I’m going to try for the second showing on Friday (June 25). This is shaping up to be the event of the season in my little town of Montpelier, Vermont. If the Bushits arrive enforce things could get ugly; and I wouldn’t want to miss that, now would I?
We Americans need to jettison our apathy and confront the Beast; and that’s where Moore can be of help. Yes, I know, he can be “over the top” at times; that he does so lessens, but in no way nullifies his core-message.
I’m not going to Fahrenheit 9/11 on Friday in order to learn something. It’s more a rallying point; one small way I can help to confront the Beast. There’s no way I’m going to miss it.
i agree that Michael Moore isn’t the ideal person to send “the message” to “the people”, but it’ll do for now. i’m excited that there is at least some dissident perspective getting through to the mainstream audiences. he ain’t no chomsky though!
Michael Moore is an idiot. Whatever his stupid movie is trying to say, it does not change the fact that Bush is a great president and has not lied about this war. Stop being anti-Bush. It’s just dumb.
What’s dumb is to insult people simply because you disagree with them. At least present some argument for your conclusion that Bush is a great and honest president. Then maybe people will take your opinions seriously.
As I’ve said, Bush is a good man. There is so much proof of this. He is against abortion and gay marriages and believes in the right thing to do. People say he lied about weapons of mass destruction. Get off of it. There was proof of WMDs and Saddam could have hidden them or destroyed them or something else. Look at the facts, this war is not something in which Bush gets anything personal from it. He knows the right thing to do and that is to help free a troubled nation and fight the evil in this world. Bush represents good. Michael Moore represents the bad. Don’t listen to these people who are famous and think they know about what’s going on and listen to the truth.
One’s political agendas don’t make him good or virtuous. Bush is also against admitting his mistakes. Does that make him a good person?
And what politician doesn’t claim to believe in doing “the right thing?” You really come off as very gullible.
Yes, please. And that involves looking beyond Fox for your news.
People within the Bush administration may well be profiting from this war. YOU DON’T KNOW ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. Haliburton is certainly getting something from the war, and Cheney very well could be profiting off of THAT.
Besides, Saddam tried to kill Bush’s father. I’m sure it gave Bush more than a little personal satisfaction to reduce the Iraqi dictator to a spider-hole refugee.
Of course, I’m not one to speculate on motivations for going to war…good or bad. I’ve no doubt that some in the Bush administration really did have good intentions for advocating the war. Maybe most of them did. I also know (as any good student of political science knows) that foreign policy decisions are rarely made on the basis of morality. The Iraq war was no different. For many in the Bush administration, it was fought to give U.S. interests a foothold in the Arab world. It wasn’t primarily about weapons of mass destruction or even human rights’ abuses. It was about furthering American influence in Middle Eastern politics.
How do I know this? Because I know several people in military intelligence, and they all say THAT’S the real reason. And since none of those people are running for re-election, they can afford to be honest.
Bush on the other hand…well, I hate to break it to you, seeker, but just because you want the constitution to discriminate against gays doesn’t mean you’re incapable of lying.
i don’t have the time right now to completely mutilate this “argument”. i will, however, address the WMD issue.
there was indeed proof of WMDs. the proof is that, in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s, George Bush Sr. provided massive financial aid to Saddam’s oppressive and tyrannical regime. Additionally, he provided chemical agents which were later used in the often-referenced “gassing of the kurds” or as it is popularly referred to, “the gassing of his [Saddam’s] own people”.
the accurate history of this is often ignored among the major news media conglomerates in an effort to make Saddam and his tyrannical regime “look bad”. this negative image serves the interests of the Bush administration in that it encourages popular support for the illegal war in Iraq.
seeker04, you’ve been victimized by propaganda. you’ve been lied to by Bush. you’re supporting an illegal war in Iraq. you’re legitimizing the deaths of countless Iraqi civilians. i’d encourage you to take a more thorough look at the evidence on both sides of the fence. i don’t want to call you ignorant, because you may not even have had the chance to examine this issue thoroughly and fairly, but let me caution you–you certainly may appear that way to many folks on this board.
True I could be gullible and Bush is really lying, but I strongly believe that he is not lying. I believe him and think he is better than that. I don’t only look at Fox news. Facts are facts no matter who says them. I believe in Bush and I believe that what he does for America is good. Liberal propagandists aren’t going to change my mind.
Absolutely false. There was, and still is no proof of WMD’s. It was an excuse for invasion.
The facts clearly show that corporations such as Haliburton were given the contracts without having to bid against other companies. Bush is doing favors for big business- but it’s not personal, right?
It seems Bush only fights evil when there is a profit in doing so. A true good person would be helping in places like the Sudan, but unfortunately, there’s no profit to be made in helping them. It would probaby be a lot cheaper to stop the genocide in Sudan, and would not have had the repurcussion of making the majority of the Arab world hate even more fervently. In fact, it might actually make us look like humanitarians.
I wish I had the luxury of living in such a simple world. Truth is, both sides have faults. Neither represents perfection. Ultra-liberals have a problem dealing with the practical application of their beliefs. Ultra-Conservatives have a problem with being too goddamn greedy (for the most part).
In closing, I always think it’s abhorent how Bush claims he prays to God to help him in deciding issues. Isn’t it funny, that when we read or hear of the muslim leaders that say the same thing, we label them “fanaticals?” I don’t mind that Bush prays when he makes decisions. Does it disturb me? Yes. However, from a public erlations perspective, he should put a lid on it. No need to give the muslims more reason to believe that Bush is a crusading christian. It doesn’t help our image.
facts are facts except when they’re just not true.
i’m not distinguishing between liberal or conservative propagandists. i’m referring to propagandists of the “business class”. business elites run our country, whether you’re aware of it or not. they create a facade for themselves by using meaningless terms like “liberal”, “conservative”, “republican” or “democrat”. but they all do the same thing. they serve the interests of big business (US-based as well as multinational corporations).
Actually, facts are not facts. There was a study recently done that surveyed viewers of predominantly fox news, and viewers of predominantly other news. Viewers of Fox news were overwhelming incorrect with their views on the current situation. I think it was 60% of the Fox news viewers that believed WMD’s have been found in Iraq. This is clearly not a fact. Sady, the majority of Fox news viewers believe it to be the case, and these people take incorrect information to the voting booth. Where you get your news is extremely important Seeker04. I strongly recommend you diversify your viewing.
It’s odd that so many people who haven’t seen this work are so willing to criticize it and, remarkably, point to a fundamental dishonesty in the product without knowing what the product is. Condemning the movie without knowing anything about it is essentially dishonest.
I’ve found the current administration to be cowardly in many respects, I suppose it shouldn’t be surprising that it’s proponents would follow their lead in this regard. Not only are they afraid to see the film, they don’t want anybody else to see it either.
The funny thing is that 75% of the movie is footage of the Bush Administration - that by itself should yield substantial amounts of dishonesty without any meddling from Mr. Moore!
Jesus Logos, I sure hope we agree on a lot of things…cause this is going to get confusing.
I’m critical of Moore because I don’t think he’s critical enough of himself; not in any way because I’m a Bush supporter. However, I’m perfectly willing to be proven wrong by Fahrenheit 9/11.
Although I like his work, I am not necessarily antagonistic towards anyone who dislikes Mr. Moore solely because of their dislike.
However, I have little patience with those who disparage comments and ideas that they haven’t even heard or considered. If there are false statements or misleading images in his productions, he should be castigated for that behavior. I haven’t heard anyone in any forum mention an issue that was relevant to judging this work’s honesty. Character assasination is not criticism!
See the movie - make a judgement - let people know what you thought about things that are really in the movie! It’s that pesky philosophy stuff again … .
