[J3Vr6]

http://www.cinescape.com/0/editorial.asp?aff_id=0&this_cat=Movies&action=page&type_id=&cat_id=270338&obj_id=41457



This has nothing do with the above, but:

You know, I really don't like Moore.  I could skew facts to make them look whatever way I want also.  The sad thing is that there are a lot of ignorant people out there who watch or read his stuff and think it's 100% accurate and the only side to the story.  Maybe I should go into making a documentary...

[Liberator]

The Market is saturated with his kind of "America is bad and why you should hate it" molarkey.  His shrill rhetoric is tiring at best.

[Flipside]

Well, Moore is possibly just a bit over the top, and tends to look on occasion at overtly biased information, but some of the stuff he finds out is quite interesting.

His Website is as slow as molasses btw

[kode]

moore may be somewhat biased, but he still has good points.

[an0n]

Everyone's biased.

But Moore doesn't lie.

[J3Vr6]

Yeah, he doesn't lie but he'll warp the facts enough that it doesn't matter if he's lying or not.

[kode]

Originally posted by J3Vr6
Yeah, he doesn't lie but he'll warp the facts enough that it doesn't matter if he's lying or not.

yeah, you'd think he's a politician or something, right?

[J3Vr6]

Maybe he wanted to be one when he was little...

[Rictor]

Yay! Censorship!

Whether you agree with the man or not, thats besides the point. Isn't America supposed to be Home of the Free Speech or something like that.

No **** Disney smacked him down. Don't wanna rock the boat in case the government decides to rock back. When you've got little Mickey Powell as chairman of the FCC, the words conflict of interest come quickly to mind.

It all goes along splendidly with the whole mentality of unblinking, unthinking support of Dubya that the media has taken up. I can't remember when last a statesman, and I use the word loosely, had it as good a Georgie boy.

_________

I think Moore's heart is in the right place, but he does spin things a bit too much for my taste. Nowhere near as much as Hannity, O'Reilly or *shudder* Coulter mind you, but I don't see the necessity frankly. The facts speak well enough for themselves, without having to skew them. However, most of his stuff about **** and the Suadis (as per Dude Where's My Country) are accurate.

[ionia23]

Originally posted by Rictor

I think Moore's heart is in the right place, but he does spin things a bit too much for my taste. Nowhere near as much as Hannity, O'Reilly or *shudder* Coulter mind you, but I don't see the necessity frankly. The facts speak well enough for themselves, without having to skew them. However, most of his stuff about **** and the Suadis (as per Dude Where's My Country) are accurate.

Moore's brilliant in every aspect imagineable.  "Bowling For Columbine" got the recognition it deserved, though it left us with a lot more questions than answers.  I greatly respect the man's work.

I can't wait for this film.

[Goober5000]

Originally posted by J3Vr6
Yeah, he doesn't lie but he'll warp the facts enough that it doesn't matter if he's lying or not.

Looks like this is another one of those instances.

Found on Drudge.

[mikhael]

Originally posted by Liberator
The Market is saturated with his kind of "America is bad and why you should hate it" molarkey.  His shrill rhetoric is tiring at best.

Actually, his shrill rhetoric is a nice balance to the shrill rhetoric of people like Hannity, Coulter and O'Reilly. Or is it only shrill rhetoric if you don't agree with it?

Seriously, I don't think Moore has ever been of the "America is bad and this is why you should hate it" crowd. One simply cannot watch Bowling For Columbine and get the idea that the guy thinks America is bad--screwed up, certainly, but not bad. I think you confuse his dissatisfaction with the way the country is run and the apathy of her people with a dislike of the country.

All of that said, Mikey is a wee bit (read: INCREDIBLY WAY WAY WAY) to the Left for my tastes.

[vyper]

I find Moore to be intensely patriotic to his country, yet startlingly honest about the actions of it's government and culture. I respect him as a researcher and documentary maker, but I respect him more as a human being for facing what he has documented head on and still retaining some faith in his nation's future.

I loved BfC, and I think Mirimax are betratying the people who line thier pockets - the consumer. We want this video, the producer wants to give us this video, so give us the god damned film.

[Genryu]

Originally posted by Goober5000
Looks like this is another one of those instances.

Found on Drudge.

Remind me again, isn't Drudge the site that posted that photo of Kerry and Fonda to discredit the guy ? Way to find an 'unbiased' source. They're even worse than Michael, but maybe they're of your political leaning, hmmm ?

[karajorma]

Exactly what I was about to say Genryu.

[Kazan]

Drudge should never be accepted as a good source
neither should Moore

[Genryu]

In my opinion, Moore is still more credible than Grudge, if only by the sheer number of sources he uses.
But I agree on one point, it's that you either love or hate the guy, but there's no middle-ground with him.

[Kazan]

Originally posted by Liberator
The Market is saturated with his kind of "America is bad and why you should hate it" molarkey.  His shrill rhetoric is tiring at best.

criticising government officials and their actions and the actions of certain citizens is not anti-american

it is is is an exercise in being american - dissent is protected by the constitution

[J3Vr6]

Yeah, it's not bad to question or criticize government.  But I do think it's bad when you're twisting the facts to do it.  Has it been done before?  Of course, statistics is like the one math that you can get more than one answer.

Moore is a funny and smart guy, but I just personally think that if you're going to make an argument of something then you should give both sides to that argument so your public can make their own informed opinion.

[kode]

Originally posted by J3Vr6
Moore is a funny and smart guy, but I just personally think that if you're going to make an argument of something then you should give both sides to that argument so your public can make their own informed opinion.

or maybe you want an audience that doesn't demand everything served on a silverplatter? how many debatants have you seen that give both sides of an argument? I've yet to see one.