The Evolution of Michael Moore

[hist2004]

By: Bill O'Reilly
Thursday, Jun 24, 2004

The evolution of Michael Moore's new film is fascinating to watch. After winning an award at the Cannes Film Festival, Mr. Moore returned triumphantly to Hollywood and made this statement to reporters on June 9th:
"We want the word out. Any attempts to libel me will be met by force. The most important thing we have is the truth on our side. If they persist in telling lies, then I'll take them to court."

"Them" were critics who were questioning the accuracy of Moore's charges against the Bush administration. "Truth" is rock solid information which, apparently, Michael Moore was sure he possessed.

But then a funny thing happened on the way to the Metroplex. The Nine Eleven Commission findings clashed with Moore's thesis that the Bushies had done something dastardly immediately after the attack by letting a bunch of Saudis, including members of the Bin Laden family, fly out of the USA while everybody else was grounded. Apparently, that is not true, at least according to the FBI and the Commissioners, none of whom were jurors at the Cannes Film Festival.

So by June 20, Michael Moore had "evolved" a bit as many in Hollywood tend to do. He said this on an ABC News program: "(The movie) is an op-ed piece. It's my opinion about the last four years of the Bush administration. And what's what I call it. I'm not trying to pretend that this is some sort of, you know, fair and balanced work of journalism."

No mention of truth this time but, as responsible columnists know, all op-ed pieces are supposed to be grounded in truth and facts should be cited in backing up one's op-ed opinion.

Uh-oh.

But just when Michael Moore was foundering in a sea of skepticism, New York Times critic A.O. Scott came to the rescue with this assessment Moore's film: "It might more accurately be said to resemble an editorial cartoon ..."

Paging Shrek! In the space of two weeks the Moore movie had gone from truth to opinion to cartoon, albeit an editorial one.

But the hits just keep on coming. Los Angeles Times film critic Kenneth Turan wrote this about Fahrenheit 9/11: "It is propaganda, no doubt about it, but propaganda is most effective when it has elements of truth ... "

So we're back to the truth now garnished with "elements."

I have seen the first half of Michael Moore's movie and here's the deal. It's slick propaganda that indicts President Bush for a variety of things using cut and paste video interspersed with the opinions of far left people like Democratic Congressmen Jim McDermott and John Conyers. For me, the first sixty minutes were tedious but I have to interview guys like that everyday so I'm jaded.

Any skilled filmmaker, and Moore is that, could fashion a movie making any American look like a pinhead. That's easy to do. Just get a bunch of video, some people who hate the guy, some factoids that may or may not be true, heat it up with sardonic rhetoric and serve. Presto, Fahrenheit 9/11.

So let's stop with the nonsense. If you want to pay 9 bucks to see Moore carve up the President, knock yourself out. But don't be calling me up telling me about truth, or elements thereof. This is rank propaganda and the American public is welcome to it. It will not evolve any further.

Regards,
Hist2004

[Black Dots]

I think trying to counter Michael Moore with the O'Reilly Factor is funny, but anyway:


The Nine Eleven Commission findings clashed with Moore's thesis that the Bushies had done something dastardly immediately after the attack by letting a bunch of Saudis, including members of the Bin Laden family, fly out of the USA while everybody else was grounded. Apparently, that is not true, at least according to the FBI and the Commissioners, none of whom were jurors at the Cannes Film Festival.


Who cares? This rumor has been floating around for awhile and honestly, being wrong about this doesn't suddenly justify a war in Iraq.


"I'm not trying to pretend that this is some sort of, you know, fair and balanced work of journalism."

Of course it isn't. Just because you're trying to make a point doesn't mean you are suddenly lying.


But the hits just keep on coming. Los Angeles Times film critic Kenneth Turan wrote this about Fahrenheit 9/11: "It is propaganda, no doubt about it, but propaganda is most effective when it has elements of truth ... "

This is a film critic's opinion of a movie he didn't make. I don't see how that person's opinion of the movie makes the information contained in the movie any less credible.

Anyway, this movie is by no means the cornerstone of any rational argument against either the war or the President. The future of the anti-war movement does not hinge on its success. If anything, I hope Moore didn't present his case in such a way as to damage the credible arguments against the current conflict.

[Far]

The guy is an ass....

He abuses the freedom "warmongers" have died to bless him with.

[Black Dots]

He abuses the freedom "warmongers" have died to bless him with.

How is he "abusing" his freedom exactly?

[usa320]

I wish he would just explode already. fat slob.

[ArmedPacifist]

You should all be proud about the fact that you have the freedom to critisize the government openly.

That is why we are better than Saddham Hussein's regime, although there will still be Saddham like cries of "banning the movie" or hoping Moore dies, he is the epitome of what Democracy is.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

IMHO giving support to the enemy during wartime is treason. The North Vietnamese depended upon the anti war movement in the US to win the war for them, since they knew they could not win militarily. Moore is simply doing his part to help the enemy. He can talk of high minded concepts - freedom of speech etc., but the fact is that he is little more than a shamelessly self promoting war profiteer.

Think about it - if Moore's movie causes any additional anti-war sentiment among the people, it could lessen support for the war in the Senate. Money to support the troops could dry up. Supplies and manpower could be shortened. Lives could be lost, as the troops there try to do the job with less to work with. So in essence, Moore is trading American lives for cold hard cash in his pocket.

Can you imagine a piece of garbage like this being shown in US theatres during WWII?

[XASA]

IMHO giving support to the enemy during wartime is treason. The North Vietnamese depended upon the anti war movement in the US to win the war for them, since they knew they could not win militarily. Moore is simply doing his part to help the enemy. He can talk of high minded concepts - freedom of speech etc., but the fact is that he is little more than a shamelessly self promoting war profiteer.

Think about it - if Moore's movie causes any additional anti-war sentiment among the people, it could lessen support for the war in the Senate. Money to support the troops could dry up. Supplies and manpower could be shortened. Lives could be lost, as the troops there try to do the job with less to work with. So in essence, Moore is trading American lives for cold hard cash in his pocket.

Can you imagine a piece of garbage like this being shown in US theatres during WWII?

Iraq ain't WWII ;)

[cut]

and we didn't start world war two..

[American Patriot]

We are not a Democracy, we are a Constitutional Republic and I doubt Moore's film could accomplish what it's fat slob creator says it can.

[Sir Zach of R.]

My life sux. My cousin (which is a girl) is 16 gets assignments in school to go see Michael Moore movies and do a paper on it. After she saw Bowling for Columbine she began to try and "inform" me. It just started to piss me off so bad that in the end I suggested she just STFU before I go postal on her ass. Damn, for second I thought she was just like the fat bastard. :fork:

[cut]

We are not a Democracy, we are a Constitutional Republic and I doubt Moore's film could accomplish what it's fat slob creator says it can.

america is not a democracy what are you on about?

a Democracy has nothing to do with wether the democrats are in power or not..

[XASA]

The Michael Moore Hatefest on Militaryphotos.net is getting to be a bit boring. The same people have repeatedly made it quite clear they don't like the movie or its producer on several threads. We get it. Now why don't you do something constructive with your time.

Many of the posts condemn Moore for insulting a president; yet, when Clinton was in office it was open season to insult him. All this self-rightous patriotism reeks of hypocrisy.

At least half the country agrees with many of the points Moore brings out in the film. Are they all traitors? Communists? Fat? Or are they concerned Americans--Republican as well as Democrat--who feel they have been manipulated and lied to.

If there are still any undecided voters out there who might be influenced by this film, they must be either extremely dumb or just plain stupid if they don't know who they are going to vote for by now.

Now why don't all you Moore haters get a life because none of your juvenile, sophomoric opinions will make the slightest bit of difference as to how this documentary will be perceived or how much money it will make.

[Trigger]

IMHO giving support to the enemy during wartime is treason. The North Vietnamese depended upon the anti war movement in the US to win the war for them, since they knew they could not win militarily. Moore is simply doing his part to help the enemy. He can talk of high minded concepts - freedom of speech etc., but the fact is that he is little more than a shamelessly self promoting war profiteer.

Think about it - if Moore's movie causes any additional anti-war sentiment among the people, it could lessen support for the war in the Senate. Money to support the troops could dry up. Supplies and manpower could be shortened. Lives could be lost, as the troops there try to do the job with less to work with. So in essence, Moore is trading American lives for cold hard cash in his pocket.

Can you imagine a piece of garbage like this being shown in US theatres during WWII?

Iraq ain't WWII ;)
We have an enemy willing to use violence to destroy our way of life.
We have a U.S. citizen making statements which are obviously beneficial to the enemy.
WWII WWIII - What's the difference?

[hist2004]

If anything, I hope Moore didn't present his case in such a way as to damage the credible arguments against the current conflict.

Already done...and why is it funny using O'Reilly to counter Moore?

O'Reilly tells it like it is whether it favors the Administration or not. People
think he's a spokesperson for the GOP. To believe that you couldn't have watched his show or listened on the radio.

Regards,
Hist2004

[Pandy]

At least half the country agrees with many of the points Moore brings out in the film. Are they all traitors? Communists? Fat? Or are they concerned Americans

Yes... they are all traitors and communists, not all fat thou.

[American Patriot]

We are not a Democracy, we are a Constitutional Republic and I doubt Moore's film could accomplish what it's fat slob creator says it can.

america is not a democracy what are you on about?

a Democracy has nothing to do with wether the democrats are in power or not..

yeah, America is not a Democracy, it's a Constitutional Republic.

[ArmedPacifist]

American Patriot, can you please exercise some STFU action?

[cut]

We are not a Democracy, we are a Constitutional Republic and I doubt Moore's film could accomplish what it's fat slob creator says it can.

america is not a democracy what are you on about?

a Democracy has nothing to do with wether the democrats are in power or not..

yeah, America is not a Democracy, it's a Constitutional Republic.

it's both... now shut up

[2Sheds_Jackson]

IMHO giving support to the enemy during wartime is treason. The North Vietnamese depended upon the anti war movement in the US to win the war for them, since they knew they could not win militarily. Moore is simply doing his part to help the enemy. He can talk of high minded concepts - freedom of speech etc., but the fact is that he is little more than a shamelessly self promoting war profiteer.

Think about it - if Moore's movie causes any additional anti-war sentiment among the people, it could lessen support for the war in the Senate. Money to support the troops could dry up. Supplies and manpower could be shortened. Lives could be lost, as the troops there try to do the job with less to work with. So in essence, Moore is trading American lives for cold hard cash in his pocket.

Can you imagine a piece of garbage like this being shown in US theatres during WWII?

Iraq ain't WWII ;)

It's more appropriate to say that today isn't the 1940s. We are now a nation more divided and which can be made to lose its nerve. There are no weekly patriotic newsreels shown before feature films today. There is virtually no censorship of news from "the front". There is open and transparent dialogue from every angle.

If today's climate existed in the 40's, we would still be fighting the Nazis. We would not have had the will to fight a "total war", and so it would have dragged on and on. And if Moore had lived then, we would have been treated to video of FDR looking like a fool, making off-hand comments, video of dead Americans, wild accusations of the President being on the German's side etc..

Moore is a lying SOB. He has spun his opinion as a "documentary". He films in a documentary style. He marketed his film as a documentary. He can express his opinion if he wants...but he should sell it as opinion. That's why newspapers have a large bold heading on the pages to clearly show what's news (subject to the rules of journalism), and opinion/editorial. Moore has put his editorial on the news page.

[Black Dots]

O'Reilly tells it like it is whether it favors the Administration or not. People think he's a spokesperson for the GOP. To believe that you
couldn't have watched his show or listened on the radio.

O'Reilly brings people on his show, berates them, presents slanted arguments and then talks about being fair and unbiased. I used to think he was funny until I realized people were taking him seriously.

Primarily though, people like O'Reilly and Moore are entertainers who deal with current affairs. They both have agendas and we, as the public, are responsible for determining whose argument holds more water.


Think about it - if Moore's movie causes any additional anti-war sentiment among the people, it could lessen support for the war in the Senate. Money to support the troops could dry up. Supplies and manpower could be shortened. Lives could be lost, as the troops there try to do the job with less to work with. So in essence, Moore is trading American lives for cold hard cash in his pocket.

Moore has said before that he wants to get troops out of Iraq and away from the fighting. How is that trading American lives for money?


Moore is simply doing his part to help the enemy. He can talk of high minded concepts - freedom of speech etc., but the fact is that he is little more than a shamelessly self promoting war profiteer.


OK, so once the shooting starts everyone is supposed to keep quiet and not use any of the rights we are supposedly fighting for?


IMHO giving support to the enemy during wartime is treason. The North Vietnamese depended upon the anti war movement in the US to win the war for them, since they knew they could not win militarily.

OK, I admit that what I'm about to say is off-topic, but I really think the impact of the Vietnam anti-war movement in America is overrated. Even as the protests intensified, more troops were sent to Vietnam. Nixon promised to end the war, but instead, he ended up widening it by invading Cambodia. There are myriad reasons why Vietnam was a lost cause including strategic misperceptions and poor political leadership, but I don’t think the anti-war movement was the straw that broke the camel’s back.

[hist2004]

Primarily though, people like O'Reilly and Moore are entertainers who deal with current affairs. They both have agendas and we, as the public, are responsible for determining whose argument holds more water.


O'Reilly was a reporter with years of experience...agenda??? You don't
watch his show or listen on the radio. It's ok to be against the war, just
remember what will happen in the future if terrorism isn't confronted head
on. Only another 9/11 :( will wake people up.

Regards,
Hist2004

[American Patriot]

WHO the **** cares about O'Reilly? We are talking about Moore and how he supposedly made this great film exposing the truth about how the President fooled everyone. You can make a thread about O'Reilly and criticize him there.

I might just have to see this idiot movie to see what specific lies he propagates.

[Vance]

My life sux. My cousin (which is a girl) is 16 gets assignments in school to go see Michael Moore movies and do a paper on it. After she saw Bowling for Columbine she began to try and "inform" me. It just started to piss me off so bad that in the end I suggested she just STFU before I go postal on her ass. Damn, for second I thought she was just like the fat bastard. :fork:
Welcome to the power of propoganda. Some people are easily swayed.

[Sir Zach of R.]

She likes John Kerry for his "war record." rofl

[afrographX]

why the hell are you so sure that you aren't believing in propaganda, too.

[American Patriot]

why the hell are you so sure that you aren't believing in propaganda, too.

English, please.

[Black Dots]

It's ok to be against the war, just
remember what will happen in the future if terrorism isn't confronted head
on.

Since no links between AQ and Iraq have been discovered and previous claims made by the administration of a link have been debunked, I don't see how the war in Iraq is confronting terrorism.

[hist2004]

It's ok to be against the war, just
remember what will happen in the future if terrorism isn't confronted head
on.

Since no links between AQ and Iraq have been discovered and previous claims made by the administration of a link have been debunked, I don't see how the war in Iraq is confronting terrorism.

The smoking gun is Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, an Al Qaeda leader who found his way to Baghdad after being severely wounded fighting against American forces in Afghanistan.

Zarqawi arrived in Iraq in May of 2002 and had surgery in an Iraqi hospital, run by -- are you ready -- Uday Hussein. I believe that might be a tie, but there's more.

Next, the Al Qaeda big shot -- who was wanted by the USA -- traveled to Lebanon to meet with leaders of Hezbollah.

A short time after that meeting, in October of 2002, Lawrence Foley, an American official, was assassinated in Jordan. The arrested killers said Zarqawi was involved in the plot.

Zarqawi wound up back in Iraq after the assassination of Foley and met up with the Ansar al-Islam group, which operated in Northern Iraq and is affiliated with Al Qaeda.

In January 2003, several Ansar terrorists were arrested in Britain and charged with planning to put Ricin in the military food supply. Some of those terrorists fingered Zarqawi in the plot.

Right now, Zarqawi is believed to be in Fallujah working with some of Saddam's former generals in planning terror attacks. Just last week he took credit for killing 13 people in a bombing.

I believe that's a lot of links and ties between Saddam, Iraq and Al Qaeda. But again, I believe the Commission when it says Saddam was not directly involved with Sept. 11. That’s true.

I'll let you figure out who that came from ;)

Regards,
Hist2004

[Black Dots]

Saddam harbored terrorists throughout the 80s (when he was our ally) and there was one thing in common with every occurence: He never let them out of his sight, or more importantly, engage in operations while he associated with them. Harboring known terrorists gave him a certain amount of credibility in the Arab world, but since, Saddam was a control freak and constantly feared innsurrection, he made sure to keep his figureheads on a short leash. Zarqawi's relationship with Saddam was no different. Do you think it's a coincidence that this guy starts making waves after it becomes clear that Saddam is on the US's things to do list? And especially after Saddam has been removed from power?

Besides, Zarqawi's link to AQ has been called into doubt by western intelligence services:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3483089.stm

"The [Zarqawi] cell-members also told their German interrogators their group was "especially for Jordanians who did not want to join al-Qaeda".

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/files/story2536.php

"These days, Islamic groups can go to other individuals, such as Jordanian activist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who set up his al Tauhid group in competition with bin Laden (rather than, as is frequently claimed, in alliance with him) to obtain funds, expertise, or other logistical assistance. "

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1087683009549&call_pageid=968332188854

"While he's often identified in the media as a bin Laden associate, most intelligence officials believe al-Zarqawi does not pledge allegiance to Al Qaeda or take orders from the terrorist leader."

http://www.thenation.com/capitalgames/index.mhtml?bid=3&pid=1502

"It seems there needs to be more work on this front before the Zarqawi matter is resolved. And even though Zarqawi is routinely described as an al Qaeda associate, the true nature of his relationship to bin Laden is unclear. As I have previously noted, earlier this year, when Zarqawi asked al Qaeda for assistance in fomenting civil war in Iraq, al Qaeda, according to US intelligence officers, rejected his request. Also, the Ansar al-Islam band that Zarqawi worked with was based in northern Iraq, in territory not controlled by Baghdad. (Its leader also has said that this fundamentalist group was opposed to Hussein.)"

[hist2004]

The evidence is there..your obviously free to believe whatever you wish.

Regards & Thanks,
Hist2004

[usa320]

The best way to hurt this guy is to ignore him... He thrives on attention and money. Depriving him of either will probably give him a swift reality kick to the balls, at which point he will realize hes an overweight slob who still acts like hes 17. At that point he will become a depressed individual and become addicted to some drugs, until the day when he will just die on the toilet while dropping a deuce.

[Secret Squirrel]

why the hell are you so sure that you aren't believing in propaganda, too.

English, please.

English version is this...none of Bush's b.s about Iraq has been proven. No WMDs, no fleets of planes for WMDs, no cooperation with terrorists, terrorism in the past year is up (after a "mistake" that said it was down)...etc. Bush even lied when he said "mission accomplished". Iraq was not a front for the war on terror, it was choose by a totalarian president because he failed to get Osama and he needed another villian to focus the world on. I just hope he doesnt **** anything else up before he's kicked out of the white house soon. woot

[Secret Squirrel]

The best way to hurt this guy is to ignore him... He thrives on attention and money. Depriving him of either will probably give him a swift reality kick to the balls, at which point he will realize hes an overweight slob who still acts like hes 17. At that point he will become a depressed individual and become addicted to some drugs, until the day when he will just die on the toilet while dropping a deuce.

Fair enough. Ok, everyone ignore usa320. woot

[Trigger]

Great post Hist2004. Too bad it will fall on deaf ears.

[Trigger]

why the hell are you so sure that you aren't believing in propaganda, too.

English, please.

English version is this...none of Bush's b.s about Iraq has been proven. No WMDs, no fleets of planes for WMDs, no cooperation with terrorists, terrorism in the past year is up (after a "mistake" that said it was down)...etc. Bush even lied when he said "mission accomplished". Iraq was not a front for the war on terror, it was choose by a totalarian president because he failed to get Osama and he needed another villian to focus the world on. I just hope he doesnt f*** anything else up before he's kicked out of the white house soon. woot
I bet you believe in the Tooth Fairy too.

[Secret Squirrel]

why the hell are you so sure that you aren't believing in propaganda, too.

English, please.

English version is this...none of Bush's b.s about Iraq has been proven. No WMDs, no fleets of planes for WMDs, no cooperation with terrorists, terrorism in the past year is up (after a "mistake" that said it was down)...etc. Bush even lied when he said "mission accomplished". Iraq was not a front for the war on terror, it was choose by a totalarian president because he failed to get Osama and he needed another villian to focus the world on. I just hope he doesnt f*** anything else up before he's kicked out of the white house soon. woot
I bet you believe in the Tooth Fairy too.

rofl at least the tooth fairy is 10 times more "real" than newsmax rofl

[usa320]

THe evidence clearly indicates a link between the Al Qaeda network and the Iraqi Intelligence service in the mid 90's, with letters being exchanged between Uday Hussein and Al Qaeda leadership. Iraq more than likely DID NOT play a role in 9-11, but the letters exchanged in fact speak of a relationship, using that exact word, between Iraq and Osama Bin Ladens terror network. Most startling is apparent cooperation between the two regarding development of Ricin. And the actions of Al Zarquawi, who left afghanistan in 2001 and set up shop in Baghdad with the Knowledge of the Iraqi regime. Saddam Hussein was informed of Zarqauwi's prescence after the US warned him about it by way of a third country's intelligence service.

Then there is the Russian evidence of Iraqi terrorist plans.

[Trigger]

why the hell are you so sure that you aren't believing in propaganda, too.

English, please.

English version is this...none of Bush's b.s about Iraq has been proven. No WMDs, no fleets of planes for WMDs, no cooperation with terrorists, terrorism in the past year is up (after a "mistake" that said it was down)...etc. Bush even lied when he said "mission accomplished". Iraq was not a front for the war on terror, it was choose by a totalarian president because he failed to get Osama and he needed another villian to focus the world on. I just hope he doesnt f*** anything else up before he's kicked out of the white house soon. woot
I bet you believe in the Tooth Fairy too.

rofl at least the tooth fairy is 10 times more "real" than newsmax rofl
Your day isn't complete until you can somehow use the word 'newsmax' in a post, is it?
Nice try Tangent Boy.

[usa320]

Fair enough. Ok, everyone ignore usa320

shut up you prick.

[ZoneOne]

movie was great

bush is stupid

end of story


wether it has 100% truth or not -- it goes to show you that BUSH is a bad choice for our president


When is the last time you've seen a hollywood movie bashing a president ????

[Black Dots]

it goes to show you that BUSH is a bad choice for our president

The worst part is, the alternative to Bush isn't much better.

[ZoneOne]

While i agree with you there

I think it's better to give him a shot then to let him just stay in office.


The point of this movie ( in my opinion ) is to shed light on how BAD bush is doing in office, and that he might be a great person, he isnt a great president.

More people have come out in the public eye to say what i just said, then has ever been done before with another administration.

All im saying is that it proves something



Beastie Boys "To The 5 Boroughs"

I quote a song.

"Stop building SUV's strung out on OPEC,
Hold up, wait up, you know we come correct,
You wanna change things up, well hey just get set
Its easier to sit back then stick out your neck,
It's easier to break things than build it correct
We've got a president we didnt elect
the Kyoto treaty he decided to neglect
and still the U.S. just wants to flex... "

[vryhpyammoadded]

The US is a poorly run quasi Socialist Republic and not a Democracy.

And, yes, this isn’t WWII but what does WWII have to do with Iraq anti war propaganda? Anti war propaganda is still the same no matter how you slice it. It still saps the national will to succeed therefore causing greater loss of life on all sides from unfocused decision making.
The US and its allies broke the Iraqi egg and now must make the national omelet or be morally bankrupt. Yes I know, blah, blah, blah adnauseum morally bankrupt anyway for invading but I disagree with that. They should remain focused to that task and wait to do the blame game later.

IMO: Based on previous crap I’ve seen him produce, Mr. Moore is another slick entertainer only milking a segment of the consumers who want to pay for the experience of his trendy pop counter cultural marketing. Heck, he may even believe in his garbage himself and give most of the proceeds to PAC websites but I think he does this more for the attention.
If Mr. Moore wanted more credibility he would distribute his cause freely and ask for donations. If I felt his cause worthy, I’d pay but until then no money.

[American Patriot]

While i agree with you there

I think it's better to give him a shot then to let him just stay in office.


The point of this movie ( in my opinion ) is to shed light on how BAD bush is doing in office, and that he might be a great person, he isnt a great president.

More people have come out in the public eye to say what i just said, then has ever been done before with another administration.

All im saying is that it proves something



Beastie Boys "To The 5 Boroughs"

I quote a song.

"Stop building SUV's strung out on OPEC,
Hold up, wait up, you know we come correct,
You wanna change things up, well hey just get set
Its easier to sit back then stick out your neck,
It's easier to break things than build it correct
We've got a president we didnt elect
the Kyoto treaty he decided to neglect
and still the U.S. just wants to flex... "

Thanks for dropping the "mad science" on us, dog.

[Black Dots]

Thanks for dropping the "mad science" on us, dog.

Although I agree with ZoneOne, that was pretty funny. :lol:

[Secret Squirrel]

IMO: Based on previous crap I’ve seen him produce, Mr. Moore is another slick entertainer only milking a segment of the consumers who want to pay for the experience of his trendy pop counter cultural marketing. Heck, he may even believe in his garbage himself and give most of the proceeds to PAC websites but I think he does this more for the attention.
If Mr. Moore wanted more credibility he would distribute his cause freely and ask for donations. If I felt his cause worthy, I’d pay but until then no money.

Hrm, sounds like the bizaro version of Bush. We should never have paid Bush; if we felt like he was doing a good job we could have donated money.

[ZoneOne]

im just quoting a song that has some political viewpoints

which coincides with Michael Moore's movie

[WolverineBlue]

This guy supports Michigan State -- 'nuff said. GO BLUE.

http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/551_1088236882_50993289.jpg


http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/551_1088237276_2822705.jpg

[StarvingStudent47]

When you spend half your life ranting about Michael Moore...Michael Moore wins. He's like an internet forum troll. The best thing to do is ignore him. The more you scream about him, the more he thrives.

EDIT--just read back through the thread and saw that others had already said the same thing.