i don't even care if his motives are less than pristine. SOMEone has to verbalize this shit. let's face it, Farenheit 9/11 started MANY conversations, most of which questioning the bush administration's motives following the attacks. i think i's important that someone be just antagonistic enough to get people THINKING. this country is finally waking the fuck up from its slumber, and people like michael moore get some credit for that, imo.
people on the other side could justifiably say the same things about ann coulter though.
i don't even care if his motives are less than pristine. SOMEone has to verbalize this shit. let's face it, Farenheit 9/11 started MANY conversations, most of which questioning the bush administration's motives following the attacks. i think i's important that someone be just antagonistic enough to get people THINKING. this country is finally waking the fuck up from its slumber, and people like michael moore get some credit for that, imo.
Yeah. And anyone notice the common defense here against calling someone out is "And not everyone who disagrees with him is a conservative, although you seem to paint them that way.". Almost everyone who disagrees with him is conservative, and your time is better spent arguing exactly why you don't agree, not who does and who doesn't. :rolleyes:
And yes, the anti-christ is a great ploy. What better distraction could you have?
people on the other side could justifiably say the same things about ann coulter though.
That brings us back to the reasonable debate about the two..
I still think Moore (although he has done some clever editing) has more valid things to say. And he's not insane... he's a jackass in a lot of ways.. but some of the things Coulter says really make her seem like she belongs in an asylum.
ann coulter is no different than any other shock ENTERTAINER. Say something sensible no one listens...say something with fancy instigating rhetoric and you've instantly got drama...aka fans and haters...and you've got ATTENTION which means money. No matter your view about coulter or moore (i figured this thread would go there) they are both entertainers who are making more money than 99.9% of the world. they both i'm sure have something good to say but neither will say it w/o throwing in their rhetoric b/c no one in this day and age of MTV / video / soundbites wants to read or watch a well thought out articulated message...they want something shocking. So yes, they're all political ploys. Michael Moore did his little tour after 9/11 and was charging $50,000 bucks an appearance (or something obscene). It's about money and as much as moore seems to not like the system, he is complaining all the way to the bank.
make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
And anyone notice the common defense here against calling someone out is "And not everyone who disagrees with him is a conservative, although you seem to paint them that way.".
This is the common defense here? For me it was specific to the post to which I was responding, not some arbitrary disclaimer. Try again.
I've already said I think Coulter is worse than Moore. I just think it is funny that libs can't see that Moore and Coulter are similar in approach, similar in how they approach their audience, and similar in the amount of distain they garner from people outside of their limited audiences. (ie, Coulter is a bitch with a man's adam's apple and Moore is a fat pig).
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
I've already said I think Coulter is worse than Moore. I just think it is funny that libs can't see that Moore and Coulter are similar in approach, similar in how they approach their audience, and similar in the amount of distain they garner from people outside of their limited audiences. (ie, Coulter is a bitch with a man's adam's apple and Moore is a fat pig).
I see that they're similar in a lot of ways, but i think Coulter is a ploy and Moore is not.
Moore helps his cause to an extent, Coulter seems to exist simply as a distraction and to make other repubs look better.
I see that they're similar in a lot of ways, but i think Coulter is a ploy and Moore is not.
Moore helps his cause to an extent, Coulter seems to exist simply as a distraction and to make other repubs look better.
what does moore do that coulter doesnt besides making movies (and coulter is not a filmaker so that doesnt really apply)?
if you lean to the left, coulter sounds like a psychotic bitch. if you lean to the right, so does michael moore. his conspiracy theories and the entire first half of fahrenheit 9/11 tracing tenuous ties between bin laden and bush that in the end didnt really serve any purpose sounds as loony to the right as ann coulter saying we should nuke the mideast sounds to the left.
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
Is Moore an extremist? Yeah, probably. Do we need him absolutely. With one extremist, you need another to keep them in check. Both sides have them. It's just ashame they exist on any level, on any side. I think Jon Stewart said it best, "Extremists run this country because moderates actually have shit to do."
Is Moore an extremist? Yeah, probably. Do we need him absolutely. With one extremist, you need another to keep them in check. Both sides have them. It's just ashame they exist on any level, on any side. I think Jon Stewart said it best, "Extremists run this country because moderates actually have shit to do."
That's one of my favorite Jon Stewart quotes. (from an incredible interview with the author of the book "fight club poltics" too ).
I'd be hardpressed to cite references in favor of Michael Moore (i'm not too fond of him either..), but let's just say Ann Coulter is a good distance farther up the crazy pole than he is.
I wouldn't be surprised if Coulter said something like "and may death come swiftly to my enemies" at the end of an interview and meant it. Moore's just a bit more sane and rational.
I've just read through the page that your above link points to. It's a complete fucking joke. Let me quote an example:
"...I was struck by the sheer cunningness of Moore's film. When you read Kopel, try to detach yourself from any revulsion you may feel at a work of literal propaganda receiving such wide-spread accolades from mainstream politicos, as well as attendance by your friends and neighbors.
Instead, notice the film's meticulousness in saying only (or mostly) "true" or defensible things in support of a completely misleading impression. In this way, Kopel's care in describing Moore's "deceits" is much more interesting than other critiques I have read, including that of Christopher Hitchens. Kopel's lawyerly description of Moore's claims shows the film to be a genuinely impressive accomplishment in a perverse sort of way (the way an ingenious crime is impressive)--a case study in how to convert elements that are mainly true into an impression that is entirely false--and this leads in turn to another thought."
Much of the article which you hold up as an example of Moore's 'deceits' follows in the same wishy-washy vein. In other words, Saying things that are "true" or "mainly true", within a context that leaves an overall impression which one disagrees with, is a bad thing. Or, put more simply, when the truth offends us, we should question the reasons behind presenting it.
You need to do better than that jeffbr. Again, for the third time, I ask you to provide me with one concrete example of Michael Moore being an extremist.
You need to do better than that jeffbr. Again, for the third time, I ask you to provide me with one concrete example of Michael Moore being an extremist.
*sigh* There is unlikely to be any data which will satisfy your requirements for a couple of reasons. Firstly because you are probably philisophically closely aligned with Moore and wouldn't want to think of yourself as extremist, and secondly because you simply don't want to see it.
There are many articles, websites, etc... debunking myths more propogated not only in Fahrenheit 9/11, but also in Bowling for Columbine where he took things out of sequence and out of context to totally change their intended meaning. But none of that will have any impact on you.
I was living in Seattle during the "battle of seattle" and the people Moore praises as heros were nothing but black hoodie, bandana clad anarchist punks from Eugene who there there for the thrill of property destruction. Most of the fuckers who were demonstrating did nothing but disrupt normal people going to their daily jobs and trying to earn a living. I, myself, had to go through a few throngs of douchebags, and cross a couple of police lines just to get to my fucking office. It is extremist to give these assholes any kind of praise, yet Moore compared the Battle in Seattle to Lexington and Concord.
Again, I'm sure you'll find nothing extremist in his attitude here, either. That will simply highlight my theory above.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
I was living in Seattle during the "battle of seattle" and the people Moore praises as heros were nothing but black hoodie, bandana clad anarchist punks from Eugene who there there for the thrill of property destruction. Most of the fuckers who were demonstrating did nothing but disrupt normal people going to their daily jobs and trying to earn a living. I, myself, had to go through a few throngs of douchebags, and cross a couple of police lines just to get to my fucking office. It is extremist to give these assholes any kind of praise, yet Moore compared the Battle in Seattle to Lexington and Concord.
Again, I'm sure you'll find nothing extremist in his attitude here, either. That will simply highlight my theory above.
I wonder if the public have ever been encouraged to analyse a film or documentary with the same intensity as they have Farenheit 9/11. I think not. I wonder why this is?
Secondly, the so-called 'anti-globalisation' protests - the first time these important issues had been brought to the worlds attention - angered you because they made you late for work? Interesting!
And because the efforts of the Seattle protesters were praised by Michael Moore, that qualifies him as an extremist? Again, Interesting!
I wonder if the public have ever been encouraged to analyse a film or documentary with the same intensity as they have Farenheit 9/11. I think not. I wonder why this is?
Secondly, the so-called 'anti-globalisation' protests - the first time these important issues had been brought to the worlds attention - angered you because they made you late for work? Interesting!
And because the efforts of the Seattle protesters were praised by Michael Moore, that qualifies him as an extremist? Again, Interesting!
Just as I suspected. Interesting!
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
It's a shame that people can't bring these same awesome critical faculties to bear upon the evening news everyday. A film like Farenheit 9/11 comes out and it is dissected like a frog in a science lab, organ by organ, bone by bone. Strange! :eek:
i don't even care if his motives are less than pristine. SOMEone has to verbalize this shit. let's face it, Farenheit 9/11 started MANY conversations, most of which questioning the bush administration's motives following the attacks. i think i's important that someone be just antagonistic enough to get people THINKING. this country is finally waking the fuck up from its slumber, and people like michael moore get some credit for that, imo.
Isn't that exactly what Ann Coulter does...just from the opposite side of the fence?
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
*sigh* There is unlikely to be any data which will satisfy your requirements for a couple of reasons. Firstly because you are probably philisophically closely aligned with Moore and wouldn't want to think of yourself as extremist, and secondly because you simply don't want to see it.
There are many articles, websites, etc... debunking myths more propogated not only in Fahrenheit 9/11, but also in Bowling for Columbine where he took things out of sequence and out of context to totally change their intended meaning. But none of that will have any impact on you.
I was living in Seattle during the "battle of seattle" and the people Moore praises as heros were nothing but black hoodie, bandana clad anarchist punks from Eugene who there there for the thrill of property destruction. Most of the fuckers who were demonstrating did nothing but disrupt normal people going to their daily jobs and trying to earn a living. I, myself, had to go through a few throngs of douchebags, and cross a couple of police lines just to get to my fucking office. It is extremist to give these assholes any kind of praise, yet Moore compared the Battle in Seattle to Lexington and Concord.
Again, I'm sure you'll find nothing extremist in his attitude here, either. That will simply highlight my theory above.
People being inconvenienced on the way to work is exactly what these protestors were trying to accomplish. That's how things like the negatives of globalization get noticed in the media. Obviously, the media outlets that are owned by corporations that want to globalize aren't going to report on the negative affects - but they will report on "crazy-eyed protestors." Intuitive people will see the protests and, perhaps, look into why so many people are pissed off. Then - whether they agree or disagree - they'll at least have been informed.
Protests have inconvenienced a lot of people over the years - and have brought attention to a lot of issues. Some attention is positive, some not so. The affects of protests, however, can last a lot longer than your general annoyance at having to walk through douchebags.
The affects of protests, however, can last a lot longer than your general annoyance at having to walk through douchebags.
The Daily Show had a field report last night on a guy who is speaking out against walkathons. He lived somewhere in Massachusetts, and the walkathons obstruct his commute to work. He has to go 6 blocks out of his way. It was fricken hilarious, this guy was railing against walkathons for cancer research, hungry poor people, black people, gays, etc. The story was edited to make him seem like the victim of the "walk-a-nazis". Wonderful stuff.
"Of course it hurts. You're getting fucked by an elephant."
The Daily Show had a field report last night on a guy who is speaking out against walkathons. He lived somewhere in Massachusetts, and the walkathons obstruct his commute to work. He has to go 6 blocks out of his way. It was fricken hilarious, this guy was railing against walkathons for cancer research, hungry poor people, black people, gays, etc. The story was edited to make him seem like the victim of the "walk-a-nazis". Wonderful stuff.
Hysterical. The new guy's they've gotten over the past year are awesome :cool:
Intuitive people will see the protests and, perhaps, look into why so many people are pissed off. Then - whether they agree or disagree - they'll at least have been informed.
Well, I saw a bunch of fucking failures, society's bottom-feeders, walking around vandalizing private property. It was hard for me to see them as anything but losers.
Protests have inconvenienced a lot of people over the years - and have brought attention to a lot of issues. Some attention is positive, some not so. The affects of protests, however, can last a lot longer than your general annoyance at having to walk through douchebags.
True. But my point for bringing up in the first place was to point out that Moore, in his extremism, portrayed these black hoodied dorks as some sort of heros, comparing their efforts to Lexington and Concord.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
Well, I saw a bunch of fucking failures, society's bottom-feeders, walking around vandalizing private property. It was hard for me to see them as anything but losers.
True. But my point for bringing up in the first place was to point out that Moore, in his extremism, portrayed these black hoodied dorks as some sort of heros, comparing their efforts to Lexington and Concord.
^^ You can't really compare his complaint to the guy on the Daily Show either. That guy was complaining about cancer walks and walks to raise money for the poor. It's a bit of a different situation
Well, I saw a bunch of fucking failures, society's bottom-feeders, walking around vandalizing private property. It was hard for me to see them as anything but losers.
And that's you. I felt the same way about the Republican opperatives "protesting" the recount in Florida. But far be it from me to say it wasn't effective.
True. But my point for bringing up in the first place was to point out that Moore, in his extremism, portrayed these black hoodied dorks as some sort of heros, comparing their efforts to Lexington and Concord.
What went down in Lexington and Concord was carried out by extremists. Revolutions aren't started by those happy with the status quo.
And that's you. I felt the same way about the Republican opperatives "protesting" the recount in Florida. But far be it from me to say it wasn't effective.
I don't like republican protests of abortion clinics, etc... As far as I know, both sides had something to protest in Florida. But from what I saw, the form of protest wasn't wanton destruction of property. Not sure if you're just trying to be argumentative.
What went down in Lexington and Concord was carried out by extremists. Revolutions aren't started by those happy with the status quo.
Compare the two if you'd like. I think you're wrong to do so. There was certainly a populist groundswell leading up to our revolution. Smelly anarchists from Eugene breaking windows out and harrassing people does not a populist groundswell make.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
Comments
people on the other side could justifiably say the same things about ann coulter though.
And yes, the anti-christ is a great ploy. What better distraction could you have?
http://www.wishlistfoundation.org
Oh my, they dropped the leash.
Morgan Freeman/Clint Eastwood 08' for President!
"Make our day"
I still think Moore (although he has done some clever editing) has more valid things to say. And he's not insane... he's a jackass in a lot of ways.. but some of the things Coulter says really make her seem like she belongs in an asylum.
http://www.wishlistfoundation.org
Oh my, they dropped the leash.
Morgan Freeman/Clint Eastwood 08' for President!
"Make our day"
This is the common defense here? For me it was specific to the post to which I was responding, not some arbitrary disclaimer. Try again.
I've already said I think Coulter is worse than Moore. I just think it is funny that libs can't see that Moore and Coulter are similar in approach, similar in how they approach their audience, and similar in the amount of distain they garner from people outside of their limited audiences. (ie, Coulter is a bitch with a man's adam's apple and Moore is a fat pig).
Moore helps his cause to an extent, Coulter seems to exist simply as a distraction and to make other repubs look better.
http://www.wishlistfoundation.org
Oh my, they dropped the leash.
Morgan Freeman/Clint Eastwood 08' for President!
"Make our day"
what does moore do that coulter doesnt besides making movies (and coulter is not a filmaker so that doesnt really apply)?
if you lean to the left, coulter sounds like a psychotic bitch. if you lean to the right, so does michael moore. his conspiracy theories and the entire first half of fahrenheit 9/11 tracing tenuous ties between bin laden and bush that in the end didnt really serve any purpose sounds as loony to the right as ann coulter saying we should nuke the mideast sounds to the left.
http://movies.crooksandliars.com/Adam-Carolla-Coulter-7-6-06.mp3
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
I'd be hardpressed to cite references in favor of Michael Moore (i'm not too fond of him either..), but let's just say Ann Coulter is a good distance farther up the crazy pole than he is.
I wouldn't be surprised if Coulter said something like "and may death come swiftly to my enemies" at the end of an interview and meant it. Moore's just a bit more sane and rational.
http://www.wishlistfoundation.org
Oh my, they dropped the leash.
Morgan Freeman/Clint Eastwood 08' for President!
"Make our day"
I've just read through the page that your above link points to. It's a complete fucking joke. Let me quote an example:
"...I was struck by the sheer cunningness of Moore's film. When you read Kopel, try to detach yourself from any revulsion you may feel at a work of literal propaganda receiving such wide-spread accolades from mainstream politicos, as well as attendance by your friends and neighbors.
Instead, notice the film's meticulousness in saying only (or mostly) "true" or defensible things in support of a completely misleading impression. In this way, Kopel's care in describing Moore's "deceits" is much more interesting than other critiques I have read, including that of Christopher Hitchens. Kopel's lawyerly description of Moore's claims shows the film to be a genuinely impressive accomplishment in a perverse sort of way (the way an ingenious crime is impressive)--a case study in how to convert elements that are mainly true into an impression that is entirely false--and this leads in turn to another thought."
Much of the article which you hold up as an example of Moore's 'deceits' follows in the same wishy-washy vein. In other words, Saying things that are "true" or "mainly true", within a context that leaves an overall impression which one disagrees with, is a bad thing. Or, put more simply, when the truth offends us, we should question the reasons behind presenting it.
You need to do better than that jeffbr. Again, for the third time, I ask you to provide me with one concrete example of Michael Moore being an extremist.
*sigh* There is unlikely to be any data which will satisfy your requirements for a couple of reasons. Firstly because you are probably philisophically closely aligned with Moore and wouldn't want to think of yourself as extremist, and secondly because you simply don't want to see it.
There are many articles, websites, etc... debunking myths more propogated not only in Fahrenheit 9/11, but also in Bowling for Columbine where he took things out of sequence and out of context to totally change their intended meaning. But none of that will have any impact on you.
So to answer your last post, here's the first time I thought of Moore as an extremist: http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php?messageDate=1999-12-07
I was living in Seattle during the "battle of seattle" and the people Moore praises as heros were nothing but black hoodie, bandana clad anarchist punks from Eugene who there there for the thrill of property destruction. Most of the fuckers who were demonstrating did nothing but disrupt normal people going to their daily jobs and trying to earn a living. I, myself, had to go through a few throngs of douchebags, and cross a couple of police lines just to get to my fucking office. It is extremist to give these assholes any kind of praise, yet Moore compared the Battle in Seattle to Lexington and Concord.
Again, I'm sure you'll find nothing extremist in his attitude here, either. That will simply highlight my theory above.
I wonder if the public have ever been encouraged to analyse a film or documentary with the same intensity as they have Farenheit 9/11. I think not. I wonder why this is?
Secondly, the so-called 'anti-globalisation' protests - the first time these important issues had been brought to the worlds attention - angered you because they made you late for work? Interesting!
And because the efforts of the Seattle protesters were praised by Michael Moore, that qualifies him as an extremist? Again, Interesting!
Just as I suspected. Interesting!
It's a shame that people can't bring these same awesome critical faculties to bear upon the evening news everyday. A film like Farenheit 9/11 comes out and it is dissected like a frog in a science lab, organ by organ, bone by bone. Strange! :eek:
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Isn't that exactly what Ann Coulter does...just from the opposite side of the fence?
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Protests have inconvenienced a lot of people over the years - and have brought attention to a lot of issues. Some attention is positive, some not so. The affects of protests, however, can last a lot longer than your general annoyance at having to walk through douchebags.
The Daily Show had a field report last night on a guy who is speaking out against walkathons. He lived somewhere in Massachusetts, and the walkathons obstruct his commute to work. He has to go 6 blocks out of his way. It was fricken hilarious, this guy was railing against walkathons for cancer research, hungry poor people, black people, gays, etc. The story was edited to make him seem like the victim of the "walk-a-nazis". Wonderful stuff.
http://www.wishlistfoundation.org
Oh my, they dropped the leash.
Morgan Freeman/Clint Eastwood 08' for President!
"Make our day"
Then again, the democrats are raving idiots... maybe they did plant her.
*shrugs*
http://www.wishlistfoundation.org
Oh my, they dropped the leash.
Morgan Freeman/Clint Eastwood 08' for President!
"Make our day"
Well, I saw a bunch of fucking failures, society's bottom-feeders, walking around vandalizing private property. It was hard for me to see them as anything but losers.
True. But my point for bringing up in the first place was to point out that Moore, in his extremism, portrayed these black hoodied dorks as some sort of heros, comparing their efforts to Lexington and Concord.
http://www.wishlistfoundation.org
Oh my, they dropped the leash.
Morgan Freeman/Clint Eastwood 08' for President!
"Make our day"
I don't like republican protests of abortion clinics, etc... As far as I know, both sides had something to protest in Florida. But from what I saw, the form of protest wasn't wanton destruction of property. Not sure if you're just trying to be argumentative.
Compare the two if you'd like. I think you're wrong to do so. There was certainly a populist groundswell leading up to our revolution. Smelly anarchists from Eugene breaking windows out and harrassing people does not a populist groundswell make.
Stop by:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=14678777351&ref=mf