The lies of Michael Moore.

**reason** · July 8th, 2004, 05:50 PM

A documentary is a presentation of the facts as the documentarian sees them.

It's what Moore edited out that bothers me. What ended up on the editing room floor is the material necessary to make the Moore film a documentary.

**Piña** · July 8th, 2004, 06:22 PM

Originally posted by travelinman:
And you expect us to believe you would go to the movies and pay money to see George Bush's speech?

Right.

Money is fleeting. Time is finite. I spent time watching the jackass. Time that no amount of money will ever get back. But I did watch.

Besides, I don't know if you've noticed this but watching tv isn't free. All those tacky ads must be there for some reason or other. Oh yeah, it's how we pay for broadcast television.

**travelinman** · July 8th, 2004, 06:30 PM

Originally posted by Pi?a:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by travelinman:
And you expect us to believe you would go to the movies and pay money to see George Bush's speech?

Right.

Money is fleeting. Time is finite. I spent time watching the jackass. Time that no amount of money will ever get back. But I did watch.

Besides, I don't know if you've noticed this but watching tv isn't free. All those tacky ads must be there for some reason or other. Oh yeah, it's how we pay for broadcast television.<hr /></blockquote>Whatever

**Piña** · July 8th, 2004, 06:31 PM

Originally posted by reason:
I'm sorry, after spending a couple years debating those tools on the Michael Moore bulletin board (now Upsizethis.org), I made the decision never to give the man my money. So the decision to not patronize Michael Moore came long before Fahrenheit 911.

Reason

Just because you decided "long before" does not mitigate the fact that you are operating from a prejudiced base and are purposefully remaining ignorant on a subject that you seem to feel passionately about.

While you would probably hate the movie and would most likely see it through the context of your dislike for moore you still owe to yourself to see it for yourself.

I have no illusions that you are going to be won over by the power and the majesty (or the subliminals of bush killing kittens) of the work but you undercut your own credibility when you refuse to see something on the basis of not liking the author. Especially if you are going to take a public stance on the work.

**Piña** · July 8th, 2004, 06:33 PM

Originally posted by travelinman:
Whatever

What next, "speak to the hand?"

I thought you said you had a college education.

**travelinman** · July 8th, 2004, 06:36 PM

Originally posted by Pi?a:
[
I thought you said you had a college education.

I do, but wasting it on you is pointless.

[ July 08, 2004 03:37 PM: Message edited by: travelinman ]

**reason** · July 8th, 2004, 06:49 PM

Originally posted by Pi?a:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by travelinman:
And you expect us to believe you would go to the movies and pay money to see George Bush's speech?

Right.

Money is fleeting. Time is finite. I spent time watching the jackass. Time that no amount of money will ever get back. But I did watch.

Besides, I don't know if you've noticed this but watching tv isn't free. All those tacky ads must be there for some reason or other. Oh yeah, it's how we pay for broadcast television.<hr /></blockquote>I won't give George Bush a cent of my money, nor do I listen to his speeches. Regardless, I have a pretty good idea where he stands on the issues.

I won't waste my time or money on Bush. Nor will I waste my time or money on Moore.

**Piña** · July 8th, 2004, 07:01 PM

Originally posted by travelinman:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Pi?a:
[qb][
I thought you said you had a college education.

I do, but wasting it on you is pointless.
[QB]<hr /></blockquote>Oh, so you're saving it up. I've often suspected as much from the general lack of thought evident in the majority of your postings.

**Piña** · July 8th, 2004, 07:13 PM

Originally posted by reason:
I won't give George Bush a cent of my money, nor do I listen to his speeches. Regardless, I have a pretty good idea where he stands on the issues.

I won't waste my time or money on Bush. Nor will I waste my time or money on Moore.

reason

I really do understand where you're coming from. I only had to watch O'really once to know that he's a grandstanding fool and as for rush and his like well, I've listened more than once but it's an experience that I'm hesitant to repeat. Mostly I use other sources to keep up with thier antics but I prefer to listen to segments in context like al franken tends to present when debunking them. (He's actually one of the few who makes the extra effort to present more than just out-of-context sound bites.)

The only problem I have with your approach is that it's a form of willful ignorance. Again, I know that we cannot hope to keep up with current affairs without informational gatekeepers to help us process the immense volume of data but some things just are so socially significant that even if you loathe the one presenting the information, or even loathe the information itself, that it is incumbent on supporters and detractors alike to make the extra effort to be informed.

**gae** · July 8th, 2004, 07:31 PM

A documentary is a presentation of the facts as the documentarian sees them.

Seems like Merrian Webster disagrees with you, Tomas.

Main Entry: 1doc?u?men?ta?ry
Pronunciation: "d?-ky&-'men-t&-rE, -'men-trE
Function: adjective
1 : being or consisting of documents : contained or certified in writing <documentary evidence>
2 : of, relating to, or employing documentation in literature or art; broadly : FACTUAL, OBJECTIVE <a documentary film of the war>

Ah, WTH. When have you ever let reality intrude on your arguments?

Thread: The lies of Michael Moore.

Thread Tools

Display

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions