Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 9/11 (general discussion - merged)

1235721

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 405
    gilschgilsch Posts: 1,995member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by NaplesX

    I don't see anyone here that is "up in arms", do you guys?I think most are predicting it to be a bunch of clever edits and lies based on his past works. I don't know if that quite qualifies as "up in arm".



    I was speaking in general terms and not referring to you specifically. By the way, have you seen any of his past works? Just curious.

    I find it interesting, yet not surprising, that you felt that it applied to you and you felt the need to come out and stand up for all neocons.



    If the shoe fits....
  • Reply 82 of 405
    pfflampfflam Posts: 5,053member


    I still haven't seen Columbine . . . i read reviews by non-ultra-right wing critics . . . smart people, who were able to say why Moore tended to exageration in the film, that, and being tired of his schtick has kept me away.



    I'll see this film, Im sure there will be places where fact checking might uproot one or two inconcistencies but I don't care . . . I want to see him trash Bush.



    I was fully aware of the context for that 'Elite' quote . . . it is obviouse and well known . . . but it is obviouse and well known also that that joke is funny to 90% of the people in the real-time audience because of its truth!!!
  • Reply 83 of 405
    shetlineshetline Posts: 4,695member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by dviant

    How about spinsanity?

    http://www.spinsanity.org/topics/#MichaelMoore




    I just spent some time at the above page, and poking around other parts of the Spinsanity site.



    This seems like a fairly impartial web site -- they go after distortions on the left and the right.



    Maybe Michael Moore's responses to some of the criticisms found here would help his case, but I've had my suspicions that Moore was someone who needs to be taken with several large grains of salt, and I think Moore would have a hard time relieving me of said suspicions now.



    I've never seen any of Moore's films yet, however. I'd be curious to see how much of the points he's trying to make stand up after accounting for Moore's mistakes and deliberated distortions. It's a shame that finding someone who's passionate, entertaining, and devoted to accuracy is hard to find all in one package. For my money, Al Franken comes closer to that ideal than Moore, though not perfectly so.



    I'm going to have to see Fahrenheit 911 no matter what -- I can't turn down a good Bush bashing. I'm already quite convinced that Bush is an incompentent sleaze anyway, based on information from many sources. Even a compentent and honest Bush would be distasteful to me since I so disagree with his publically asserted values. I'll see what Moore has to say about Bush, then see how well it stands up under scrutiny later.
  • Reply 84 of 405
    existenceexistence Posts: 991member
    I can't judge this film yet but my favorite Michael Moore film is Canadian Bacon, staring John Candy and Alan Alda, simply because it's so prescient (especially the bits in it about terrorists). It's fiction unlike some of Moore's contemporary works. The middle east and terrorism are the canada of Canadian Bacon.
  • Reply 85 of 405
    wrong robotwrong robot Posts: 3,907member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Existence

    I can't judge this film yet but my favorite Michael Moore film is Canadian Bacon, staring John Candy and Alan Alda, simply because it's so prescient (especially the bits in it about terrorists). It's fiction unlike some of Moore's contemporary works. The middle east and terrorism are the canada of Canadian Bacon.



    Like maple syrup, canadian evil ooozes into america. How long can we silence the screams!
  • Reply 86 of 405
    trumptmantrumptman Posts: 16,464member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by ShawnJ

    The documentary looks pretty good, actually. From what I've read, the film looks interesting enough to actually see it when it comes out. This is coming from someone who has neither read any of Moore's books nor seen his movies. I bet the local 20 screen movie theater will show it-- although they recently devoted 10 screens total to Troy and Shrek 2.







    Whatever maximizes profit, I suppose. *shrugs*



    I think I'll rent The Fog of War, Elephant, and In America tonight.




    Frightening because even I've seen Bowling for Columbine.



    I would recommend not watching all those in one night. Good movies, like good food is best when savored, not just consumed.



    Nick
  • Reply 87 of 405
    aquaticaquatic Posts: 5,602member
    OK how about some constructive posting here. First, does anyone have a mirror? That sucks how it's streaming and not a normal trailer like Apple's. Second we need to get Post Counts back so people stop making a bunch of new names like Common Man and Playmaker and posting to back themselves up.
  • Reply 88 of 405
    trumptmantrumptman Posts: 16,464member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Aquatic

    OK how about some constructive posting here. First, does anyone have a mirror? That sucks how it's streaming and not a normal trailer like Apple's. Second we need to get Post Counts back so people stop making a bunch of new names like Common Man and Playmaker and posting to back themselves up.



    Why is this sort of thing asserted so often here? Is it really so hard to believe that more than one or two people on this planet might agree with someone else, regardless of the view held? Why don't you just come outright and say that anyone who disagrees with you must be an extremist?



    The mods here can tell if someone is repeatedly posting from the same IP number. In the past they have taken care of such people and would likely do so again in the future.



    Nick
  • Reply 89 of 405
    naplesxnaplesx Posts: 3,743member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by tonton

    It is forum policy that members are not to have multiple accounts. Moderators have all the resources they need to weed out those accounts. I suggest a moderator policy of "outing" secondary accounts from the usual suspects to further discourage this practice.



    Here, here. I say they should investigate this obvious breech and then post their findings right here in this thread. That should lay this to rest post haste.
  • Reply 90 of 405
    aquaticaquatic Posts: 5,602member
    It's not hard to change your IP, or use a different computer. Post Counts were a good balance against that.
  • Reply 91 of 405
    naplesxnaplesx Posts: 3,743member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Aquatic

    It's not hard to change your IP, or use a different computer. Post Counts were a good balance against that.



    sure but you can't change your ISP's IP and Subnet, so let's put this to rest already.



    I am sick of you pansies accusing everyone that they are cheating, it all sound like whining, now.
  • Reply 92 of 405
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    Sorry to break it to you naples, but it's actually pretty easy to post with a different IP.
  • Reply 93 of 405
    existenceexistence Posts: 991member
    mms://wm.mindshare.na-central.speedera.net/wm.mindshare.na-central/moore/fahrenheit_911_480.wmv



    The above is the address WMP says I played this morning when I played the F911 trailer. It still works...
  • Reply 94 of 405
    wrong robotwrong robot Posts: 3,907member
    In addition to that, you don't think it's even the slightest bit strange that someone would come to an apple computer discussion forum for the sole purpose of discussing politics.*



    Most of the AO-ites post(ed) apple related stuff still, they came here because they are fans of apple computer, and they just kind of got caught up talking in AO about politics almost exclusively. But finding this place, and coming here simply as a place to talk about politics is at least a little bit suspect methinks.



    I'm not accusing anyone of doing this, or suggesting that it is happening, but surely you don't think it's not totally unreasonable, given the circumstances.



    \





    *just to clarify I'm not saying it can't happen, It's just a little weird, and kind of rare. but then again, I don't know how easy it is to find this place since I'm already here, it is on google, but still, I have a hard time picturing someone thinking "I need to find a place to vent about my political opinions, *google* hmm, appleinsider, that sounds perfect!"



  • Reply 95 of 405
    rageousrageous Posts: 2,170member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by shetline

    You'd rather have him support some protest candidate who can't win, who can only help Bush? That would be logically contradictory.



    My response: You bet your ass that's what I'd want of him.



    If Michael Moore truly cared for America and really wanted to see change, I would indeed expect him to look towards a protest candidate. Think of what Moore and his great ability to generate press could do to bring light to viable third party candidates. But he doesn't want real change, he just wants Bush gone at any cost. And right now to Moore and the rest of those who dislike Bush it means voting for whomever has the best chance at beating him, not who they actually would support if they cared about the future of their country.



    It's the compromises that have gotten us to where we are. Your statement serves to reinforce the idea of compromise, and also vilify those who wish to vote with their hearts and minds and vote 3rd party. You choose to make them seem like a part of the problem, instead of as people looking for a new and better solution. And don't be mistaken and think I believe your type of rancor to be characteristic of one specific party. Were the tables turned I've no doubt the rhetoric would be the same.



    Those who care for themselves, others, and their country will seek a candidate who best represents them; be that Bush, Kerry, Nader, etc.. They will not give in to the overwhelming pressure of the two parties and vote for someone for no other reason than they hope their choice will "beat the other guy"©. But people don't vote that way. Because really people don't actually give a shit. Besides, it's so much work trying to actually research an alternative candidate when we can get home from our jobs, sit on our fat asses while we bitch about how bad we have it, and let CBS, NBC, ABC, Fox, CNN, MTV, Moore, Hannity, Limbaugh and Franken tell us who we should be voting for. Which is why America is really starting to suck. Because most people only want to taste victory, even if that victory is hollow and by proxy. Change is insignificant other than in the superficial sense.
  • Reply 96 of 405
    aquaticaquatic Posts: 5,602member
    Well we need Bush gone at any cost, imagine how many species will be lost in the next four years if he is re-elected. No one thinks about the environment when we wage war. It's pretty damn bad. Agent Orange?



    Anyway Naples gee you're getting a little touchy eh. How about some input from Common Man and Playmaker. And it's not exactly hard to physically go somewhere and use Internet. Anyway all us liberals we're all just pseudonyms for pfflam!!!
  • Reply 97 of 405
    naplesxnaplesx Posts: 3,743member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Aquatic

    Well we need Bush gone at any cost, imagine how many species will be lost in the next four years if he is re-elected. No one thinks about the environment when we wage war. It's pretty damn bad. Agent Orange?



    Anyway Naples gee you're getting a little touchy eh. How about some input from Common Man and Playmaker. And it's not exactly hard to physically go somewhere and use Internet. Anyway all us liberals we're all just pseudonyms for pfflam!!!




    Um, fine. How many times have this been brought up in this thread. It's getting old. Get some proof, or shut the hell up.



    I post from 3 different computers: 1 at work, 1 at home and my laptop all over the place. But I do it under the same name. I would not have ever even thought of creating a pseudonym until I heard it from someone here. I have nothing to hide as you can tell from my profile, unlike many that are accusing me and others of being duplicitous.



    It may be possible and actually happening, but not by me. let's get back to debating the topic and get over it.
  • Reply 98 of 405
    shetlineshetline Posts: 4,695member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by rageous

    My response: You bet your ass that's what I'd want of him.



    If Michael Moore truly cared for America and really wanted to see change, I would indeed expect him to look towards a protest candidate.




    For Michael Moore, and many other people now, getting Bush out is more than big enough of a change.



    A lot of people who had the attitude "Democrats and Republicans? They're all the same! They're all out for big business! They're all power mongers who don't care for the little guy!" may still not be in love with Democrats, but they are now realizing how big a difference there can be between the lesser and the greater of two evils.

    Quote:

    Think of what Moore and his great ability to generate press could do to bring light to viable third party candidates.



    His abilities will be enough to shift opinions a few percentage points, no more.



    First of all, he's tarnished his own credibility on more than one occasion.



    Second, while he may be influential, he's also divisive. He's viewed as far to the left, and many people would disbelieve him if he said 2+2=4, just because he said it.



    The left/right division in this country is very real, and the coming election is will most likely be decided by a few percentage points drifting around in the middle between entrenched camps.

    Quote:

    But he doesn't want real change, he just wants Bush gone at any cost.



    I don't buy the rhetoric that Kerry replacing Bush isn't "real change". It will most certainly be real change.



    As for costs, what about protest at any cost? What about the cost of forms of protest that run counter to the protesters own goals?



    Many Americans might be disillusioned with the two-party system, but it's not because they're hankering for, oh, a Socialist Worker's Paradise that neither of the two parties is providing.



    I'm not saying it's wrong to try to change the two party system -- I'd like to see a lot of changes myself. I'd like to see the notion of "party" severely weakened, and have a system where individual candidates mattered more, and where proportional representation and power rather the "winner takes all" is the most common way of doing things.



    But there are effective and ineffective ways to get there. Voting for Nader is an ineffective one. Nader does not appeal to the majority, or even a plurality, of Americans, no matter how displeased or apathetic towards the two parties we might be. In a crude left/right analysis of the current electorate, Kerry appeals to the left, Bush to the right... and Nader? Mostly to the further left.



    Call it "voting your conscience" all you like, voting for Nader will suck more votes from Kerry than from Bush, hurting Kerry, helping Bush, and even if you, unlike many of the rest of us, aren't terribly worried about what four more years of Bush could be like, the "return on investment" in future elections for casting a protest vote now isn't likely to be very high, and could in fact be negative.

    Quote:

    And right now to Moore and the rest of those who dislike Bush it means voting for whomever has the best chance at beating him, not who they actually would support if they cared about the future of their country.



    This sounds an awful lot like insufferable Bushies who call liberals traitors.



    News flash: It's BECAUSE MANY OF US CARE ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THE COUNTRY that we think that another four years of Bush is something that WE CANNOT RISK. Please don't play the game of impugning the motives of those who disagree with you.



    I give you credit for having genuine concerns. I just think you're very mistaken about how to express your concerns effectively.



    If you're concerned about the symbolic power of voting, consider this: Think of all of the harm Bush has done to the reputation of America around the world, all of the distrust and hate stirred up among both allies and rivals. Now think of the world's reaction if we show that we've dismissed this man vs. the reaction if we look like we're putting our stamp of approval on all he has done by giving him four more years.

    Quote:

    It's the compromises that have gotten us to where we are.



    On the contrary, I'd say it's lack of compromise that's gotten us into the current mess. Republicans, with control over both Congress and the White House, haven't had to compromise enough with Democrats, and have given an incompetent, politically-driven, policy-inept administration too much power.
  • Reply 99 of 405
    shetlineshetline Posts: 4,695member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Aquatic

    Anyway all us liberals we're all just pseudonyms for pfflam!!!



    In fact, PFFLAM is really an acronym: People Frequently Faking Location And Moniker
  • Reply 100 of 405
    tigerwoods99tigerwoods99 Posts: 2,633member
    This movie looks great, will it be released in theatres here though?



    I saw one of Michael Moore's other movies, "Bowling for Columbine" and thoroughly enjoyed it



    "Fahrenheit 911" is getting rave reviews it seems
Sign In or Register to comment.