick any sides.
 
the velorium camper said:
i think when i become able to vote ill just vote for whos right and not pick any sides.

People aren't voting for who's right anymore, they're choosing the lesser of two evils. And if Bush names Rudy Giuliani as his running mate, he'll win the election.
 
Jesus, I just came in here to try and get some infromation about the new album, and there's political shit in here??
Even more remarkable, there's people who still support Bush????

Holy shit, the whole world is in big trouble if you yanks 'vote' that anti-depressant taking right wing Christian fundamentalist nutjob back into office.

I guess I'll come back in a few weeks and see if someone's cleaned this shitstain up. Thanks for fucking up my visit, Sphere, you lunatic.
 
Amazing. Arab fundamentalists blow up two of the tallest buildings in this country, resulting in 3,000 people killed. George Bush takes to the offensive to clean up what Clinton was too cowardly and politically motivated to do over the last eight years and you people call him a right-wing fundamentalist nutjob and other choice words? It appears to me you people would be better suited to get off your own medications and wake up to the world we live in. I feel much safer with the "nutjob" in office than I will if another wuss-ass democrat is in office.
 
The only thing more humorous than Michael Moore's clowning is the equally zealous and emotional response of his critics. Guess what, people like YOU created Michael Moore. His goal in life is get attention and further his cause, and you're helping him - the fact he angers those on the other side of the fence is why many "liberals" love him.

"This is the best and most concisely written article I've read on Michael Moore yet."

So you actively go out and seek anti-Michael Moore articles? Hahahhaha, talk about getting played - this is exactly what Moore wanted and planned on.
 
No terrorists did anything to this country since 9/11, so intelligence must be doing something right.

Much of America isn't "liberal" or "conservative;" many people are moderate. They agree with views on topics that either side could have. People don't go out and vote because candidates are too right or too left.
 
Next_Profundis said:
The only thing more humorous than Michael Moore's clowning is the equally zealous and emotional response of his critics. Guess what, people like YOU created Michael Moore. His goal in life is get attention and further his cause, and you're helping him - the fact he angers those on the other side of the fence is why many "liberals" love him.

"This is the best and most concisely written article I've read on Michael Moore yet."

So you actively go out and seek anti-Michael Moore articles? Hahahhaha, talk about getting played - this is exactly what Moore wanted and planned on.

Michael Moore, like everyone else in the entire friggin world is after one thing: getting attention and furthering their cause. Read some Neitzche, or just think about the thread, everyone wants their opinion to be heard and others to believe exactly what they believe. This should not come as such an abhorent shock, it's one of the primary functions of capitolism. It's not a certain group of people who create a Michael Moore, it's all people and the way our society fuctions that create ALL social status and select who we listen to and who we don't. The fact is, finding fault in Moore's work and ideologies is just as beneficial as the validity behind his ideas. Many of the fantastic ideas and open forum of discussion here on important topics that SHOULD be discussed would not have ever happened spontaneously, and if critiquing Moore is what creates those discussions, then let us critique away! And how on Earth could you slam critics for critiquing Moore.... that's their job! Without adamant critics, the uneducated and uninformed would be far more likely to accept Moore's work as all fact and righteousness and never even KNOW another side exists.

"Why do you always have to be so critical?" -Duke
"Because I'm a film Critic" - Jay Sherman
 
You misunderstand. There is nothing wrong with critiquing Michael Moore. I'm what might be called a "liberal" and I myself am very critical of Moore. I find he is loud, obnoxious, dishonest, and a poor champion for my school of thought. What I was critical of was the emotions associated with the responses of his critics, not the responses themselves. For instance when asked to provide listings of factual inaccuracies of F9-11, the original poster says, "here's two tasters of his blatant bullshit." Perhaps, "two examples of dishonesty in his film are" might have been better. It is this sort of emotive response which has made Michael Moore's film such a hit.
 
Prismatic Sphere said:
I am not a child of the state and I refuse to support any side which readily asserts(covertly or overtly) to know the better values to determine the course of my life; whether they be a police-state or a nanny-state.
I will happily be voting for Michael Badnarik because he IS deeply committed to our intrinsic rights and he SHOULD be running our country. To look at it any other way is meaningless and tantamounts to nothing less than self-immolation.

Dude, I actually feel exactly the same way you do. The only difference is, I know that realistically, the only two parties that matter in this country are democrats and republicans. Sad but true. You will never see an independant party in the white house. So picking "the one you hate the least" is really the only way to go about it, hence my support of the "liberal" side. I hate a lot of aspects of liberalism. Lets not forget it was a democrat's wife who started the PMRC in the 80's and I'm against all forms of censorship (omiting of course any sort of racist stuff), but realistically, voting for a 3rd party would be throwing my vote away.

I don't particularly love Kerry, but at this point anything is better than Bush. He's done more to fuck up our foriegn relations than probably any other president in the history of our country. He had the world's support after 9/11 then threw it all away by waging an unjust and unwarrented war. Fuck at this point if Bush were running against a grapefruit I'd vote for the grapefruit. At least if you drew the right kinda face on the grapefruit it might actually look smarter than Bush too...
 
Next_Profundis said:
So you actively go out and seek anti-Michael Moore articles? Hahahhaha, talk about getting played - this is exactly what Moore wanted and planned on.

I got my link in an e-mail.

I don't like George Bush either. He's an idiot.
 
The terrorists attacked because they were angry about a right wing neo-conservative xenophobe being elected president. They also were angry about the fact that Bush's daddy stationed thousands of American soldiers in Arab nations and have been holding a monopoly on Saudi Arabian oil. Also, they are pissed of at our support of Israel, since they do not deserve the land they were given by the USA and have killed thousands of innocent Palestinians. George Bush can eat shit because he has pissed of the militant Muslim extremists and 3000 Americans paid for his arrogance and bullshit on September 11 (not to mention the fact that over 100 American soldiers have been killed in this war in Iraq, a county not linked in the slightest bit with Al Qaeda. Honestly, we cannot believe the shit about weapons of mass destruction, and for those who say 'hey! Hussein was an evil dictator anyway' I ask 'what about Libyia and Ghana and the other oppressed African nations? Do we go to their aid? Of course not, they don't have oil). The US is fucked. We still fund and trade with Israel, China and Russia, even though foreign policy clearly says that we will do neither with countries that are in violations of human rights or commit crimes againt humanity (Russia-Chechnya. Israel-Palestine. China-Tibet).

Now that that's cleared up, let's move on to a happier topic. How about Pinella's solo album? looks pretty good, eh? I just picked up a couple of Blind Guardian albums and they are damn awesome. "And Then There Was Silence" ranks up there with some of SX's best songs.
 
I believe the Israeli's took there own land (in a mere six days, mind you, and that doesn't include the rest of the land they occupied during that war either, since Britain pressured the Israeli's to return it to Egypt and Syria) rather than had it given to them by the US. And I believe they allowed the Palestinians to inhabit the Gaza Strip after the Palestinians were booted out of Jordan.

I, for one, stand by President Bush for keeping us safe. He has been on the offensive to keep America safe. Iraq had clear ties to Al Qaeda - there were several Al Qaeda training camps within Iraq. Iraq also had a deadline from the UN to prove they destroyed their weapons of mass destruction. They never did. The UN ruined its legitimacy by not taking action against Saddam as they idly threatened they would. The weapons were hidden rather than destroyed, but I won't argue that point.

Ten years from now when the dust settles in the Middle East and there are more legitimate governments with better peace (not perfect peace), will you then finally give President Bush his due?
 
ABQShredHead said:
I believe the Israeli's took there own land (in a mere six days, mind you, and that doesn't include the rest of the land they occupied during that war either, since Britain pressured the Israeli's to return it to Egypt and Syria) rather than had it given to them by the US. And I believe they allowed the Palestinians to inhabit the Gaza Strip after the Palestinians were booted out of Jordan.

I, for one, stand by President Bush for keeping us safe. He has been on the offensive to keep America safe. Iraq had clear ties to Al Qaeda - there were several Al Qaeda training camps within Iraq. Iraq also had a deadline from the UN to prove they destroyed their weapons of mass destruction. They never did. The UN ruined its legitimacy by not taking action against Saddam as they idly threatened they would. The weapons were hidden rather than destroyed, but I won't argue that point.

Ten years from now when the dust settles in the Middle East and there are more legitimate governments with better peace (not perfect peace), will you then finally give President Bush his due?
I find it quite astounding how you are stating rumours as if they were facts, in the same way the Bush administration has done. No hard proof has ever been found that Al-Qaida was linked to Iraq in any way. If you think so, you've just been inclined to do so by the American media which are completely biased in the republican direction. Weapons of mass destruction still haven't been found up til now, and you seriously still believe they are "hidden"?
Man, that's insane. Guys like Blair and Powell already had to admit that they were "misinformed" or "were not sure" that the WMD actually existed. It seems now that Saddam fooled everybody, including his own henchmen.
I was actually not againts the Iraq invasion, but for other reasons than presented by Bush. The administration continuously manipulates the American people, and most of the Americans are too brainwashed to see it.
Did you, for instance, know that around 75% of the Americans think that less than 2,000 soldiers were killed so far in Iraq? And that the actual body count is already over 11,000?

The administration, along with the media, manipulate the Americans into nothing but having FEAR. That is what it's all about.

And on a personal behalf, I find Bush a complete idiot because i honestly think he is simply not intelligent enough, not to say too stupid, to be in the powerful position that he is. Thus, the people behind him that actually make the decisions, can do whatever they want, without a smart guy thinking it all over. I find a loose cannon like Bush as a president of the U.S. to be equally dangerous and frightening as the presence of Al-Qaida.
(and let's not delve into the complete mess the Bush administration has made of domestic politics. Kerry would do a much better job with that).
 
Since my presence has been requested in this thread, I'm obliged to answer...Bush has been disastrous for this country. His policies have resulted in a prolonged and unwanted conflict that his administration supported through deception and manipulation, helped cause record deficits, and he has shown remarkable incompetence in just about everything. And just because there has not been a major terrorist attack on US soil since 9/11 does not mean we are in any less danger, otherwise there would be no need for these politically timed alerts (the weekend after the DNC, based on outdated info? How gullible do they think we are?)...homeland security has been a massive failure IMO.
As for Moore, F911 is a propaganda tool, no question about it. But having seen the film, I believe it does have its valid points and makes a strong argument against Bush. And at this point, I support anyone working actively to get Bush out of office.