| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Arthen |
Posted - 06/22/2004 : 12:17:19 PM
http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723/
A great article on Michael Moore and Fahrenheit 911. |
| 99 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Macht |
Posted - 07/09/2004 : 12:56:57 PM
it is also very disturbing |
| tericee |
Posted - 07/09/2004 : 04:01:51 AM
I'll second that motion!!!!!!
Please Please Please take the picture off or make it smaller... |
| Silky The Pimp |
Posted - 07/08/2004 : 11:36:16 PM
Hey Fleabass, would you mind getting rid of the big baby eating picture? It's driving me nuts having to scroll to the right to see all the text. |
| Macht |
Posted - 07/08/2004 : 7:06:41 PM
quote:
Originally posted by tericee
quote:
Originally posted by Macht
Two: A bigger threat comes than to each other, like aliens, but I don't believe in aliens :P
And you call yourself a TIM fan?
in one of his interviews he said aliens were just a thing made up by hollywood
|
| Arthen |
Posted - 07/08/2004 : 3:53:39 PM
If aliens came along, it'd be more like the X-Files than Independence Day. Instead of the world joining together to get rid of them and everyone ends up happy, you'd have a secret cabal of people working with the aliens to ensure their own safety. |
| Zachmozach |
Posted - 07/08/2004 : 1:30:40 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Arthen
Peace will never happen. It's a bullshit abstract thought. You want peace on Earth? You'd have to kill every living thing.
Nah we are constantly evolving and I think someday humans will evolve past war. I think people will come to the realization that war solves nothing. I all too serious when I say that the only thing war is driving us to is extinction. Just to be the world power the US now is taking more drastic measures to ensure that the US remains dominant like the militarization of space. If we continue to build WMD's and assert military force unilaterally throughout the world we are seriously on our way to extinction. We already have the ability to blow the world up. It's only a matter of time. I think peace is a possibility, but we'll all probably destroy oursleves because no one thinks peace is possible so we'll just destroy each other. |
| tericee |
Posted - 07/08/2004 : 12:43:58 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Macht
Two: A bigger threat comes than to each other, like aliens, but I don't believe in aliens :P
And you call yourself a TIM fan? |
| Macht |
Posted - 07/08/2004 : 12:39:55 PM
There are only three ways I see there can be peace.
One: A domniant military power to control everyone. To keep everyone opressed.
Two: A bigger threat comes than to each other, like aliens, but I don't believe in aliens :P
Three: everone becomse dead |
| Arthen |
Posted - 07/08/2004 : 03:45:21 AM
I'd like to believe that if some great disaster, whether natural or man made, occured, life would end up being like The Road Warrior and Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome. You know, with gangs of mohawked cretins, packs of kids in loincloths, and Tina Turner running around with huge hair. One can only dream. |
| dan p. |
Posted - 07/08/2004 : 01:28:05 AM
hahahaha. |
| Arthen |
Posted - 07/08/2004 : 12:09:58 AM
I saw that one coming Dan. |
| dan p. |
Posted - 07/07/2004 : 3:15:20 PM
suddenly i'm a proponent of world peace. |
| Arthen |
Posted - 07/07/2004 : 2:20:56 PM
Peace will never happen. It's a bullshit abstract thought. You want peace on Earth? You'd have to kill every living thing. |
| Zachmozach |
Posted - 07/07/2004 : 1:17:49 PM
quote:
Originally posted by tericee
Never? I haven't given this much thought, but I think there must be one or two... What about these wars, which (I think) have resulted in peace?
- Revolutionary War (US & UK are allies today)
- U.S. Civil War (there are 50 states!)
- Mexican-American War (NAFTA is alive and well)
No the war didn't bring peace. War brings what it brings and that is death and mass murder. However after seeing this happen enough and one side getting the worst of it they usually come to some sort of agreement to not fight. As far as the revoloutionary war that wasn't our last war with britian. We were right back at it like 25 years later. To me it's like this. If I'm fueding with a group of 25 and I kill almost all of them tell they give up and then we become allies it didn't really bring peace. Peace will never involve killing people. The problem is with war leading to peace is that as soon as the fighting is over and you have peace you justify the fighting and the killing. So as soon as that is justified it will be justified again and it says to the victor that it's ok to war and fight and kill. So it never idealy will bring peace. Maybe with one nation or two but not to the world. I think I get what you're saying and all about how we are at peace with nations we've warred with including out own. My thoughts are that things are the way they are with these nations in spite of war not because of it. |
| tericee |
Posted - 07/07/2004 : 06:56:02 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Arthen
I don't disagree that Bush is lying, but lying to get a liar out of office, is like fighting and having wars to get to peace. It doesn't work.
Never? I haven't given this much thought, but I think there must be one or two... What about these wars, which (I think) have resulted in peace?
- Revolutionary War (US & UK are allies today)
- U.S. Civil War (there are 50 states!)
- Mexican-American War (NAFTA is alive and well)
|
| Arthen |
Posted - 07/07/2004 : 04:18:27 AM
I will try to get to all of the articles.
Nothing that has been discussed will have an effect upon how I vote, because I plan on abstaining. |
| PJK |
Posted - 07/06/2004 : 11:47:23 PM
Here are some of the many sites with valid information from many different sources. Probably all I will hear is these aren't good enough blah blah blah to which I say, thats ok, its alright to have a difference of opinion. That is what makes life interesting. I just happen to be one Republican who is voting for Kerry because I feel he is more likely to do a better job than then Bush is. OK I admit it, I loath Bush, can't stand him or his VP etc. Thats all I have to say, that and I am going to volunteer to help the Democratic Party this election, because I feel that strongly that Bush MUST NOT be re-elected. I don't want to take a chance in things going the way they did the last time. It is time to step up to the plate, for freedoms sake.
http://www.inthesetimes.com/issue/25/25/feature3.shtml
http://www.tenc.net/news/bushladen.htm
http://www.americanfreepress.net/10_07_01/Bush___Bin_Laden_-_George_W__B/bush___bin_laden_-_george_w__b.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/events/newsnight/1645527.stm
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&theme=saudi
http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/bin_laden_ties.html
http://www.judicialwatch.org/1685.shtml
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?011112fa_FACT3
http://www.texasobserver.org/showArticle.asp?ArticleID=480
|
| therippa |
Posted - 07/06/2004 : 1:46:49 PM
A good breakdown and discussion thread without the political nihilism of this one |
| Arthen |
Posted - 07/06/2004 : 12:50:13 PM
I don't disagree that Bush is lying, but lying to get a liar out of office, is like fighting and having wars to get to peace. It doesn't work.
Which ones did you research? I'd like to see the info on the other side of the matter. That's one of the biggest problems I had with Bowling for Columbine, when you get all of this information talking about all the edits and obvious lies, and Michael Moore never truly refutes all of the claims.
I don't understand your question about believing the interviews. Do you mean the transcripts?
I have yet to see the film, but I'm trying to work on that. |
| Macht |
Posted - 07/06/2004 : 11:58:36 AM
Politics is a bunch of lies on either side. It's just a corrupt program for gain of money for either side. Every party has corruption, every person has a little 'evil (if you will) in them.
I'm too disgusted with government and politics that I've decided to really not care and try to enjoy life with my friends |
| PJK |
Posted - 07/06/2004 : 06:39:13 AM
Did any of you SEE the movie or are you just good at coming up with interviews? What is truth and why do you believe these interviews and news but not the film? I am not saying it wasn't one sided, of course it was, the purpose is to get Bush out of office, no one was hiding that fact, but I beg to differ with the interviewers that it was full of lies, I researched some of them, and Bush is the one who is lying. |
| Arthen |
Posted - 07/06/2004 : 03:34:26 AM
I like to think of Moore's films as games or scavenger hunts, where I watch and try to recognize all the chopped up clips and carefully worded phrases and sentences. It'd be fun if it weren't for the fact that people take it as truth. |
| Macht |
Posted - 07/05/2004 : 10:40:49 PM
bah you beat me to it :P
I knew i was going to post that, I just forgot :P |
| TurnItToLove |
Posted - 07/05/2004 : 10:35:25 PM
http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm
this is interesting as well |
| PJK |
Posted - 07/05/2004 : 9:06:19 PM
Saw it today, so glad I did too! All I can say is that if I ever saw Bush in person it would take all the self control I could muster not to spit on this man! Of course I didn't like him before the movie and after seeing it, I just want to smack him one!
As for my vote, he wasn't getting it before I saw the movie so nothing really changed there. |
| PJK |
Posted - 07/04/2004 : 10:56:36 AM
HERE'S ANOTHER INTERVIEW WITH MICHAEL.
http://www.ew.com/ew/report/0,6115,658817-4-6_1||525488|1_,00.html
|
| dan p. |
Posted - 07/01/2004 : 11:09:23 AM
then stop bitching about bush and start bitching about his administration, if they're the ones behind whatever conspiracy you've convinced yourself of. or better yet, stop complaining entirely. it's really tired and not in the least bit interesting. |
| therippa |
Posted - 07/01/2004 : 05:08:13 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Arthen
One more thing I was kind of wondering about...
Most people who are adamently against Bush, claim he is this bumbling idiot of a president. But then those same people turn around and claim he is capable of orchaestrating a vast conspiracy/plan to deceive the world and invade a country.
So, which is it? Stupid fool or brilliant villian mastermind?
Well, I don't think it's as much as people believe he in charge of the conspiracy, but more that he is the shill for his administration.
|
| Arthen |
Posted - 07/01/2004 : 04:17:04 AM
One more thing I was kind of wondering about...
Most people who are adamently against Bush, claim he is this bumbling idiot of a president. But then those same people turn around and claim he is capable of orchaestrating a vast conspiracy/plan to deceive the world and invade a country.
So, which is it? Stupid fool or brilliant villian mastermind? |
| dan p. |
Posted - 06/29/2004 : 7:47:14 PM
no, YOU'RE unfair to hobbits.
actually, i'm convinced tolken wrote "in a hole in the ground there lived peter jackson a hobbit." |
| tericee |
Posted - 06/29/2004 : 3:38:16 PM
That's unfair to hobbits.
Peter Jackson looks like a hobbit; Michael Moore looks nothing like Peter Jackson. Therefore, Michael Moore does not look like a hobbit. |
| dan p. |
Posted - 06/29/2004 : 3:11:44 PM
he looks like a hobbit. |
| Arthen |
Posted - 06/29/2004 : 12:38:25 PM
Holy Cow! He is Jimmy from South Park! |
| Silky The Pimp |
Posted - 06/29/2004 : 09:00:37 AM
If he were really so righteous, he'd be donating all the procedes from his movies to putting the "right" person in office... or to the families of dead from columbine etc. But he's a capitalist, just like everyone else, and he makes movies that will put him in the spotlight and stir up controversy so that people will go see them and put dollars in his pocket... hey, it worked for Mel Gibson.
I've also heard of a new film called "Michael Moore Hates America" that basically aims to explore the worlds of bullshit that he puts into his films. There's a preview of it floating around the internet... it's actually somewhat funny how this guy tries to get an interview with Michael Moore but just gets denied time after time.
On a side note, does anyone else think he looks like a fatter, more bearded version of Jimmy, the joke telling cripple, from South Park? |
| Arthen |
Posted - 06/29/2004 : 02:25:24 AM
Dan, you have levels of bitterness that I only dream of achieving. |
| dan p. |
Posted - 06/28/2004 : 2:50:07 PM
not likely. he acts like he does because that's what makes high school rebels skip math class to go see his movie, along with the desire to hear someone who's supposedly more well informed and smarter say the same things they say. that's where he makes money. that's his target audience. |
| Arthen |
Posted - 06/28/2004 : 04:33:39 AM
My respect for Michael Moore would sky rocket if he dropped the whole bullshit act about trying to be the "savior of the world" by bringing "truth" to the masses. If he just said: "I'm just trying to make entertainment and money," he'd have more credibility. |
| tericee |
Posted - 06/28/2004 : 04:28:02 AM
quote:
Originally posted by j
This New Yorker article is pretty spot-on:
http://www.newyorker.com/critics/cinema/?040628crci_cinema
I thought it was pretty good. The reviewer said it was a "visciously funny" film, but also reminded us that the movie is entertainment rather than TRUTH:
"But the great documentary filmmakers at least make an attempt, however inadequate, compromised, or hopeless, to arrive at a many-sided understanding of some complex situation. Michael Moore is not that kind of filmmaker, nor does he want to be. He calls himself a satirist, but he’s less a satirist than a polemicist, a practitioner of mocking political burlesque: he doesn’t discover many new things but punches up what he already knows or suspects; he doesn’t challenge or persuade an audience but tickles or irritates it." |
| Arthen |
Posted - 06/27/2004 : 06:11:27 AM
I, too, think John McCain would make a far better president than both Bush and Kerry. I like his record the best and it could just be his image, but I think he has (or he at least seems to) have a lot of intergrity and honor. |
| j |
Posted - 06/26/2004 : 5:43:41 PM
This New Yorker article is pretty spot-on:
http://www.newyorker.com/critics/cinema/?040628crci_cinema
it ends as follows:
"Michael Moore has become a sensational entertainer of the already converted, but his enduring problem as a political artist is that he has never known how to change anyone’s politics." |
| therippa |
Posted - 06/26/2004 : 5:19:55 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Arthen
Oh, and about a comment you made earlier about "time to stop towing the party line", referring to the Republican party. Why would it be better to tow the democratic line?
I was referring to the republican party, but the same should go for the democratic too. A lot of the times the person who is representing your party may not be representing your beliefs.
Here is an example: My roommate's income is at the very bottom of the middle class, he could be considered "poor" in the part of the country we live in. He recently got laid off. He is a Muslim. He is voting for Bush because of "party lines", and won't bend on it. Bush's vision of the future is least concerned with the well-being of people like him. I ask him what makes a republican, he says conservatism. Does spending hundreds of billions of dollars on a pointless war ,taking us from the larget surplus to the largest defecit sound "conservative"?
Another example: I am a registered democrat. If John McCain was running against Kerry, I would vote for McCain. I think he would makea better president.
The hot ticket would have been Kerry/McCain, and I think McCain made a bad decision shooting that down.
|
| Arthen |
Posted - 06/26/2004 : 2:26:47 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Therippa
You really haven't sexplained what you have against this movie (or is it just the concept of it?). You really haven't had much more of a rebuttal to anything anyone's said except "No you don't" or "That's not true". I'm going to assume you support Bush, even though you haven't said it yet.
The orignally article that I posted(http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723/), which was the original point of this thread, has a plethora of things that I am concerned about in the movie. As a whole I have never been impressed with Michael Moore, except I found his original work: "Roger and Me" to be a rather promising film.
I can't say that I have seen this film, but I do have plans to. But knowing Moore's background and style, especially from his books and "Bowling for Columbine", I have (what I would consider) a pretty solid idea of the things he'll be doing in the film. I did a lot of research on "Bowling for Columbine", actually giving a speech on the problems in it with his blatantly distorting facts, events, interviews, and in cases making up figures. Is there a list of sources provided at the end of the film, that I could go out and check out for myself?
Also the fact that Michael Moore had footage of prisoner abuse before everyone else, and did nothing. I don't care what excuse he gave for not exposing it, I think that is complete bullshit. If you ever uncover something that wrong, and I believe those events are extremely wrong, you have a moral responsibility to try to stop it or to make people aware of it.
And as for my supposed supporting Bush, I can't say that I do. But then I can't think of a politician that I support. I can't support any of them because they are all involved in the same corrupted system. It used to be you could have a Mr. Smith (Jimmy Stewart) type of person who would go in and try to change things for the better. But you don't get that anymore. As for presidential elections I believe it comes down to the old pick the lesser of two evils, but at the end of the day they are both evil.
The qualities of a president that I look for have long since fallen by the wayside.
Oh, and about a comment you made earlier about "time to stop towing the party line", referring to the Republican party. Why would it be better to tow the democratic line? |
| Macht |
Posted - 06/26/2004 : 07:53:51 AM
quote:
Originally posted by therippa
[br
This movie is about partiotism, free speech, and all that good stuff. Hell, even the FOX critic agrees with that. It seems people who DON'T want you to see it are the people who are afraid it will change your mind about Bush.
Yes, but fox is stupid :P
I'm not really going to judge the movie prematurely, but I just know I'm going to hate the movie becuase I dislike Moore's points/views, he has some funny stuff though :P |
| therippa |
Posted - 06/26/2004 : 04:18:41 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Arthen
Critics liking a movie doesn't make the material in the film accurate or true.
I just got back from the movie. Most powerful thing I've ever seen on the screen. I went in with an unbiased view to let the story do it's work. It's not even necessarily an anti-bush movie, it's more about how the entire administration is fucked up. He doesn't state wild facts in the movie like republicans feasting on babies, he says things that can be proved, and does so either with footage or documents.
Go see it with an open mind. I'm not suggesting you let Moore tell you how to vote. I'm suggesting you do yourself the justice of getting all the evidence before you make up your mind.
I'll bet the movie surprises you.
The information that gets to us is very censored and purposed.
It's never bad to get more information. And be very leery of people that try to get you to NOT see something or read something. They are the problem, not Moore.
I'm trying to keep the flames low here, but...
You really haven't explained what you have against this movie (or is it just the concept of it?). You really haven't had much more of a rebuttal to anything anyone's said except "No you don't" or "That's not true". I'm going to assume you support Bush, even though you haven't said it yet.
This movie is about partiotism, free speech, and all that good stuff. Hell, even the FOX critic agrees with that. It seems people who DON'T want you to see it are the people who are afraid it will change your mind about Bush. |
| Arthen |
Posted - 06/26/2004 : 03:17:44 AM
I don't believe so. |
| Fleabass76 |
Posted - 06/26/2004 : 03:14:02 AM
quote:
As sad as it is, the presidency doesn't mean anything anymore.
It does when the same party has the presidency and the congress.. |
| Arthen |
Posted - 06/26/2004 : 03:07:01 AM
Critics liking a movie doesn't make the material in the film accurate or true.
And I really hate to break it to you, but the founding fathers were completely elitist and for the most part didn't want things for the common man. I also don't think it's fair to judge someone because they don't speak well.
One doesn't "have" to vote.
None of this presidential behavior is new. It's just that in today's society it is easier to pick out. Like I have said before, the last honest and decent president I can think of, was Theodore Roosevelt, and it's been a hundred years since he was re-elected.
I honestly believe %80 of the things that have happened in the past four years, would have happened if Al Gore had been elected president. Because the president means dick (no pun intended). As sad as it is, the presidency doesn't mean anything anymore. |
| dan p. |
Posted - 06/25/2004 : 7:53:50 PM
um. . .i don't have to vote. |
| therippa |
Posted - 06/25/2004 : 6:49:54 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Arthen
It got a good review from a website, it must be a great film!
I assume this is in regards to my post of the rotten tomatoes link. So far 91 out of 110 critics are loving it.
quote:
Originally posted by dan p.
who said you had to take one?
Well, you have to vote for somebody! I'm in California and can vote on a third-party candidate (and I may) and not have to worry about Bush winning the electoral votes, but to people living in the swing states, it is important to vote Kerry if you don't like Bush. Hell, when Moore worked for Nader he suggested that a few days before the election, Nader tell his followers in the swing states "your vote here matters too much, if you want to support me support Gore". Afterall, they aren't trying to win the race, they are just trying to get the 10% needed for government money to spend next time.
That said, it is time we vote Bush out. Step away from "towing the party line" and look at the lies, mistakes and general idiocy of the Bush administration. Please. I implore you.
I feel the founding fathers of our country are turning over in their graves at the sorry mess that the past few Presidential administrations have turned our once great country into. Seriously. And Bush is taking our country further away from greatness.
Don't get me wrong, I am a patriot and love this country. It is still the best place to live on the planet. But overall I think we, as a country, have lost sight of what makes this country great, and we are not as great as we once were.
Freedom? Guatanimo Bay is a true shame. What happened to the Bill of Rights? Patriot act? Does nobody see the irony of that name?
High moral ground over all? Starting a war based on at best a rush to judgement and making 'facts' fit Bush's needs. More likely, outright lies. The president doesn't care enough about the fiasco in Iraq to even bother to learn how to say Abu Ghraib, "Abu gharif"?? WTF. He is honestly not smart enough to run our country. Read about the founding fathers, these guys were articulate, well educated, and had the best interests of the government as a whole as their greatest and most important goal. Not further lining the pockets of themselves and their corporate weasel CEO friends. The founding fathers, were interested in keeping the govenment transparent to avoid corruption. Cheney hides behind 'executive privilege' to keep his name separated from the energy corporations that pillage our goverment's and personal savings. Are people blind?
Separation of church and state? "Faith based" government sponsored charity. Ban on stem cell research. Push to outlaw homsexual marraige at the Constitutional level. Where is the outrage?
It is seriously a sad time in our nation's history. It is your patriotic duty to vote Bush out of office. PLEASE. Wake up, smell the coffee, this guy is ruining our country.
|
| Arthen |
Posted - 06/25/2004 : 5:22:20 PM
It got a good review from a website, it must be a great film! |
| KevinLesko |
Posted - 06/25/2004 : 3:30:19 PM
I can't wait to see the movie, I almost went to a midnight showing in Los Angeles, but I had to ge back home earlier then that would have allowed. I'll be seeing it this weekend though. |
| therippa |
Posted - 06/25/2004 : 1:19:54 PM
Wow, look at all these fresh tomatoes |
| rubylith |
Posted - 06/24/2004 : 3:51:34 PM
mmmm |
| La Mer De Noms |
Posted - 06/24/2004 : 2:39:10 PM
womb |
| dan p. |
Posted - 06/24/2004 : 1:51:56 PM
who said you had to take one? |
| therippa |
Posted - 06/24/2004 : 1:29:53 PM
quote:
Originally posted by rubylith
but seriously...
what is an idea the "left" as a whole has that is anyway near as silly as most of the rights ideas.
Personally I consider myself a libertariam...but the idea "who cares about the poor(who by the way are stuck being poor and cant help it) shouldn't get any of "my" money(who really needs to make more then 5 million a year) is just plain cruel.
but then again I think every individual has their own opinion and that everyone feels the need to push it on everyone...
the fact is everyone involved in our government is corrupt. Right, Left, middle...its very fucked up.
I just think that if we have no stupid wars (that i would be drafted to), free healthcare, free college, no more delpleted uranium, and move back to bi-latteral trade, this economy would sour and crim rates would drop.
fuck bush, fuck kerry, fuck everyone...
its time we all govern ourselves..
A quote I found on another forum...
All politicians are lying, self-serving, cynical crooks. That said, liberal and moderate politicians tend to run toward sexual dalliances and white collar domestic crime, while conservative politicians tend toward global schemes to rob the poor and pointless, bloody military adventures. I'll take horny and greedy over cynical and murderous any day of the week. |
| Arthen |
Posted - 06/24/2004 : 1:06:23 PM
Humans taste of chicken! Eddie Izzard wouldn't lie to me! |
| tericee |
Posted - 06/24/2004 : 12:37:09 PM
quote:
Originally posted by therippa
I think the reviewer is taking a right-side view to the movie.
I'm not sure that's the case... The same guy who wrote that review wrote the following just four months ago:
"Dennis Kucinich is the sort of guy who we need in politics. He thinks long-term, and he doesn't think that in the short or long term it pays to trade principles for compromises. That's the attitude one wants in a president, of any party. This, however, is probably not the year for a man who basically believes in the downsizing of the United States."
And he wrote this about Reagan:
"The fox, as has been pointed out by more than one philosopher, knows many small things, whereas the hedgehog knows one big thing. Ronald Reagan was neither a fox nor a hedgehog. He was as dumb as a stump. He could have had anyone in the world to dinner, any night of the week, but took most of his meals on a White House TV tray. He had no friends, only cronies. His children didn't like him all that much. He met his second wife—the one that you remember—because she needed to get off a Hollywood blacklist and he was the man to see. Year in and year out in Washington, I could not believe that such a man had even been a poor governor of California in a bad year, let alone that such a smart country would put up with such an obvious phony and loon."
I think dissing Reagan can get you excommunicated from the Republican Party  |
| Saint Jude |
Posted - 06/24/2004 : 12:19:31 PM
mmm, babies taste of chicken. |
| therippa |
Posted - 06/24/2004 : 11:51:21 AM
Inspired by Fleabass...I'm going to start using this on forums...
 |
| rubylith |
Posted - 06/24/2004 : 11:34:42 AM
pet peeve: people who don't like side scrolling...
im just kidding...
large photos = large festering mass on brain |
| tericee |
Posted - 06/24/2004 : 11:28:24 AM
Pet peeve: people who post photos (entertaining and/or nice photos, but still) that are SO BIG that I have to scroll left and right to read the text in the thread.
AGH! |
| rubylith |
Posted - 06/24/2004 : 09:50:13 AM
which bonesman will you vote for? |
| Arthen |
Posted - 06/24/2004 : 03:23:31 AM
That's one fine looking baby eater. |
| dan p. |
Posted - 06/23/2004 : 7:26:39 PM
ah. and now i understand. |
| Fleabass76 |
Posted - 06/23/2004 : 6:12:02 PM
quote:
Originally posted by dan p.
i never understood why anyone would vote for a third party. you know their not going to win. it's like picking 11 out of the numbers 1-10. some people call it a "protest vote" as if it actually accomplishes anything. if you really don't like either one of the two candidates, just don't vote. it amounts to the same thing.
Well, the amount of votes a third party candidate does determine how much funding the party gets in the next election, which is a step towards equality, but its going to take alot of people getting fed up with the two party system to get there at the presidential level. It's already happened at lower levels like the Governor's race, e.g. Ventura. |
| dan p. |
Posted - 06/23/2004 : 6:00:06 PM
i never understood why anyone would vote for a third party. you know their not going to win. it's like picking 11 out of the numbers 1-10. some people call it a "protest vote" as if it actually accomplishes anything. if you really don't like either one of the two candidates, just don't vote. it amounts to the same thing. |
| Macht |
Posted - 06/23/2004 : 5:40:31 PM
damn... im voting green party now... |
| Fleabass76 |
Posted - 06/23/2004 : 5:36:54 PM
Libertarian is a buzz-word. Most people claim to be one without even checking what it actually stands for, and when it comes time to vote, they'll vote dem or rep.
But they shouldn't vote retublican because they EAT BABIES, it is true, they have this secret hospital under the republican national committee headquarters where labotomized women are impregnated and the fetus is eaten as soon as it is surgically removed from the wome(sp?)!!!
A Republican after a feast of BABY!!
Then there's the demofats who are trying to TAKE OUR GUNS away because they are in a secret negotiation with the MOLE PEOPLE!! Word has it that they've signed a deal to remove our guns so the mole people can take over the surface, using us for slave labor and eating the elderly for sustinance. In return they get to legalize weed.
A Mole People scientist devising a way to convert our life force into pure energy!!!  |
| dan p. |
Posted - 06/23/2004 : 11:56:12 AM
to govern yourself requires the ability to be honest with others and more importantly, yourself. there aren't too many people who meet that criteria. |
| Macht |
Posted - 06/23/2004 : 11:39:07 AM
[quote
quote:
Originally posted by dan p.
it's time to govern ourselves? not a bad thought. unfortunately, we're not ready for it. plus you can't forget about all the chaotic neutrals out there. never know what those fuckers will do next.
lol reminds of that episode of Futurama, where DOOP has their new headquarters and Zapp was saying, you never know wheere those filthy neutrals lie.
Anyways you're right. There would be too much demand for this and that and people (as a whole) could probably never get along together becuase they let their bias on their opinions/knowledge affect how they see a person. If people could cast away their political (and possibly religious) view then I believe peace could be achieved |
| rubylith |
Posted - 06/23/2004 : 10:16:53 AM
old people shouldn't be allow to drive a car unless it is crashing into the whitehouse. |
| tericee |
Posted - 06/23/2004 : 08:43:46 AM
quote:
Originally posted by dan p.
yeah. i've noticed a lot of people, espeically on internet and message boards call themselves "liberatarians." seems like that's the new thing. not as tired as democrat or republican. i don't know much about them, though, so i can't as i don't like it.
it's time to govern ourselves? not a bad thought. unfortunately, we're not ready for it. plus you can't forget about all the chaotic neutrals out there. never know what those fuckers will do next.
If you're interested in learning more, here's one place you can start
http://www.self-gov.org/ |
| tericee |
Posted - 06/23/2004 : 08:42:35 AM
quote:
Originally posted by dan p.
quote:
Originally posted by victorwootenfan
It's small wonder that conservatives hate him, if they listen to all that propaganda bull shit all day, it's fucking hitler-esque shit.
dude. michael moore's work is propaganda, too. it's no better. and i don't seem to notice any resemblence to hitler. as far as i know, we aren't advocating slaying jews, gypsies, gays and elderly by the millions, nor is the propaganda all pervasive, as it was under hitler's rule.
i find comparisons to hitler tend to come from 15 year olds who can't win an argument and have to take it to the extreme. i hate how everytime some liberal takes any conservative person or idea and immediately equates with the nazis. conservatives do the same thing. according to them, the entire left consists of rabid socialists and communists. get this: there's middle ground. not everything that opposes your ideas are at the extreme opposite end of the spectrum. give it up already. no one is impressed or shocked by your comparision of modern day political figures to brutal totalitarian rulers. it doesn't make a lick of sense. unless you've lived in a place like nazi germany, or made a study of it, you really don't have a place to compare it to anything.
Well said, Dan. |
| Arthen |
Posted - 06/23/2004 : 04:30:01 AM
If you go against liberalism* you must surely be a fascist who is trying to opress people. Or you must be ignorant! Why else would you go against liberalism*?
*In the above conservatism can be exchanged for liberalism |
| dan p. |
Posted - 06/22/2004 : 11:29:47 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Macht
lol
go to a bar
i don't drink.
hahaha. "against liberalism." like it's a fucking crime or something. |
| Arthen |
Posted - 06/22/2004 : 10:24:20 PM
No offense to you Pam, I'm sure you drive fine. And some older people do. My Grandma's pushing 85 and she drive pretty well.
People defend their own side's propaganda as fact or as a documentary, then go out and bash the other side for their propaganda. It's fucking stupid.
Oh, and in response to the whole: "Protesting a hypothetical Michael Moore documentary goes against liberalism". You have people on the liberal side of things that bitch and moan and fight and complain as much as people do on the conservative side. |
| Macht |
Posted - 06/22/2004 : 9:39:00 PM
lol
go to a bar |
| dan p. |
Posted - 06/22/2004 : 9:08:10 PM
well they aren't real hippies. they just have image problems, and they chose the new hippy image. everything it comes with. the factory tie dyed shirts, patchwork pants, hemp anything, phish, the whole thing. basically they look like really earthy people, but they're pretty rich.
i need some new friends. |
| Macht |
Posted - 06/22/2004 : 8:23:30 PM
my brother is a hippy :P
He tends to make our discussions peaceful though, and I respect him too much to get angrya t him |
| dan p. |
Posted - 06/22/2004 : 8:20:40 PM
i'll watch it, too, even though i know talking about it to my hippy friends will probably just make my blood boil. |
| Macht |
Posted - 06/22/2004 : 8:18:12 PM
people hate moore for their different reasons. Taking someones hatred toward someone due to 'propaganda' and then bringing it to Hitler is total crap.
Dan has it right right there.
I dislike Moore not becuase I want to be like the propaganda
But I saw his last movie, dind't like, dislike him.
I'll probab;y end up seeing this one though |
| dan p. |
Posted - 06/22/2004 : 8:16:21 PM
quote:
Originally posted by victorwootenfan
It's small wonder that conservatives hate him, if they listen to all that propaganda bull shit all day, it's fucking hitler-esque shit.
dude. michael moore's work is propaganda, too. it's no better. and i don't seem to notice any resemblence to hitler. as far as i know, we aren't advocating slaying jews, gypsies, gays and elderly by the millions, nor is the propaganda all pervasive, as it was under hitler's rule.
i find comparisons to hitler tend to come from 15 year olds who can't win an argument and have to take it to the extreme. i hate how everytime some liberal takes any conservative person or idea and immediately equates with the nazis. conservatives do the same thing. according to them, the entire left consists of rabid socialists and communists. get this: there's middle ground. not everything that opposes your ideas are at the extreme opposite end of the spectrum. give it up already. no one is impressed or shocked by your comparision of modern day political figures to brutal totalitarian rulers. it doesn't make a lick of sense. unless you've lived in a place like nazi germany, or made a study of it, you really don't have a place to compare it to anything.
haha. yes pjk, that's original. don't worry, i'm not offended in the least by your surprise at agreeing with me nor by the fact that you usually don't. that would be absurd.
|
| Macht |
Posted - 06/22/2004 : 7:20:02 PM
quote:
Originally posted by therippa
[br
quote:
Originally posted by Arthen
If Michael Savage came out with some movie I'm damn sure there would be liberal groups protesting it and trying to get it stopped.
That is incorrect by definition of liberal
Don't feel like geting involved in this :P
But posting a dictionary definition of a vague word doesn't support your idea
Have fun :P |
| PJK |
Posted - 06/22/2004 : 6:14:01 PM
quote:
michael moore and george bush push vast amounts of propaganda. they are the opposite sides of the same coin, and the coin is worthless. they don't want to inform you. they want to sway you to their side.
Wow, Dan, is that an original quote? I like it!
As for the movie I do want to see it. I can't believe I am going to say this, but I can't believe I actually agree with most of what dan says! (no offense intended dan, I just usually don't see things the same way you do)
quote:
Posted - 06/22/2004 : 5:50:19 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
oh yes, and fuck old people.
Hey, wait a second. What's up with this one? Shit I am "old people" but wait, you said Fuck old people, hummmmm fucking's good, so hey, nevermind, I am OK with this quote too! LOL |
| victorwootenfan |
Posted - 06/22/2004 : 6:13:53 PM
Yeah, so i was listening to fox news the other day(not by choice, i was driving to a job site with another fellow who listens to fox news), and of course they bashing the hell out of michael moore. It's small wonder that conservatives hate him, if they listen to all that propaganda bull shit all day, it's fucking hitler-esque shit.
They were honestly trying to get people believe that michael moore was not mentally stable, they interviewed a psychiatrist about him, they had a cheesy commerical rip-off of michael moore that was just saying, "michael moore eats a lot" and that was all. And then they were just like, this guy is insane, this guy is really obese, ahahah, he doesn't know what he's talking about, etc... And of course like all biased news stations took some sound clips out of context and ripped him apart. It was bullshit man, i fucking hate fox news. |
| dan p. |
Posted - 06/22/2004 : 5:50:19 PM
oh yes, and fuck old people.
not really. sicky. |
| dan p. |
Posted - 06/22/2004 : 5:49:11 PM
i must have missed the part where arthen tried to define liberal.
also, rights aside, they did do it, and ultimately, that's all that matters here in regards to the film. the right to do something without negative consquence and the power to do something without negative consequence are the same thing. either way, it gets done, bitching about rights aside. they don't have the right to use threatening action, but they did, and now michael moore has to deal with it and not dwell on the fact that it shouldn't have happened at all. |
| therippa |
Posted - 06/22/2004 : 5:37:32 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Arthen
Why is it that if someone says: Michael Moore isn't an honest fellow and he presents things in a very distorted way, that person is automatically labeled a right winger? That's bullshit.
That's because every person or organization working against this movie are republicans and/or right wingers.
quote:
Originally posted by Arthen
If Michael Savage came out with some movie I'm damn sure there would be liberal groups protesting it and trying to get it stopped.
That is incorrect by definition of liberal
quote:
Originally posted by Arthen
The people protesting the film, have as much right to protest it, as Michael Moore does to make it and attempt to show it. Michael Moore has the freedom of expression, and he used it, but that freedom doesn't include automatically having it shown nationwide.
The do have the right to protest, they do not have the right to use threatening actions to try to stop theater owners from showing it.
quote:
Originally posted by Arthen
People still have this mentality that the president has power, and that a different person in office would change EVERYTHING. It would change NOTHING.
It couldn't possibly make things worse, at least where they are going now.
quote:
Originally posted by Arthen
There's one important issue that I feel everyone is ignoring. Old people still being allowed to drive. Specifically in front of me.
Now, this is where I agree with you.
|
| Arthen |
Posted - 06/22/2004 : 5:05:58 PM
Why is it that if someone says: Michael Moore isn't an honest fellow and he presents things in a very distorted way, that person is automatically labeled a right winger? That's bullshit.
If Michael Savage came out with some movie I'm damn sure there would be liberal groups protesting it and trying to get it stopped.
The people protesting the film, have as much right to protest it, as Michael Moore does to make it and attempt to show it. Michael Moore has the freedom of expression, and he used it, but that freedom doesn't include automatically having it shown nationwide.
People still have this mentality that the president has power, and that a different person in office would change EVERYTHING. It would change NOTHING.
There's one important issue that I feel everyone is ignoring. Old people still being allowed to drive. Specifically in front of me. |
| therippa |
Posted - 06/22/2004 : 4:41:14 PM
A retort to the Hitchen's article |
| dan p. |
Posted - 06/22/2004 : 4:35:32 PM
yeah. i've noticed a lot of people, espeically on internet and message boards call themselves "liberatarians." seems like that's the new thing. not as tired as democrat or republican. i don't know much about them, though, so i can't as i don't like it.
it's time to govern ourselves? not a bad thought. unfortunately, we're not ready for it. plus you can't forget about all the chaotic neutrals out there. never know what those fuckers will do next.
|
| rubylith |
Posted - 06/22/2004 : 4:16:47 PM
but seriously...
what is an idea the "left" as a whole has that is anyway near as silly as most of the rights ideas.
Personally I consider myself a libertariam...but the idea "who cares about the poor(who by the way are stuck being poor and cant help it) shouldn't get any of "my" money(who really needs to make more then 5 million a year) is just plain cruel.
but then again I think every individual has their own opinion and that everyone feels the need to push it on everyone...
the fact is everyone involved in our government is corrupt. Right, Left, middle...its very fucked up.
I just think that if we have no stupid wars (that i would be drafted to), free healthcare, free college, no more delpleted uranium, and move back to bi-latteral trade, this economy would sour and crim rates would drop.
fuck bush, fuck kerry, fuck everyone...
its time we all govern ourselves.. |
| dan p. |
Posted - 06/22/2004 : 3:30:40 PM
quote:
Originally posted by rubylith
right wingers are so silly...
agreed. and i suppose you think the left is better. the second i see someone make fun of the right from the left, or the other way around, i know they have their heads up their ass. convincing yourself that an entire half of the political spectrum is shooting yourself in the foot. you don't listen for ideas that may be helpful. you seek only to tear down the other side.
michael moore and george bush push vast amounts of propaganda. they are the opposite sides of the same coin, and the coin is worthless. they don't want to inform you. they want to sway you to their side.
michael moore's new film will have the exact same results as the last one, which is nothing. not a damn thing. moore's books and movies are for liberals to jerk off to. pure and simple. after this movie has run it's course, conservatives will still be giving bush blow jobs around the clock, and liberals will still hate him. conservatives will still hate liberals and vice versa. what will change? michael moore will have some more money and that's about it. people going into the movie voting for bush (assuming there are any bush lovers who are going to watch it, which there probably aren't) are going to walk out still voting for bush. liberals are going to walk out still not voting for bush.
what bothers me about michael moore more than anything else is that he thinks and acts like he's some kind of fucking hero. some freedom fighter being surpressed by the man. a man who believes in what is right (his version of what is right) and goes to great lengths to to get his work out to the people to be heard. a man making a difference despite all odds. a fucking martyr. what kills me is that, for all his posturing as a someone who cares enough to endure all the hardship that comes with putting out movies like his, is that ultimately nothing is accomplished. except he gets more money. remember that. it's his job to be a smarmy, sarcastic, outraged liberal. that's how he pays his bills. |
| therippa |
Posted - 06/22/2004 : 2:48:38 PM
I've been following up on this movie every day since I first heard of it (thank you google news alerts)
Well, personally I can't wait to see this movie. I think the reviewer is taking a right-side view to the movie. While Moore's reporting may be a little sensational, it is based in fact. A lot of what will be shown in the movie is stuff that the White House and news outlets like Fox have been trying to keep "secret" the whole time.
The fact is, Bush is tied to the Bin Laden family financially. The Saudi royal family has more control over this administration then the people of the US.
A lot of republicans are trying their best to stop this from being released. From the Move America Forward (ripoff of MoveOn.org) group that is pressuring movie theaters to not play it, to people like this guy on Salon, to people like O'Reilly who will talk it down without even seeing the whole movie (he walked out halfway through, but will tell you how terrible the whole thing is), to the consersative nuts that have been sending death threats to theater owners, it all shows how hypocritical the neo-cons in this country are.
Example: The MPAA gave it an R rating for war scenes. The scenes are no worse than what is shown on CNN, MSNBC, FOX, etc, the difference is instead of showing dead/injured Iraqis they are showing dead/injured US soldiers. Why should people under 17 not be allowed to see that when Army recruiters are visiting highschools trying to convince sophmores and juniors to enlist when they graduate?
I think the resistance the neo-cons have been showing says a lot about this movie and the character of the group as a whole.
Then again, a vote for Bush is a sure sign of a character flaw. |
| rubylith |
Posted - 06/22/2004 : 2:42:42 PM
right wingers are so silly... |
| Macht |
Posted - 06/22/2004 : 12:40:17 PM
Truely, the reviewer has his facts straight and knows them upside down and sideways |
| Arthen |
Posted - 06/22/2004 : 12:38:13 PM
And just because Bush is not in the White House doesn't mean that he's out of reach. He's always in contact. It's pointless for someone to always be at the White House, they can't control the situation from there second by second. Truman took long train rides across the country during WWII. Eisenhower took vacations during Korea. Etc, etc. |
| Macht |
Posted - 06/22/2004 : 12:22:48 PM
A film that bases itself on a big lie and a big misrepresentation can only sustain itself by a dizzying succession of smaller falsehoods, beefed up by wilder and (if possible) yet more-contradictory claims. President Bush is accused of taking too many lazy vacations. (What is that about, by the way? Isn't he supposed to be an unceasing planner for future aggressive wars?) But the shot of him "relaxing at Camp David" shows him side by side with Tony Blair. I say "shows," even though this photograph is on-screen so briefly that if you sneeze or blink, you won't recognize the other figure. A meeting with the prime minister of the United Kingdom, or at least with this prime minister, is not a goof-off.
I love the person who did this review
|
