Latest from Michael Moore

Remove all ads!

So, it appears that Michael Moore is a liar. Can't say I'm particularly surpised.

 

Yes, his AGENT was told. Michael Moore was not. He did not say his agent told him at that time. I love how the article says he admits that it was a publicity stunt, then nowhere in the article is that admission. Then it says his agent, NOT MICHAEL MOORE, was told. Not saying Michael Moore didn't know, just that that is one horribly biased article with a serious agenda. It would be like seeing an article saying "BUSH ADMITS HE WANTS TO TAKE OVER IRAQ" and then the article actually says Bush has an agenda in Iraq of which invovles creating a free society.

 

Oh come on, that's no excuse. An agent is supposed to be someone's righthand. That means that if someone informed the agent, he should be informing his boss over the phone THE SAME MINUTE. If the agent didn't do that, then Moore doesn't have very capable employees.

 

Yes, yes, I see it all so clearly now! Moore's agent definitely wouldn't tell him that Disney had no intentions of allowing Miramax to distribute his film, since clearly Moore has no need to known this minor detail.

If it happened as you suggested, I'm almost certain that the article would refer to him as his ex-agent rather than his agent.

 

Umm, I clearly said that I wasn't denying that he knew, just that the article plainly claims that he admits to it, then nowhere at all in the article does it back up the headline. Again, another example would be "WMD's found in Iraq" then the article talks about the WMD programs that could have been activated possibly. Not saying that he is innocent, I was critisizing the article. I prefer to wait until all the facts are known. Then I'll judge.

 

Well, here is what Moore is saying about it:

 

Poor Moore, he just can't catch a break.

Labor Dispute Clouds Opening of Cannes

Now his movie is probably going to get upstaged by this French labor dispute. Gosh I feel sorry for poor Michael.

 

Poor Bush, he just can't catch a break.

Looks like there won't be a protest after all.

Now his movie is probably going to get a chance to be seen by the world. Gosh I feel sorry for poor George.

 

Got news for you DR, the majority of the people in this country don't even know who Moore is, and I will be very surprised if his little piece of propaganda will hurt Bush at all. The only people who want to see Fahrenheit 411 are those who would vote for anyone as long as their last name isn't Bush.

It would be a lot more harmful to Moore if the film wasn't shown that it will be to Bush because it is.

 

Gosh...NEWS! Thanks, that changes everything. Most people in this country don't know who Dick Cheney is either. What's your point? Besides, I know a hell of a lot more conservatives and moderates who saw - and liked - "Bowling for Columbine" than I do your arch-enemies, the libs. It'll have a decent audience, don't worry. I never said it would throw the election.

Didn't really want to get into it with you here...I just felt like replying to your snide little comment with an equally snide little comment refuting it. I find it amusing that you never contribute to a thread about a Bush critic unless it's to add a link to some news story that either somehow discredits them or makes them look bad, and provide a snarky comment of your own to further that character assassination. You never talk about the validity of the issues they address, you just serve up justification to dismiss them. Shoot that messenger...he's comin' right for us!

I also love how you refer to a film that's not even out yet or that you've never seen as "propaganda," when you have no idea wether or not the subject matter is actually factual. I understand the definition of propaganda, but usually people refer to it in the context of exaggerations and fabrications intended to unfairly sway public political view. You incinuating this here as well is pretty obvious.

I would think, as adamantly pro "war on terror" and anti "muslim extremism" as you claim to be, you wouldn't have a problem with people pointing out the well-documented fact that our president has close personal and business ties with some of the biggest terrorist supporters on earth (which, from what I've read, will be detailed at great length in the film). I personally reserve judgement on the film till I see it, but his liberal grand-standing aside, I have yet to find an instance where Moore has outright lied about something in his films or books. Heavily biased, yes. Unfair at times, sure...but that doesn't make him a liar.

If nothing else, like most of Moore's material, it will be funny.

 

I can't help but feel a bit sorry for the Bush supporters. I mean here it is an election year and six months before the elections will take place their man has one of the lowest approval ratings in history for a sitting president(what is it...41% right now? Ouch!)! When Bush Jr. was announced as the replucican nominee in 2000 many if not most REPUBLICANS thought he was a moron but the dittoheads and FOX news personel worked overtime to unify eveeryone, publicly contesting the notion that Bush was not too bright every chance they got.
And they did ALL that work for what?? So their man could offer embarrasing faux pax after faux pax...grammatically challenged speeches so notorious that they spawned an entire sub-genre of political reporting(his infamous "Bushisms"). So he could lead America into the worst economic crisis we have experience in decades? So we could end up embroiled in multiple wars that have turned into exactly the type of Viet Nam-esque bogs which conservative pundits assured us could never happen.

Remember what the folks at FOX and MSNBC were saying when the statue of Saddam came down?

"All those journalists who criticised the war should be fired or at least offer an apology with their resignation!"

I heard the above uttered almost word for word by at least ten different reporters/commentators at FNN and MSNBC at that time.

"We will be done here and our boys will be back home in weeks!"

"When we actually DO become embroiled in a Viet Nam type quagemire then you can criticise but until then SHUT UP!"


Both of the above were uttered more times than I can count by neo-cons and the like.


I did not oppose the war for the record. In fact if they had treated it like a WAR and the reason they offered was control of oil I would probably have come out in support of the whole thing.
But I DID recognise that we had a moron adn his committe of personally selected morons in charge of the whole thing and I did not have confidence that blind luck could trump moronic action.

Michael Moore is, as someone said above biased, exaggerative and , AFAIAC flat out wrong on many issues but he is not a liar.

I am a HUGE fan of Al Franken. An unapologetic liberal(like myself) who not only doesn't lie but is not prone to the irrational "O.J. is innocent" type conspiracy nonsense that much of the left(including Moore) espouse.

 

Well, right now that seems to be about half the country. Kerry doesn't have to do very much at the moment (which he hasn't, by the way) except let Shrub continue to flounder about as his presidency falls into the abyss. At this point, even Nader may not be able to prevent Shrub's slide into political oblivion.

 

Wow DR, you are pretty good at doing exactly what you accuse me of, character assassination.

As far as me calling this propaganda, first, quit putting words in my mouth about what I may or may not be “incinuating”. I said it is propaganda, and based upon the definition of propaganda I stand by that:

From: Webster definition of propaganda

Now it appears that I am not the only one who feels that way, and that someone who actually saw the movie agrees with me:
Film review: Fahrenheit 9/11

As far as me not knowing what is in the movie, you are right, I don’t, and I won’t unless Moore decides to show his film for free, or give all his profits to the causes of rebuilding Iraq, or supporting the families of those who died in this war. If Moore feels so strongly about this issue, then he should give up his profits for the endeavor to prove his sincerity. Otherwise I will continue to dismiss this film as propaganda.

Personally, I am outraged that Moore is going to profit by taking advantage of this tragedy, and I will not provide money to him as a reward.

 

Darkwolf, the problem with this arguement is if he did this, he would be undermining his movie. How can one logically release a movie that largely opposes the war in Iraq, and then give the profits in support of the war in Iraq. It's the equivalent of Chandros mailing his paychecks to Bush. (Not that he actually does that, but he was the first very liberal SPer that sprang to my mind.)

 

I said rebuilding, not to the war effort. There are plenty of charities that are not affiliated with the US Government that are sending supplies to Iraq for Iraqis, and many others that will dedicate themselves to helping those Iraqis who suffered because of the war once the occupation ends. This in no manner shows support for the war. It is pretty cruel, and petty, not to support the Iraqi people in orderto punish the Bush administration for its actions. It is also dispicable to make a profit by exploiting their suffering.

 

I would just like to say that Fahrenheit 9/11 has got glowing reviews here in Sweden. That is not very unexpected though. I think that whether you think the movie is good or not depends on your general political stance. I do however think it is a mistake to reject something just because. If Ann Coulter made a movie I would be lining up outside just to see what she had to say. I would recommend anyone who is interested in politics and the general situation in the world to go and see Moore's movie. So what if hte dude makes a few more millions? He already has enough but no matter the case it is always useful and educational to see what the other side has to say.

 

Sorry joacqin, but I disagree with you. I won't go see Moore's movie because even the reviews I have read that praise it admit that there is nothing new in it. It is just basically a rehash of what is already known.

It wouldn't matter who made this movie, and for what purpose it was made (ie, if Ollie North made a documentary showing Iraqi's hugging soldiers, victims of Saddam’s torture chambers and chemical weapons, and soldiers pulling vulnerable Iraqi's off of bridges to prove the war is just), if it was being made for profit, I wouldn't go see it.

I have seen enough of people suffering in my life, watching a little more gratuitous misery is not going to change my views.