If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Mickey Mouse miffed Michael Moore's movie might mislead. Miramax may miss mainstream multiplex moola   (money.cnn.com) divider line 468
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

18925 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 May 2004 at 9:09 AM (10 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



468 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all
 
2004-05-05 05:48:37 PM  
2004-05-05 04:43:53 PM GregoryD
Video Vader,
one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter.
Remember the boston tea party? Terrorism. Oh yeah I'm American, Freedom fighter.


Greg: would you please be so kind as to get off my side of the flame war? Thank you.
 
2004-05-05 05:52:02 PM  
Dinger, FoxNews doesn't scare me - can't speak for others. It irks me though when a so called news channel is basically one editorial show after another, be it for the left or the right, and those shows are labeled as news. It's not news, it's opinion. It's the equivalent of a political talk radio show, without the back and forth dialogue, and with the label of "news" instead of "show".

Do you really think CNN painted Saddam in a good light to get interviews, or that Saddam wanted to interview with CNN because they're biggest news source worldwide and he could get his assanine message to more people?
 
2004-05-05 05:59:13 PM  
One last thing -- Moore may have an agenda (obviously he does), but some of the things he does say are true. Don't discount everything because you may disagree with the agenda. Bush did send the bin Ladens back to Saudi Arabia after 9/11. Why? Nearly all the hijackers were from Saudi Arabia - Osama bin Ladin himself is from Saudi Arabia. Yet they are our buddies in all this? Why?

You may not like Moore or his opinions, but these are relevant questions that shouldn't be ignored or discounted just because they may go against "your side".
 
2004-05-05 06:10:48 PM  
As soon as I saw Programmer Cat's name wayyy up in the thread, I thought: "He's gonna work in dildos, strapons, some kinda double-dong reference."

And I was right. Am I the only one who's detecting a pattern? What gives, P-Cat?
 
2004-05-05 06:30:11 PM  
I love the neo-con asshats.

They have the right to their opinion.

However, they forget.

Just because you have a right to your opinion,
does not mean your opinion is right.



I'd love to see someone who thinks Moore is lying do a documentary on it. Make it as funny and interesting as his are. Who knows, you might even make some money and get an oscar.

Be a real challenge, since most conservatives seem unable to think for themselves, and only follow. But, please, prove me wrong. I'd love to see a funny creative conservative. If I saw that I might start looking for God or the Easter Bunny.
 
2004-05-05 06:34:37 PM  
there are... pi comments? looks like more than that to me.
 
2004-05-05 06:38:30 PM  

/everyone's favorite nice guy, Ted Rall
 
2004-05-05 06:40:00 PM  
ZipBeep

szmike

If your response to the many charges listed in the article is to dismiss it because the author is a conservative lawyer for the NRA who writes for Guns and Ammos, let me point out that you are not refuting a single charge he is making. You are merely pointing out his political affiliation. Would you accept as a sound argument that we don't have to listen to any of Bush's critics because they are liberal and biased?


No, I think what people are saying is that the guy has an agenda, he may not have even seen the movie


Then stop right there. If they had RTFA (admittedly the original links were bad but the google cache is not) they would see a 17-page analysis giving Michael Moore's film the same level of scrutiny as the Zapruder film. One example among many, the Moore version of the Charlton Heston speech is dissected line by line, with a thorough detail of the context of each line. He also supplies the original text of the speech itself so you can make your own conclusion. I get the feeling that the only person who has seen Bowling for Columbine more than David Hardy is Michael Moore and his fellow editors.

(a lot of the stuff he says aren't in the version of the movie I saw on DVD)

Like what. I've seen the DVD version and everything he mentions were there. He did remove the false caption from the doctored Willie Horton ad in the VHS release but I saw it plain as day on the DVD. The DVD also allowed me to pause the film and read with perfect clarity a newspaper headline that Michael Moore says in the film's narration was regarding an NRA meeting held in Flint two days after the Kayla Rolland shooting. If you pause and read the text of the article itself, Michael Moore shades it out but you can still read it, the article is nothing about Heston. It's about Bill Clinton holding a campaign rally. I'm sorry but there's no way to spin that into any thing other than a lie.

and he just hates Michael Moore.

In the 17-pages, not to mention the other side articles, did I see David Hardy state any personal opinion on Moore.

He may hate his farking guts. He may have no opinion on the man himself, but just hates his lies and manipulations.

So what? That still doesn't refute anything he has said about the movie.

He did the same thing on Michael Moore's other movies.

So has a problem with people who habitually use lies and manipulation to make a political point.

Not to mention that it is an amateur site similar to the Roswell UFO sites or a Kennedy conspiracy site.

Jeebus, that's the worst farking argument I've heard all day. I wish I read that first, I wouldn't have wasted any time responding to you.

Durp...David Hardy's website is an amateur site... Durp...Roswell UFO and Kennedy conspiracy sites are also amateur....Durp...Therefore David Hardy's site is just like those Roswell and Kennedy sites....Durp!!!!!

If that argument were anymore strawman, it would be prancing down the yellow brick road singing how it wiles away the hours conferring with the flowers.

[rest of post deleted unread]
 
2004-05-05 06:48:21 PM  
How strong is a society if it cannot withstand criticism from one of its own? How virtuous are the doctrines of a government if they go unchallenged? How free are a people if their voice is bound?



/ Personally, Michael Moore annoys me, but thats ok, Im an American, I tolerate all kinds of crap. Besides, I decide for myself, don't you?
 
2004-05-05 06:52:33 PM  
Smallberries

I love the neo-con asshats.


And I love the liberal douchebags still stuck in 60s mode.

They have the right to their opinion.

However, they forget.

Just because you have a right to your opinion,
does not mean your opinion is right.


Well, true, but doesn't that sentimtent apply to anybody irregardless of their own personal political ideology?

I'd love to see someone who thinks Moore is lying do a documentary on it.

It must be your birthday. Amateur filmmaker Mike Wilson is doing a documentary called Michael Moore Hates America. It's about how an average joe with a camera trying to nail Michael Moore for an interview. Ironic how it sounds like a remake of Roger and Me.

www.michaelmoorehatesamerica.com

Make it as funny and interesting as his are. Who knows, you might even make some money and get an oscar.

That's the challenge. Michael Moore's films resonates with audiences because they are entertaining and he does have undeniable folksy charm.

Be a real challenge, since most conservatives seem unable to think for themselves, and only follow.

Unlike all the liberal lemmings here following the Bloated Piper of Flint.

/embarrassed he's wasting his time with the knee-jerk wingnut asshats.
 
2004-05-05 06:57:30 PM  
Hey, szmike!

Maybe you should read the rest of the post. This whole site has been debunked by many people, including myself, back when it was almost relevant. Like, right after the Oscars???

Why is nobody else doing this? What is the guy's problem with Michael Moore that he spends his time doing this? Is somebody paying him to do this?

Why are YOU so willing to believe everything this guy says and yet Michael Moore is an idiot, lying scumbag? We're not allowed to question this guy.

I'm going back and analyzing every word this guy says again. As I said in the previous post, if you want to see the analysis, do a search on my name and hardylaw on Fark. That should take you to it, unless it's so old that it's dropped off. In that thread, you will find several debunkers for this guy. Mine isn't even close to being the best.

Don't waste our time with this guy's crap anymore until you have read those posts.
 
2004-05-05 07:13:31 PM  
Yamara

Hey, since Ted Rall is such an avowed socialist, I'm sure he'll be more than happy to give all his income from his comic strips, plus whatever cash he manages to extort from Danny Hellman, and donate it to Air America (the radio station, not the CIA airline).

After all, how much overhead does it take to malign terror widows, New York firemen and Patrick Tillman?
 
2004-05-05 07:16:54 PM  
The Bush family has connections with the Bin Ladens?
 
2004-05-05 07:20:06 PM  
I just wanted to say that I hate Michael Moore for the same reason that I hate Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage... The list goes on...

They're all a bunch of self-centered, self-righteous loudmouths. Maybe if they weren't so busy being attention whores I might actually listen to what they're saying...

I'll have to admit that I got turned off by Michael Moore when he made his speech at the Oscars, and all I saw was some fat, frog-mouthed ungrateful jerk who basically made an ass out of himself. Sure, people are entitled to their opinions, but I feel that there's a time and a place to do it... And in my opinion, that was neither the time or the place. Add to that the fact Bowling wasn't even technically a documentary... Yeah, that'll irk me.

I mean, I like listening to Howard Stern, but he even gets to be too much sometimes...
 
2004-05-05 07:34:47 PM  
Just because one apple is rotten doesn't mean the entire bunch is rotten. Most of the family has been checked out by the FBI. Snopes.com has a great debunk of the whole MM and the flying thing.

I'd rather know the facts then the screws be put to Saddam, you know how he's going to answer. I mean thats like asking the Iraqi Information minister on troop posistions. CNN withehld facts in the chase of the story.
 
2004-05-05 07:38:37 PM  
I can't believe you Americans. You go on and on about liberty and freedom of speech and yet many of you don't seem to be concerned about the most important speech of all - political speech. More and more, the government and big business wants to stop people speaking out against the war. Nightline is banned in St Louis for showing faces of dead soldiers, a woman loses her job for taking photos of coffins, meanwhile the hot topic of debate is whether John Kerry threw his medals over a fence 33 years ago. WHY ARE YOU PEOPLE STANDING FOR THIS?

BTW, where did everyone get this idea that a documentary has to be even-handed? I don't recall ever seeing a documentary where I couldn't tell what view the producer wanted to convey. Bowling for Columbine was not even-handed by any means but it was a magnificent documentary. It's not as if the airwaves are flooded with Moore's point of view so I can handle a little left-wing bias now and then.
 
2004-05-05 07:42:13 PM  
szmike

After all, how much overhead does it take to malign terror widows, New York firemen and Patrick Tillman?

Cuddly, ain't he?

But now is not the time to question ordinary Americans' venality and self-deception. We need to pool all our greed and silence to win the War!
 
2004-05-05 07:43:01 PM  
I'm confused...

As a card-carrying Republican, I can't figure out why "Liberal Hollywood" with all it's Clinton-supporting minions would red-light such a liberal project.

I remember Rush telling me of the evils of the "Liberal Elite" out there in California. Isn't it Hollywood's mission to distort the truth and brainwash America with their liberal, commie, pinko, welfare state propaganda?? Wouldn't the liberal media release such a movie as Michael Moore's new one? I just don't understand.

Brain implosion imminent...
 
2004-05-05 07:50:48 PM  
"After all, how much overhead does it take to malign terror widows, New York firemen and Patrick Tillman?"

Ok, szmike, that is just friggin ridiculous. I listen to Air America exclusively and not once has anyone on that network maligned anyone but the people that should have seen 9/11 coming and the same people that invaded Iraq in response to Islamic extremists.

I'll bet you've never listened Air America, and you'd have a Herculean task of coming up with proof of them maligning the groups you've noted. I thought you were interested in the truth.
 
2004-05-05 08:03:01 PM  
ZipBeep

Hey, szmike!

Maybe you should read the rest of the post.


Okay, I'll bite. Better judgement would normally say otherwise, but that third Busch is kicking in.

This whole site has been debunked by many people, including myself, back when it was almost relevant. Like, right after the Oscars???

Really? Like, wow. That is so farking amazing. Do you guys, like, own a time machine, and all? I ask because Michael Moore's Oscar speech took place on March 23, 2003 and he posted his "wacko attacko" rebuttal on his site on Setpember 23, 2003. Six moinths later.Why that's just five and a half months after the time he told Roger Ebert he would post a rebuttal on his website. So did you post your rebuttal to David Hardy's rebuttal of Michael Moore's Wacko Attacko article before he wrote it, or is your definition of the phrase "right after" liberal enough to encompass a six month time period?

Why is nobody else doing this? What is the guy's problem with Michael Moore that he spends his time doing this? Is somebody paying him to do this?

He is currently retained as an attorney for the NRA orginazation. Therefore, he does have a vested interest in debunking anti-NRA propaganda. That in itself does not refute his claims.

Why are YOU so willing to believe everything this guy says and yet Michael Moore is an idiot, lying scumbag?

Because I took the time to read his article, watch Bowling for Columbine, read the original transcript of Charlton Heston's speech in Denver, do a line by line study of what Moore depicts in his film. There is no conjecture on David Hardy's part. He presented the facts. I looked at both sides and made my own decision. All Moore could say in his defense was that the NRA was mad that Charlton Heston's words were being used against him. His defense did not counter the notion that Charlton Heston's words were indeed being used.

We're not allowed to question this guy.

I love this sentence for so many reasons. I love it in context. I love it out of context. I want to point out the irony, but I feel it is so obvious that only the dimmest of asshats wouldn't get it. And I don't cater to the dimmest of asshats.

I'm going back and analyzing every word this guy says again.

You do that.

As I said in the previous post, if you want to see the analysis, do a search on my name and hardylaw on Fark.

No, I think I'll wait until you come back from your second analysis and we'll work with that, mmm'kay? I'm sure you'll take this as a fear on my part of being confronted with The Truth, but the thing is, and please don't take this personally, I have spent enough analyzing the Moore version and the real version of the Heston's speech to know that what Moore did went above and beyond any rational notion of creative license.

I hate the NRA. I hate Charlton Heston's association with the NRA. I hate guns. I hate gun nuts. A very powerful documentary could have been made on America's fascination with guns. It was not. An entertaining piece of propaganda about Michael Moore and how much he hates Bush was. A very powerful documentary could be made on Bush's association with the Bin Laden family and his close ties to the House of Saud. Michael Moore will not make that documentary. Michael Moore will make an entertaining piece of propaganda about Michael Moore and how much he really, really, really (and I'm talking triple dog here) hates Bush.

The endless refrain I have been reading from the Michael Moore apologists is that "he makes you think. He makes you think!!!"

Really? Tell me this. What discussion did Bowling For Columbine produce? Did it encourage disucssions regfarding the lax gun laws? Did they talk about the culture of fear? Did they ponder the evil corporations' influence on today's teens with the productions of weapons of mass destruction? Did they pontificate the how the racist media pins every crime ever commited on the nearest available black man?

No. Everybody talked about Michael Farking Moore. When Farenheit 9/11 comes out, the only topic will be Michael Farking Moore.

Penn Jillette is right. What else can one say about a man brave enough to challenge an Alzheimer's victim to a battle of wits.

Michael Moore is an asshat and doesn't deserve one more second of my time.

/leaves thread
 
2004-05-05 08:07:53 PM  
Anyone else notice how most of the really inflammatory right-wing wackos have really high fark numbers? It's like they were all sent here by the RNC at the same time to plant their dim-witted propoganda.
 
2004-05-05 08:12:38 PM  
Bowling for Columbine cost $5 million and made $100 million.

Michael Eisner is farking dead.
 
2004-05-05 08:16:55 PM  
"I can't believe you Americans. You go on and on about liberty and freedom of speech and yet many of you don't seem to be concerned about the most important speech of all - political speech. More and more, the government and big business wants to stop people speaking out against the war. Nightline is banned in St Louis for showing faces of dead soldiers, a woman loses her job for taking photos of coffins, meanwhile the hot topic of debate is whether John Kerry threw his medals over a fence 33 years ago. WHY ARE YOU PEOPLE STANDING FOR THIS?"

Most of us are doing what we can, but face a huge foe. The religious fundamentalists and corporate America support the RNC. They have more money to spend, more people to do the spinning and more networks to do the spinning on. The new liberal and Democrat movements are mostly grass roots, so even if it looks like there's nothing going on, it's really just not being covered on most networks.

We are, of course, open to suggestions, LionelHutz! Feel free to respond with any ideas, short of violence, you can recommend.
 
2004-05-05 08:22:02 PM  
Okay, I know I just made this big rant about how I was leaving this thread but this caught my attention and has nothing to do with the aforementioned asshat.

glenlivid

"After all, how much overhead does it take to malign terror widows, New York firemen and Patrick Tillman?"

Ok, szmike, that is just friggin ridiculous. I listen to Air America exclusively and not once has anyone on that network maligned anyone but the people that should have seen 9/11 coming and the same people that invaded Iraq in response to Islamic extremists.


Sigh. I think about 99.99% of the people who read that post knows that it was Ted Rall that I was referring to.

As far as to why I am bothering with explaining myself to the remaining 0.01%, I blame Anheiser-Busch.

I'll bet you've never listened Air America,

Nope. You shore got me there, padner.

and you'd have a Herculean task of coming up with proof of them maligning the groups you've noted.

Well, since I was talking about the transfer of wealth from Ted Rall to Air America, I thought that doubts on the need of high overhead would apply to the party would be with lesscash ,especially among people familiar with Rall knew of his ouerve.

My bad, I suppose.

I thought you were interested in the truth.

To quote the immortal Orson Welles: Yes, always!
 
2004-05-05 08:24:34 PM  
Michael Moore actually spoke here at Boston College last fall. He noted that he was making this movie, but also told all gathered there to hear him speak that he had made enough money on BFC that he had 'fark you' money and if Disney wouldn't put out his movie, he'd find some other way of getting it out to theaters. Now this. This should be interesting to watch.
 
2004-05-05 08:24:49 PM  
Well, since I was talking about the transfer of wealth from Ted Rall to Air America, I thought that doubts on the need of high overhead would apply to the party would be with lesscash ,especially among people familiar with Rall knew of his ouerve.

Subtract three Bsuch Light and the above should read as:

Well, since I was talking about the transfer of wealth from Ted Rall to Air America, I thought that doubts on the need of high overhead would apply to the party that would end with less cash, not more. Especially among people familiar with Rall's ouerve.
 
2004-05-05 09:00:34 PM  
I am all for the release of this film. Lord knows we need another comedy after Michael and Me and Bowling for Columbine. This guy at least makes people do the research to determine for themselves that he is full of himself and full of sh@t!!
 
2004-05-05 09:04:11 PM  
"I disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it." - Voltaire

Those of you who applaud this just because you don't like the man don't deserve (or even understand) the freedoms you've been given.
 
2004-05-05 09:35:46 PM  
Aprilia.RSV
>>Squawk Box this morning said the film will probably win the Cannes film award<<

A bash-America film in a competition in France. Gee, what are the odds on that one?
 
2004-05-05 09:39:12 PM  
Daymn. My first accepted link, and it's the forum flamewar of the day.

My bad.
 
2004-05-05 09:41:56 PM  
Those of you who applaud this just because you don't like the man don't deserve (or even understand) the freedoms you've been given.


Way to blow it out of porportion. I'm going to be making a movie called Dumbfarks who make who make posts on fark. You see if no one wants to show my piece of garbage it's surely some conspiracy against me. The aliens have allied itself with Ted turner to keep the truth from people!!!!! My free speach is being brought down by the aliens, don't these people know who I am? I'm dinger I deserve my freedom to put crap on Movie screens!!!

I wouldn't expect any less from people who think that the Bill of rights is some banner and every dumbfark liar deserves a 100 milliom dollar budget film because it tows his beliefs or hopes.
 
2004-05-05 09:53:54 PM  
When will the conservatives learn?

If you don't like something produced by the likes of Al Franken or Michael Moore, the WORST thing you can do it try to prevent its release. Just let it go. Don't call attention to it because trying to stop it makes you the bad guy and now everyone wants to see it or read it because it will piss you off.

This goes double for people like Franken and Moore who are better at using the media than you are. Face it, they're better and you suck at it. Nothing against you personally, that's just the way it is.

And learn from your mistakes: Cop Killer, 2 Live Crew, Married with Children... the list goes on and on. People love forbidden fruit, and if you try to to eliminate something, it will get more popular.

Liberals, this goes for you too. Try to eliminate anything "conservative" like you guys tried to do in the early to mid 90's and the same thing will happen to you. The Man Show is a prime example of such anti-PC backlash. Just let it be. If you are offended, write a crappy poem about it and post it on your livejournal. But organizing a boycott because you are "taking a stand" is only promoting that which offends you.

In other words, shut the hell up the both of you.
 
2004-05-05 09:58:19 PM  
I should also add The Passion as another project that many liberals didn't want anyone to see. You all made a big stink about it and couldn't stop talking about it. "Passion this and Passion that" was all I heard you idiots yammering about.

And that movie became box office gold. If you'd just ignored it, the faithful would have seen it and then talked amongst themselves. Now, thanks to the controversy, they Passion fanatics still won't shut up about it. Thanks a lot.

/do you want to torture me?
 
2004-05-05 10:02:36 PM  
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=638&ncid=762&e=2&u=/nm/2004050 5/en_nm/media_disney_dc

"We dealt with this issue a year ago," Eisner added. "We informed the agency that represented the film. We informed all of our companies that we chose not to be involved with that particular film."

Cannes is one week away?
As I said Cha Ching! $$$
Big cash for all involved.
 
2004-05-05 10:05:01 PM  
How can you Conservatives keep calling Michael Moore a "liar?" The guy's got more lawyers than Dubya!



If he's lying, how come he ain't been sued from here to Sunday?



Typical Conservative attack: don't argue the facts, just kill the messenger, censor the message, and hope the rednecks vote for your bumper-stickers.
 
2004-05-05 10:05:35 PM  
glenlivid Good point. From the media (and this thread) you'd think that all Americans are right wing lunatics, when in reality it's just GSpot and Dinger. As I have no suggestions for long term solutions, we'll settle for getting rid of Bush in November. Then we can start on the whole life, liberty and pursuit of happiness thing. Keep fighting the good fight.

I would post a emphatic retort to Dinger's last post, but I have just realised how ridiculous it is to be debating politics with someone called Dinger.
 
2004-05-05 10:28:39 PM  
Zipbeep: [You don't want to know whether this war was fought because of WMD or because of Saudi connections. You also don't want to criticize Bush for getting us into this stupid war, but you want to criticize Michael Moore, who disagrees with him. You also criticize Moore's appearance, but never mention how much Bush looks like a chimp.

George W. Bush, right or wrong, eh?. (Even if he is mostly wrong??)]

I'm not the president, so I don't know all of his reasons for doing things. As for the war, the Saudis aint real happy about us, plus having been caught giving money to the survivors of suicide bombers in Palestine and as the biggest member of OPEC, deliberately screwing with the price of oil to screw with Infidel economies and having Al Jazeera report slanted news against the US. Bush didn't start this thing with the Saudis. Saddam was a bloody killer and a festering sore, ready to erupt again. No one had the balls to get him except for the US and the Brits before he 'burst' forth again, probably with WMD and nukes.

I support the war. I've been around long enough to see what happens when you ignore or make deals with dictators. Recent history (WW2) showed clearly what happens when you not only ignore a 'minor' dictator but his atrocities (killing off the Jews, killing off the mentally ill, chronically sick, deformed, etc.) Then there's Castro. Once a freedom fighter against a brutal dictator, now a dictator himself, responsible for the slaughter of thousands and virtual enslavement of his nation. You think those refugees the US catch and ship back home are greeted with open arms? Prison and almost certain death await most.

The basic trouble with the war is that the spin doctors in Muslim nations have portrayed it as the Christians against the Muslims and made it appear that the US is trying to stomp out Muslims. They hardly mention all of the good the coalition soldiers have done there. Plus, Shiite terrorists have no problem with taking down 10 of their fellow citizens to get 1 US soldier.

BTW, I don't think Bush looks like a chimp.

No one said a peep when MacNamara prolonged the war in Vietnam by demanding statistics, body counts, sortie counts and threatened seasoned military commanders with their careers if they didn't listen to him. We ran so low on bombs that to satisfy him, the military risked multimillion dollar jets and pilots, each carrying 1 bomb, on sorties to keep the stats up. LBJ just went right along with him.

Bush, Sr. kicked Saddams ass when he invade Kuwait but had to stop at the border when his troops fled because Saudi sensibilities would have been insulted if he chased a Muslim into Muslim lands and finished him off, which, militarily, would have been the right thing to do. The Saudis chose the US to do their dirty work, when Bin Laden had his own troops and wanted to fight Saddam. Their decision turned Bin Laden into a terrorist, whose mouth got him in so much trouble damning the Kingdom that they tossed him out. Even though they openly damn him, we have intercepted Saudi finances directed at supporting his organization.

Moore is a mudraker, getting rich off of exaggerated stories. Ralph Nader started raising hell when companies started producing defective consumer goods knowingly and picked his battles with concrete information and facts to back him up. Nader didn't exaggerate either. He pointed out the explosive qualities of the Ford Pinto, showed how Ford wasn't interested in recalling them or changing the design (even though the had and rejected, as too expensive, corrective measures) and did the same with the Corvare.

I used to be a fan of Moores, often reading his website, until I noticed his ranting and raving about minor things, trying to blow them up into major issues, plus exaggerating information and having minions doing the same. Plus, he ignored some major issues with BIG BUSINESS at the time. Like, he's ignoring the increase in food prices over this Atkins diet krap, especially meat. He's also ignoring the efforts of major farm conglomerates to wipe out the small, independent farmers, which would enable them to fix prices of food. He hasn't addressed why the US suddenly closed down Texas wells and dismantled most of it's refineries. He's all for the common man, but hasn't addressed the major cuts in Social Services, the doubling of the cost of homeowners insurance (even though the insurance industry recoups it's losses after a major disaster within a year and starts showing profits) forcing many families to drop such insurance nor how the US is doing most of the research for the worlds drug supply, which, according to the pharmaceutical industry, is why we pay about the highest fees for medication. He is curiously silent on how major companies like Walmart, determined to place a store in almost every city, have damaged the free enterprise system, forced thousands of quality small businesses out of the market, limit the selection of products and is starting to violate labor laws.

Moore is krap.
 
2004-05-05 10:55:37 PM  
If you have a good point, which MM frequently does, there should be no reason to misrepresent and exagerate, which he also does - blatantly. No better that the crap the spews out of Ann Coulter's prissy lil mouth, which incidently would look very nice rapped around my... .

PS I honestly believe he intentionally torpedoed the Clark campaign - by endorsing them. He's simply not an honest person.
 
2004-05-05 10:58:15 PM  
2004-05-05 09:41:56 PM Dinger

Wow, you neocons can be incoherent.
 
2004-05-05 11:22:20 PM  
michael moore smells like cheese.
 
2004-05-05 11:27:44 PM  
Just can't refuse one more....

Is it wrong to doubt?
Is it wrong to question?
Is it wrong to ASK?

I've been grappling with some rather hard things these last few months, things that have forced me to rethink my whole outlook on life.

I have always tried to keep an open mind, I've always tried to keep a positive outlook, and I've done my absolute best (and fail) to be respectful and tolerant (even though when others do not).

First off, let me say this: me and a friend of mine were talking about Bowling For Columbine a long while back, and this is what we think: Moore isn't saying that guns are the problem with our society, he isn't even saying WE are the problem, he's trying to grapple with the MINDSET. Where does he say anything about being anti-gun? He doesn't. You saw in the bank that he was looking at that gun like a ten-year old in a candy store. I think he was a lot more fair-and-balanced than you'd think, it's just he didn't hold back on showing us the horrible results of people who'd been hurt (physically or emotionally) by the misuse and abuse of firearms.

Was it wrong for him to get straight to the point with Charleton Heston about going to an NRA meeting right after the Columbine incident (when Marylin Manson cancels his show out of respect)? Moore isn't Jon Stewart and this isn't the Daily Show. He wasn't there to kid, he was there to ASK and by god he did it. He didn't joke around he got straight to the point and I admire that immensely.

He wants us to think, if there was ever a reason for Bowling, to broaden our minds. I've tried to keep an open mind for a long time now, but it's hard to do it sometimes.

It's hard to be honest. Especially with yourself.

And I think to myself, what is it that makes this country so great? Is it the people? Could be, there are indeed nice people, you just have to find them, or they find you.

Is it our government? I find myself sinking my head in shame at that one.

Is it our way of life? I doubt it....

Is it our grandoise Capitalist Free-Market Society that proports superiority over all other forms of society and give out opportunities for all?

Most definitely not.

Nietchze. He asked some tough questions, questions that may have very well lead to his insanity. He was unrelenting in his pursuit of the "truth". His conclusion was that Mankind must overcome itself. His ideal manifested in the "Overman", a man who has overcome himself, who has embraced life, and lives it, who strives to achieve and sees every obstacle as a challenge to overcome, and each accomplishment a reiteration of one's own existence.

Not to merely excel and succeed on the physical level but also on the mental and perhaps even SPIRITUAL level as well. To embrace tragedy, to stare into the abyss unafraid, to peer into the bottomless, the unknown, the unthinkable, and not flinch for a moment. To be all you can be, do what you would do, and know what you wanted.

And to have the courage to say "to hell with the rest."

A lot of you may not like that. That's understandable, not many people like to hear a guy who sent his mind through proverbial hell to re-evalute the very things that dictate what our society is, does, and acts come back from that unknown with some very startling shiat that no one to that point could have imagined or hoped to have understand.

He DOUBTED.
He had QUESTIONS.
He had the balls to ASK. Even if the very subject of that question may have only been himself.

Just like Marx, just like a lot of other (in)famous people out there who are dead, or forgotten, or laughed at or scorned today.

Just like Michael Moore. Anybody that opens their mouth to say something about our way of life, or our government, that is unpopular, or makes us look bad, must automatically be some liar, or madman, or some hooligan trying to cash in on unsuspecting people who actually stop to LISTEN to what he has to say.

I don't necessarily agree with Nietchze, I don't may not even think that his "ideal" Human Being is even attainable (and if you think that he's talking about breeding or genetics, you have a lot to learn about Nietzche; nothing he believes is worth attaining comes cheap, and you can't cheat to get it), but I THINK about it. And that's what counts. This line of thought leads to other paths, paths no other but I have tread upon, paths that lead to conclusions unknown, certainties undiscernable.

I have thought long and hard, and this is what I have to say:

I have power. WE have power. Every last Human being on this earth has the ability to impose their will to mold the future of our world and all that it encompasses. Even if it seems insignificant, or trivial, EVERY decision has an inevitable result or consequence.

I have found many of these in recent history. The Cold War is chockful of these ironious tidbits. The mid-to-late 19th Century is as well.

If we choose to remain ignorant, if we CHOOSE not to choose, we are giving up our POWER as Human Beings. Then what does that make us? Why don't you just castrate us, cuz then that'd be the same thing. Why don't you just shackle yourselves up now?

The resulf of 9/11 can be traced back, and its path is intricate and winding with twists and turns, with countless untold decisions shaping the ultimate outcome, or consequence.

If you think that we will win this "war" on terror, then you need to trace back through every war in recorded history. A victory always gives way to a new conflict, and a lot of what are dealing with today is the result of the last two World Wars.

If we look at Ghandi, and Martin Luther King, however, we find a major difference. Through peaceful resistance (even if they were beaten, imprisoned, murdered), they never fought back, they never wavered, and they got what they wanted. Violence is the recourse of an impatient mind, and all that the victim can do is react to it, but how the "victim" responds determines what sets them apart from the aggressor. If the victim retaliates, does it really make them any better than the criminal? Does the eye-for-an-eye mentality really work?

I say no; violence propogates more violence, and a feeble mind will succumb to the ferocity of others. Minds that are uneducated, uncaring, apathetic, and selfish will always ignore, or bow before those that make the rules, and dictate truth and laws. They will plege loyalty without ever doubting, without ever ASKING, what dictates that their power is absolute. Nietzche called this kind of people the "herd".

I call them fools. People who think they can pull the wool over their eyes and make believe that the world's problems will just go away if they act like the world exists OUTSIDE of their lives, but the inevitable and inescapeable truth is that no matter how hard you try, no matter how much want to look away, no matter how hard you try to ignore, or how you act, sooner or later we are all gonna be swept by the fervor of actions and inactions that we all make. Whether we want that or not is not for us to dictate, because once we make that choice, and that window of opportunity closes, then you don't get another chance.

I have tried to remain borderline, to stay out of the way, to ignore the truth, to try to stay on everybody's good side, but I can't do that anymore. Everybody's got a stance, and I'm taking mine. And it comes down to this:

America, is not a country, it is not a place, it is not a democracy, or a way of life, or a pledge, or even a people. America isn't in its currency, or its strongest or brightest, its poor or wealthy. America isn't a fashion statement, or brand of clothes; its not having the fastest car, or having the best looking girl. It's not punk, or rock, black or white, Christian or Atheist, Islam or Buhddist, Redneck and Yankee, Bible-Thumber or Goth. America isn't its achievments or influence, wealth or power.

America, is an ideal, a dream. One that we still strive for today, one that our Framers understood, perhaps better than any of us today could ever hope to do so.

America is a place where nobody cares what you believe, or what god you choose to worship. Where everybody is your neighbor but refrains from being a Peeping Thomas. A world where people care, but know enough stay out of the affairs of others when necessary. To carry out justice fairly and in due process. To have the right life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. To not have to care whether anybody finds out if your a homosexual, where everybody is tolerant. Where everyone tries to understand.

That America isn't perfect, but it may be the closest thing to Heaven on Earth.

America, is understanding. THAT is true freedom.

For anybody that would criticize or demonize those who you would not yourself take the time to understand, to unjustly persecute and antagonize, to dare JUDGE that which does not hurt, that which does not harm, I say to you that you do not live in America, you are a heartbeat from Hitler. A hairbreadth from Stalin. A mirror away from the Anti-Christ.

You say that it is not possible, but I say you are afraid! I say that you are too comfortable! I say that you have forgotten what TRUE power is!!! Power is not in the money, because it ultimately loses its value. It's not in the rifle, or in the bullet. The answers you seek are not in the Bible, or the Koran, but within YOU.

These things are mere extensions, REFLECTIONS of yourself, but some things reflect poorly, depending on the person. A solider's determination and discipline are reflected sharply in his duties, just as a person's personality is reflected in his or her everyday life, and the things they do.

You may say that I am mad, that I'm some doped-up twenty-year-old hippie-wannabe. I say that I am the son of a father that volunteered to risk his life in a war with no meaning. I have chosen to find a better way.

I am the young man that has decided to surpass himself, and the society that bore him. I say that I will not strive to be the overman, but to define the very essence of life ITSELF! I pledge alleigance to none and fight for nobody that would encroach on the dreams and feedoms of others. I'll push myself to my limits, and then surpass that, I'll do things I never thought I could do, and then some. If Peter the Great could rule Russia, bring it out of the Dark Ages, be a handyman, a part-time dentist and all-around nice enough guy to just let himself be called Peter, then why can't I do the same?

The answers we seek in life are so obvious that we miss them so easily, that we become sidetracked into causes that are not our own, beliefs that are not in our hearts, dreams that become nightmares.

We must live life for ourselves but be aware that we are not alone in the world, strong enough to live alone, but civilized enough to enjoy the company of others. To be define ourselves, to BE ourselves. To let our actions dictate who we are, to exercise our privelige to power.

And with that I will bid you all a fond farewell, and look forward to new day, a day that will strive to achieve. The day that I can look into the sky, and believe that we are insignificant but great people. To see the sun rise and feel, and CARE once more. To be content and to be happy, to love myself, and to appreciate myself. To be what I want to be, with the horizon to show me the endless sea of choices and unknown paths yet to be travelled.

And there, in the dark unknown, where no other has dared to trek, I will be waiting there, and watching, waiting for the day that we can cast aside the light, and find our own way....

--For those who ask, for those have dared to question, for those who live life on their own terms, for those who have ever dared...
 
2004-05-06 12:01:52 AM  
GregoryD
Video Vader,
one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter.
Remember the boston tea party? Terrorism. Oh yeah I'm American, Freedom fighter.


I wouldn't put the throwing of tea into a harbor on the same scale as killing and mutilating people. Even if we pan Moore's objections to the use of "insurgents" or "terrorists", what's this about them not being "the enemy"? Of course they're the enemy! They're the ones trying to throw a monkey wrench into the handover of power to a single Iraqi government. The Fallujah insurgents do it to defy any outside authority, while the al-Sadr goons do it to try to take over the country for themselves.

They are not the Revolution either, at least not in the way Americans understand it. The American Revolution was much more unified, popular, and successful than al-Sadr's power grab ever was. And they were definitely not Minutemen; otherwise, they would have waited only a minute after the US invasion to wage an attack, not a year. That whole bit with the magazine was just a reaction to the US wising up to them, not a response to an invasion like the actual US minutemen did.


ZipBeep
VideoVader
Huh, I'm surprised nobody has posted this yet:
We were waiting for you, Beavis ("heh heh heh - hey Butthead, he said CoxAndForkum - heh heh heh")


Heh, I know that C&F pics have become semi-cliche. Why do you think I was surprised nobody tossed it out yet? I just felt like throwing a grenade into the forum to bring out knee-jerk reactions from anti-C&F types like you.

Huh huh huh, dumbass.





And later....


ZipBeep
Hey, szmike!
Maybe you should read the rest of the post. This whole site has been debunked by many people, including myself, back when it was almost relevant. Like, right after the Oscars???

Why is nobody else doing this? What is the guy's problem with Michael Moore that he spends his time doing this? Is somebody paying him to do this?


Did you happen to write the above two paragraphs out of sequence before pasting them together? Cuz that's the only way I can imagine you missing the irony of the sum.

You say you spent the time to debunk the whole anti-Moore site, yet you disparage those who debunk Moore himself as time-wasters who might be on the take? The only difference you mention is that Hardy was the only one to debunk all of Moore's movie, while more have debunked all of Hardy's article, as though that gives the latter side more credibility, but even that's not true because there's quite a few sites devoted to debunking Moore (as have been listed here).

To paraphrase your own words, what is your problem with Hardy that you spend your time doing this? Answer: apparently the same problem Hardy has, if any.


SG_Doomflange
2004-05-05 09:41:56 PM Dinger
Wow, you neocons can be incoherent.


I understood what he said. His grammar kinda went into the crapper, but he got his point across.
 
2004-05-06 12:39:40 AM  
szmike
Really? Tell me this. What discussion did Bowling For Columbine produce? Did it encourage disucssions regfarding the lax gun laws? Did they talk about the culture of fear? Did they ponder the evil corporations' influence on today's teens with the productions of weapons of mass destruction? Did they pontificate the how the racist media pins every crime ever commited on the nearest available black man?

No. Everybody talked about Michael Farking Moore. When Farenheit 9/11 comes out, the only topic will be Michael Farking Moore.


Wanna know why? 'Cuz they couldn't refute his claims. When he kept talking about the NRA and the missile factory in Denver and Marilyn Manson, he was, in fact, spot on. So what does the right do? Attack the man, of course.

I bet you, if I made a similar movie, but didn't go in front of the camera once, put in the same stats and facts he put in there, and made rock-solid attributions that would be hard to argue against...the righties would still be attacking me. 'Cuz it's the way of the world...don't attack that which you don't like; attack those who bring you that which you don't like...
 
2004-05-06 12:52:57 AM  
If only Michael Moore was an American, and made films in America where there's freedom to express such things, maybe he'd have a chance. Oh well.

Let me take this opportunity to say, "Fark you stupid mindless Republicans and your moron King".

ALL HAIL THE HOMELAND! OBEY AND BE SPARED!
 
2004-05-06 01:40:15 AM  
Enough bickering. All you who voted for Bush, just admit you made a mistake, and we'll move on. And don't let it happen again.

I heard a great line the other day..."A vote for Bush is a serious sign of a character flaw." For real. You'd have to be nuts. He's literally the biggest Presidential failure since Jimmy Carter, and EVERYONE realizes it...it's just that some choose to disregard it out of pure spite. Hell, all the administration has done these days is make excuses, rather than point to any successes.

A vote for (insert anything) is a vote for improvement.
 
2004-05-06 02:14:19 AM  
Got here late - last time Michael Moore went around on Fark - someone posted a site (or like 8) that had all the inaccuracies listed "Bowling". Yes he's been refuted, and yes, the refutes were based on fact and not political opinion. He's not a very good documentary film maker - he's a great dramatist, and perhaps we as a group are not ready for drama associated with 9/11. I'm not, and doubt I ever will be. I don't see anything funny about it, and I don't like people using it for political gain, Rep, Dem or whatever. Disney, however, should have know exactly who they were dealing with when they signed on for the project. Michael Moore is not subtle, never has been, and has never tried to couch his sympathies to sell a flick to anyone. How much more obvious do you need be than turning the Oscars into a personal political rant, although IMO he was just ahead of a current trend that is a repeat of what has gone on before.

So I hope he sues the fark out of Eisner. Michael Moore never was anything but himself and its tough shiat on Eisner thinking he could be anything but that.

Moore's agent Emanuel told the New York Times that Eisner asked him last spring to pull out of the deal with Miramax. Emanuel said Eisner expressed particular concern that it would endanger tax breaks Disney receives for its theme park, hotels and other ventures in Florida, where President Bush's brother, Jeb Bush, is governor.

No. Not quite. Bullshiat. It will definatley get him an unhapppy face from Jeb, who will then cheerfully schedule all big political whoop te doo's at Universal, which yes, will cost Eisner cash but he won't ever fark with the tax breaks. I farking hate reporters that dick off stupid factoids and don't research shiat. If Jeb farked with the mouse, if he could be somehow knocked semi-concious and actually sign something that COULD - it would fark a third of Orange counties work force over night, and he is damned aware of it. It would also mess with the Reedy Creek improvement district (the Disney Utitlity Nazi's) who are currently arse over heels trying to deal with flooding situations at Little Lake Bryan in the South part of the county, and a thousand other things that would ripple through the whole economy down here in Orlando. The only reason why that jackarse reporter even suggested this is that Jeb expressed a serious concern when it looked like Disney might get taken over by comcast. It's more than just a stupid theme park, it's a life support system for a big chunk of Florida the state might have to take over if another corporation got control of Disney.
 
2004-05-06 03:07:50 AM  
What successes did Clinton have for 8 years? Getting impeached? Doing jack shiat about Al Queda?
 
2004-05-06 03:14:30 AM  
I don't know if it made it into this thread yet, but I heard a rumor that Disney is currently tapping Mel Gibson for some CEO position over at their studios. Why? Because of THE PASSION, which Disney will also distribute. Couple that with the admission in the article that Disney is in the pocket of one Jeb Bush for tax write-offs, and that they are dropping Moore's anti-Bush project (which was also dropped by Mel Gibson's own studio, "ICON"), and you can begin to see a pattern of where Disney is headed: the Fox News for the under-13 set.

I would say it's a tragedy that a beloved American icon like Mickey Mouse had been bought and paid for as a political pawn, but, truth be told, Disney hasn't done anything worth note in the past decade anyway, except screw up a sweetheart deal with Pixar. Still, R.I.P. Mickey.

PS: Harvey Weinstein over at Miramax is still considering Moore's documentary, and Weinstein is a huge contributor to the Democratic Party. This isn't over by a long shot.
 
2004-05-06 03:49:52 AM  
Now, more then ever, I am in awe of the strength of Michael Moore that tries to fight for the rights of all of you, and still gets heckled by narrow-minded bigots.

Your weak minds say "Moore Sucks", "Moore is fat" and "Moore tells lies", without even realising that the issue is that a man is blocked a corporation to say what he has every right to say, even if you don't like it.

Some of you idiots are flushing yourself down the toilet smiling because W said it's good for you, and you won't be able to realise that until you are de-programmed or you realize you're farking drowning.

/Gonna love it when the movie hits #1 and Moore gives another Oscar speech.
 
2004-05-06 04:21:43 AM  
Moore's movie will do well money- and influence-wise.
People are already choking and sputtering. Comical!

MegaManNobody --

I read all that you posted. I can't be bothered to comment much. I am glad you're reading and thinking. Broadly speaking, your insights aren't bad. The saving grace with you (repeatedly) is a sortof grand, sweeping gesture... it's easier to make fun of than to replicate (compliment).

Nietzsche. I've looked it up dozens of times and I still can't spell it reliably. It seems you've been reading him for months now. Take a break or read some critiques and/or editorializing on him. I think you do, but;

He's too erudite, poetic, cryptic, allegorical, aphoristic, etc. I first tried reading him at 24. I am 33 now, still trying Nietzsche on occasion. My understanding is massively different now. I'm sure it will change more. He's objectionable and necessary, or not?

His style makes it difficult to tell when he started to go nuts. That's how you and I, young sir, will share a measure of greatness with ol' Friedrich! I sense I've already had more fun than he did, the poor bastard.
 
Displayed 50 of 468 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report