What Moore left out of F-911.

[CheesalaIsGood 0]

No, he said that Rush reached way more people than Moore does via his movies. True, but it hardly makes much of a difference when the film has earned the money that it has. The word is out and people are talking more about this movie than the Rush broadcasts of the last 2 months even though "he reaches more people" and for a longer period of time.

 

 

As far as going point by point. I could link something than you link something that is counter what mine was. Back and forth yadda yadda. So far nothing has convinced me otherwise as I find many of the righty counter-points to be just as suspect as they accuse the lefty media of being. However, I DID address the points made about me "being full of shit" by reminding everyone that so far the film has been out over a month with not a word uttered by Bush and his cronies. More importantly, no lawsuits so far! Nor will there be! Moores facts have stood up. He has come straight up with the sources he knew people would expect from him considering the right wing backlash they knew was coming (Except from Bush). Take it, leave it, spin it whatever. *I* thought it was good read.

[Guest MikeSC]

Well the film has been out for weeks now. Last I checked it was 2004.... Nope still no lawsuits claiming LIBEL! WHat about the slander????

You are aware that is abnormally difficult for famous people to sue for slander or libel, right? And you are aware it'd be political suicide for Bush to try, right?

What about the lies! If Moore has just made the whole thing up without a shread of evidence or truth than he would have already been sued up the ass by now.

How 'bout this --- I've seen more thoroughly researched JFK assassination theories?

Instead they have quiet letting the radio hosts, the FNC, etc do the talking for them.

And the Democrats have their networks and radio network to speak for them. Goodie.

For what? Do they think its just going to go away? The longer this goes unchallenged the more credibilty Moore aquires and the more guilty Bush and company look.

The Democrats, if they stick with him, are going to kill their credibility for eternity.

If they don't make a counter-point (facts of their own) other than just saying its "unmitigated bullshit!" over and over again then they have been exposed as the assholes they are. Maybe they can't.

Been done. Repeatedly.

I suppose 100 million bucks earned ISN'T reaching people. Funny how when one strikes a nerve and it's all BAN BAN BAN! Pussies.

"Triumph of the Will" did quite well. "Birth of a Nation" was quite the box office hit in its day.

 

Doesn't make them good movies.

No, he said that Rush reached way more people than Moore does via his movies.

Which is actually bullshit, since Rush doesn't get all of the mainstream attention that Moore receives.

The word is out and people are talking more about this movie than the Rush broadcasts of the last 2 months even though "he reaches more people" and for a longer period of time.

It's the whole "It's a movie" thing. When Moore had a weekly TV show, people couldn't ignore it quickly enough.

So far nothing has convinced me otherwise as I find many of the righty counter-points to be just as suspect as they accuse the lefty media of being.

Nothing will convince you otherwise. Not spending a ton of effort trying.

However, I DID address the points made about me "being full of shit" by reminding everyone that so far the film has been out over a month with not a word uttered by Bush and his cronies.

Hey, Clinton didn't bitch about the "Clinton Chronicles".

 

OMG, IT MUST BE TRUE! LOL! 2004!

More importantly, no lawsuits so far! Nor will there be!

Of course. You don't give an attention whore MORE attention.

Moores facts have stood up.

Even liberals don't agree.

He has come straight up with the sources he knew people would expect from him considering the right wing backlash they knew was coming (Except from Bush). Take it, leave it, spin it whatever. *I* thought it was good read.

*You* would.

-=Mike

...Read "Michael Moore is a Big Fat Stupid White Man". He hasn't sued them yet, so everything is obviously true...

[sfaJack 0]

No, he said that Rush reached way more people than Moore does via his movies. True, but it hardly makes much of a difference when the film has earned the money that it has. The word is out and people are talking more about this movie than the Rush broadcasts of the last 2 months even though "he reaches more people" and for a longer period of time.

Yeah, people are talking. The Bush-haters are saying, "See, Bush is the suckiest!" and the Bushies are saying, "See, Michael Moore is an idiot" while listing all the ways his film is wrong. People ARE talking, but it's only resulting in both sides digging their heels in further and deepening their resolve. I don't know of too many people whose view has instantly been changed because of F9/11.

 

So far nothing has convinced me otherwise as I find many of the righty counter-points to be just as suspect as they accuse the lefty media of being.

Which is exactly the point that's been made many times about why it's useless to bother with rebutting your "points." You don't WANT to believe anything other than what you already believe, so really, what is the point in trying to enlighten you?

 

However, I DID address the points made about me "being full of shit" by reminding everyone that so far the film has been out over a month with not a word uttered by Bush and his cronies. More importantly, no lawsuits so far! Nor will there be! Moores facts have stood up. He has come straight up with the sources he knew people would expect from him considering the right wing backlash they knew was coming (Except from Bush). Take it, leave it, spin it whatever.

You addressed nothing. The fact that Bush has said nothing is meaningless. What is the fucking point of the President of the United States wasting his time firing back at an overweight (OMG Mikey Moore Fat LOL2004~!) filmmaker who has too much time on his hands? Hell, if Bush DID respond to Moore, you'd probably jump all down his throat for taking his focus off of running the country.

 

And a lawsuit would be a waste of time. Besides that, what the hell would it prove, other than to say the President is a crybaby?

 

It's pretty rare that a day goes by without the President being burned in effigy somewhere, somehow. It goes with the job.

 

*I* thought it was good read.

That's because you're an idiot.

[Guest GreatOne]

Besides, shouldn't lawsuits be better left to the veep candidate?

 

BA-DA-BUM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Jobber of the Week 0]

...Read "Michael Moore is a Big Fat Stupid White Man". He hasn't sued them yet, so everything is obviously true...

No offense, but I expect about as unbiased a view of Moore from David T Hardy as I would expect Moore to give of Bush. I remember when he was simply that guy with the web site with this page that debunked shit in BFC. Except a lot of it was kind of obvious stuff, like how he spliced together different Heston speeches when even I, watching BFC for the first time at 2AM in the morning as a cure for insomnia, noticed the background changing. Who would be fooled by that? The blind, I guess, but anyone else?

[Justice 0]

...Read "Michael Moore is a Big Fat Stupid White Man". He hasn't sued them yet, so everything is obviously true...

No offense, but I expect about as unbiased a view of Moore from David T Hardy as I would expect Moore to give of Bush. I remember when he was simply that guy with the web site with this page that debunked shit in BFC. Except a lot of it was kind of obvious stuff, like how he spliced together different Heston speeches when even I, watching BFC for the first time at 2AM in the morning as a cure for insomnia, noticed the background changing. Who would be fooled by that? The blind, I guess, but anyone else?

I think that's the point Mike's making, Jobber... The fact that Michael Moore hasn't sued him OBVIOUSLY means he's telling the truth.

 

And on Heston: The bigger part is how he cut the speech up tons to make it seem a lot crueller than it was intended (That, and he didn't note the fact that the NRA did cancel everything outside of a luncheon because of the shootings).

[Guest PlatinumBoy]

I'm no lawyer, but isn't it awfully hard to sue Moore, since he isn't outright lying as much as showing the tip of the iceberg of some facts and then saying his opinion. Also I love how CheesalaIsGood makes blanket statements and the gets so flustered at others insulting him, like KKK in another of his threads.

 

Edited for Verne....... that was worded weird, I meant that KKK was insulting CheesalaIsGood by saying the same things Cheese was saying essentially and that Cheese was the one getting all flustered and bent out of shape, my original post could be taken the opposite way.

[Vern Gagne 0]

You don't know KKK very well.

[Guest MikeSC]

I think that's the point Mike's making, Jobber... The fact that Michael Moore hasn't sued him OBVIOUSLY means he's telling the truth.

Exactly. Since "Not being sued" is the new definition of truth --- well, total truth.

 

Though, for what it's worth, the Hardy book is far better researched, footnoted, sourced, etc. than Moore's work.

No offense, but I expect about as unbiased a view of Moore from David T Hardy as I would expect Moore to give of Bush. I remember when he was simply that guy with the web site with this page that debunked shit in BFC. Except a lot of it was kind of obvious stuff, like how he spliced together different Heston speeches when even I, watching BFC for the first time at 2AM in the morning as a cure for insomnia, noticed the background changing. Who would be fooled by that? The blind, I guess, but anyone else?

Um, JOTW, LOTS of people bought it. Hook, line, and sinker. They also bought the ending of his interview with Heston, which the book actually did a good job of showing could not have possibly happened as it was shown.

-=Mike

[Jobber of the Week 0]

I think that's the point Mike's making, Jobber... The fact that Michael Moore hasn't sued him OBVIOUSLY means he's telling the truth.

Touche. All I meant by the speech was that I found the editing painfully obvious. I made my own opinion on that during my first viewing of the movie totally uninformed that it would happen. If I can see that in a tired stupor, I think an attentive audience would, too.

[Justice 0]

I think that's the point Mike's making, Jobber... The fact that Michael Moore hasn't sued him OBVIOUSLY means he's telling the truth.

Touche. All I meant by the speech was that I found the editing painfully obvious. I made my own opinion on that during my first viewing of the movie totally uninformed that it would happen. If I can see that in a tired stupor, I think an attentive audience would, too.

I'm not talking about the added part. I'm actually referring to Moore's selective cutting of the speech. In the original speech, Heston gives an appology and states how they've basically cancelled the entire convention outside of a luncheon, and then goes on to defend the NRA from taking the blame for Columbine. In the movie, the cuts Moore makes make him come off as insensitive and callous rather than respectful and defending himself.

[Guest ArchoanJB]

actually you know 100 million in 4 weeks isn't all that impressive. When the average theatre price is 7-8 dollars, thats a little over 1 million people in a month. I'm sure Rush's radio show gets more than that in a week. So no, the movie making that much isn't all that influential.

[2GOLD 0]

actually you know 100 million in 4 weeks isn't all that impressive. When the average theatre price is 7-8 dollars, thats a little over 1 million people in a month. I'm sure Rush's radio show gets more than that in a week. So no, the movie making that much isn't all that influential.

 

Umm, some movies would kill to make 100 million in four weekends. I dislike Moore but don't dismiss the 100 million.

[Guest ArchoanJB]

I wasn't saying 100 million ins't a bad box office, but it's not reaching THAT many people, compared to some some radio hosts, etc.

[Guest Olympic Slam]

Judging F-9/11 on its box-office earnings is stupid because at least 85% of people that go to see it are already ANTI-BUSH. The movie does nothing more than comfort and reaffirm the political beliefs of those who saw it. Maybe the young college crowd came away a little bit more anti-Bush, but that's about it.

 

This is why I never really post about F-9/11; its a dead issue because it does nothing and achieves nothing. I gurantee outlets like talk radio (Rush, Hannity, Savage), popular shows like the O'Reilly Factor and the overall post 9/11 climate will have way more sway over the way people vote in November than Moore's 2 hour film will. Therefore the media's love affair with the movie, as usual, is misleading.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Judging F-9/11 on its box-office earnings is stupid because at least 85% of people that go to see it are already ANTI-BUSH.

I do believe it would be appropriate to say that judging the approval of F911's message on it's box office earnings is stupid because 85% of the people who saw it went because Disney tried to shut it down.

 

The movie didn't even register a blip in the general public's mind until Eisner made a stink about it.

[tommytomlin 0]

This is why I never really post about F-9/11; its a dead issue because it does nothing and achieves nothing. I gurantee outlets like talk radio (Rush, Hannity, Savage), popular shows like the O'Reilly Factor and the overall post 9/11 climate will have way more sway over the way people vote in November than Moore's 2 hour film will. Therefore the media's love affair with the movie, as usual, is misleading.

I'm pretty sure anyone who listens to Hannity, Savage, Rush and O'Reilly aren't going to be voting for Kerry come November anyway. They are just like Moore, they preach to the converted.

 

 

 

They also suck.

[Guest GreatOne]

Judging F-9/11 on its box-office earnings is stupid

Of course all the Moore fanboys preface their arguments FROM THE TOP by saying how great it was cause of how much money it made..............

 

It only has capacity for failure anyway. Not a good idea to make a movie squarely with the sole intent of VOTING BUSH OUT and then go around the country badmouthing the only party that has a chance of beating him (they ARE mostly morons but I don't need another one to tell me that).

[Guest Olympic Slam]

Judging F-9/11 on its box-office earnings is stupid because at least 85% of people that go to see it are already ANTI-BUSH.

I do believe it would be appropriate to say that judging the approval of F911's message on it's box office earnings is stupid because 85% of the people who saw it went because Disney tried to shut it down.

 

The movie didn't even register a blip in the general public's mind until Eisner made a stink about it.

Are you NUTS??? The movie won Cannes(?) in France and was released to the public like a month later. The movie is huge stuff because.......

- It won that film festival

- It stars Michael Moore who is fresh off an Oscar winning film!!!

- Its political and in an election year no less.

- The media is biased and is hyping it

 

You better buy your brain back from whomever you sold it to if you think people went to see this movie because they thought "gee golly, if those facists at Disney opted out of carrying this movie under their name, then it must be good" .

 

I'm pretty sure anyone who listens to Hannity, Savage, Rush and O'Reilly aren't going to be voting for Kerry come November anyway. They are just like Moore, they preach to the converted.

 

Yes they do preach to the converted, but many more people have been converted or are in the process of being converted because of those guys than Moore's film. They've had more time to do it and more outlets to do it. I can't tell you how many times I've listened to the above hosts and have heard callers comment on how they used to be liberal Democrats and have now changed their outlook because of listening to their shows.

 

Talk radio will change more minds of Democrats than F-9/11 and similiar efforts will convert Republicans.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Are you NUTS??? The movie won Cannes(?) in France and was released to the public like a month later.

The moviegoing public doesn't care about Cannes and the movies they like. This is why movies like Day After Tomorrow and Troy do well at the box office, and not the ones that win Cannes awards.

 

  The movie is huge stuff because.......

- It won that film festival

 

See above. The public doesn't watch Cannes arthouse stuff unless it's made a big issue by other merits.

 

- It stars Michael Moore who is fresh off an Oscar winning film!!!

For documentary, which is not exactly a booming interest among public moviegoers.

 

- Its political and in an election year no less.

This is a stronger arguement, but a ton of Americans don't vote and don't care no matter what happens.

 

- The media is biased and is hyping it

There you go. And the media wave started from the shockwaves created by the Disney thing. Sorry, but this movie wasn't on the minds of people who aren't politically active until it got in the press being presented as a near-taboo subject (Ooh! He's calling out Fearless Leader, that'll make headlines.) Such an aura of controversy can only be generated by mass America somehow. And having one of the largest media conglomorates in the world bury the film because they think it's too much of a hot potato will give you that kind of press.

 

I can't tell you how many times I've listened to the above hosts and have heard callers comment on how they used to be liberal Democrats and have now changed their outlook because of listening to their shows. 

What can you say? They're willing to let someone else make up their mind for them.

[Dangerous A 0]

Because of the hype of F/911 being a bash Bush movie, the left of the country is gonna come out in droves supporting it.

 

However, if a high profile, right wing guy like say Sean Hannity made a documentary bashing Kerry/supporting Bush, I'd say it would be equally successful because the right would support it in droves. And don't think a movie from the right isn't far behind in the next year or so.

 

Sad thing is I know guys like Moore and Hannity pander to the lowest common denominator of the public too lazy to research issues and just let these guys dominate their thinking. I attempt to listen to both sides and see the spin they put on issues. Then I try to wipe away all the bullshit slung on the issue to see what the heart of the matter is. I usually end up sad because both parties in the end will do little/nothing about something.

 

Here's to DA putting down Lil' Jon as a write in vote come November.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

You're like a poor, poor man's KKK; no one would confuse you two, though, because he actually happens to be funny some of the time. You're just sad and pathetic.

SOME of the time?

 

Commie.

 

Oh yeah, Mikey's fat...