General discussion

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Now you know the liberal are going to go nuts

by SkipperUSN In reply to More Moore Lies

Now you know what you just did is fire up all these liberals and socialist in this forum. And from the post of various people - it appears that a large number of posters are very liberal - or socialist. But I am sure a larger number of conseratives are quitly sitting on the sides not saying anything. We have to find our voices - and speak as loud as the Liberal Left...

Thanks for the voice MAX

Collapse -

A Washington Post Liberal Against Moore

by maxwell edison In reply to Now you know the liberal ...

Richard Cohen, a very liberal joutnalist who writes for the even more liberal Washington Post, says the following about Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" .

"....defeated by the utter stupidity of the movie."

"...the myth (that) the presidency was stolen from Al Gore."

"...not only was I dismayed by how prosaic and boring the movie was -- nothing new and utterly predictable -- but I recoiled from Moore's methodology, if it can be called that."

"For a time, I hated his approach more than I opposed the cartoonishly portrayed Bush."

"......too serious to turn into some sort of joke, as Moore has done."

"Moore's depiction of why Bush went to war is so silly and so incomprehensible that it is easily dismissed."

"But nothing is said about multiple U.N. resolutions violated by Iraq or the depredations of Saddam Hussein."

"....prewar Iraq is depicted as some sort of Arab folk festival -- lots of happy, smiling, indigenous people. Was there no footage of a Kurdish village that had been gassed? This is obscenity by omission."

"It is so juvenile in its approach, so awful in its journalism, such an inside joke for people who already hate Bush, that I found myself feeling a bit sorry for a president who is depicted mostly as a befuddled dope."

"I fear how it will play to the undecided."

For the whole article:

Another interesting article:

Thanks for you comments, Skipper. And welcome aboard TechRepublic.

Collapse -

by ND_IT In reply to A Washington Post Liberal ...

Let's not forget that Congress (both democrats and republican alike) voted for Bush to use force. I have seen a few liberals embrace MM in the simple fact of using hate speech against Bush. Same way some extreme right wing Republicans went after Clinton during the impeachment hearings. But for the most part I think liberals are keeping their distance from Micheal Moore, which is a good thing. Some of them would look pretty hypocritical if they support MM, but also supported Bush in his decision to go to war in Iraq.

Collapse -

Moore is simply a MORON

by TomSal In reply to

..and so are the idiots who line up to pay for his books and for tickets to his movies.

Nuff said.

Collapse -


by maecuff In reply to Moore is simply a MORON

I have read his books AND seen his movies, and I can assure you, I am NOT a moron.

Collapse -

What a non-starter

by JamesRL In reply to Moron..

Gee, I've recently read the Economist, The New York Times, Mother Jones and the American Conservative.

Guess every American would think I am a moron by that criteria. Think I have all the bases covered.

If you never read the source material and only read the criticism and make up your mind on that, then perhaps you might be a moron(apologies to fans of you might be a redneck jokes).


Collapse -

Mother Jones - The American Conservative - And More

by maxwell edison In reply to What a non-starter


I, too, read a wide range of views, from the left, such as Molly Ivans and Eleanor Clift, to the right, such as George Will and William F. Buckley, to many people in-between. (Actually, Ivans is pretty much an avowed socialist.) I read the New York Times (pretty liberal) and the Washington Times (pretty conservative) on a fairly regular basis. Time and Newsweek seem to be pretty liberal, while National Review is pretty conservative, all of which are on my reading list. And when many of the "experts" write books, I'll read many of them - especially the presidential memoirs. (My collection of presidential memoirs, and presidential "wanna-bes" such as Goldwater and Kemp, goes back to Herbert Hoover, with only a few missing - and many of them are signed. Yes, I'll buy Bill Clinton's - and hopefully get him to sign it when he comes to town on his book tour.)

Personally, I'm often accused of reading only the conservative view of things, since that's the view I espouse, but that couldn't be more wrong. After all, one of the best ways to defeat an opponent's argument is to fully understand it, and it's a great way to debate an issue without having to rely on all the standard and often repeated rhetoric. I probably read more "liberal" sources than the "liberals" who post in these threads.

(I first read Mother Jones back in the late 70s, by the way. An "interesting" publication, to say the least, although I haven't looked at it in a while.)

You are absolutely right-on about reading the source material (and/or viewing the actual speech), instead of - or at least in addition to, reading the pundents take on it. At times, one has to wonder if we actually saw and/or read the same thing?

Collapse -


by fjf142 In reply to Moron..

I beg to differ. You are definitely a moron if you believe MM's rantings.

Collapse -

The arrogance astounds me..

by maecuff In reply to Moron

I'm not saying that ANYONE else should believe as I do, I'm not trying to change anyone's beliefs. I don't ask that you agree with me..but you can sure as **** respect that we have a difference of opinion without assuming that I'M the moron.

Collapse -

Moron - personafied

by pctech In reply to Moron

fjf142, is the only point you can make is that you can make personal attacks?

Related Discussions

Related Forums