well, somehow my connection crashed. I hate that.
for a parody of moveon.org, visit National Lampoon'swww.moveonplease.org
hehe.
I think Republicans should worry less about Michael Moore's "editing" of the "facts", and worry more about finding the WMD's that Bushlet said were in Iraq about to imminently be used against us. What "facts" did Moore leave out that exonerate the President? I count none. Seriously...what are the "facts" the Republicans think we're missing?
bush lied. moore lied. they're both assholes.
move on, please.
_Originally posted by bit-101 _ **bush lied. moore lied. they're both assholes.
move on, please. **
Yeah, but one is the leader of the free world and the other is a fatty from Flint.
Their lies don't really cancel each other out...
No. But it sets the stage for an uncaring public. One guy lies. The next guy lies even worse. After awhile it creates apathy. Because both sides are so full of shit that an enema would need to start in the ear canal.
Personally, I don't even see what the difference is between the Democrats and Republicans anymore. It's like arguing over Coke and Pepsi. Who gives a fuck? They're both bad for you. In fact, it's a lot more like those MasterCard vs. Visa ads, in that the humor value is that they're both owned by the same organizations.
But nothing offends me more than Moore and his followers. They're like a bizarre mutation of Rush Limbaugh (who was at the top of my disgust list until Moore came around).
We're getting ripe for Senator Joseph McCarthy again...
_Originally posted by JERKSTORE _ **
Their lies don't really cancel each other out... **
no they don't, but many moore supporters, when presented with proof of a moore deception are like, "well, so what? that doesn't vindicate bush. he's still an asshole."
so why do you need michael moore's lies to validate why you hate bush. i don't like either one of them, but i don't need out of context news clippings and soundbites to back up my opinions.
Out of context news clippings and soundbites provide a strong backbone to support my political views.
_Originally posted by shuteye _ *Out of context news clippings and soundbites provide a strong backbone to support my political views. *
as they should. you just gotta choose the right context to be out of. 
_Originally posted by bit-101 _ but many moore supporters, when presented with proof of a moore deception are like, "well, so what? that doesn't vindicate bush. he's still an asshole."
I'm no Micheal Moore fan at all. I like gun ownership and such. I haven't even seen his movie. I just don't see how Bush is vindacted by his lies.
It's real simple...I supported the Pres. Bush when he said we needed to eliminate the WMD's or else Sadaam would use them. (check my old post...I was supportive of the president) - but there were NO WMD's, and if you can't see thats a problem, then sorry. He basically went to war on a "Trust Me." - well, we DID! And he was wrong. And people died.
I'm not saying we should throw Bush in jail and throw away the key - just that he should be held to account for being wrong, and not be re-elected. And as far as Moore goes, what he says doesn't matter to me. I've formed my opinion from real news sources that are damaging enough to Bush.
_Originally posted by bons _ **No. But it sets the stage for an uncaring public. One guy lies. The next guy lies even worse. After awhile it creates apathy. Because both sides are so full of shit that an enema would need to start in the ear canal.
Personally, I don't even see what the difference is between the Democrats and Republicans anymore. It's like arguing over Coke and Pepsi. Who gives a fuck? They're both bad for you. In fact, it's a lot more like those MasterCard vs. Visa ads, in that the humor value is that they're both owned by the same organizations.
But nothing offends me more than Moore and his followers. They're like a bizarre mutation of Rush Limbaugh (who was at the top of my disgust list until Moore came around).
We're getting ripe for Senator Joseph McCarthy again... **
you've made an obvious choice here, and [even if it is an unconscious endorsement] you promote the status quo... and the continued Bush presidency.
this isn't meant as a personal attack or even a one-on-one response... yet I would submit that there is a clear difference between the two choices available to us in this election and every election—as much as I do believe that ideally we would have more options than two—our choices are as clear as the proverbial Star Wars or LOTR classic good versus evil...
and I'm not saying one is more "Good" and the other is more "Evil"... that all depends on which side you are on...
the Republican "machine" seemed to clearly believe that Clinton was [if not evil] bad for the country, bad for the economy, against them and deserving of their every effort to block his political and economic plans... as they clearly believe Kerry/Edwards are to be attacked with the same sort of venom—for the same reasons
the Democrat party has its extremists—just like the Republicans—and the Dems have a "machine" that is politicaly both opposed to and quite opposite the Republicans.
Each think the other is wrong.
But it sets the stage for an uncaring public.
this may well be true, yet I believe [once again] that there are distinct differences between the choices and the motivation of 'setting this stage' as you say.
admittedly using statistics quite loosly here, I believe the republicans would have us accept that they won the last election by a majority and that majority rules, winner take all, they have had a 'mandate' since the last election which was solidified by the unity in our nation after 9/11.
my opinion is that most dems or liberals would say that the last election was simply very, very close... too close.
we are all led [by the media] to believe that the nation is split—when the fact [of loosely used statistics] is that those americans eligible to vote, who don't vote are the majority... less than half[?] of thos eligible, maybe—but by all loose figures, more than either the Republican or Democratic numbers
I ask, who does this statistic benefit most?
I say it [voter appathy and low voter turnout] benefits the conservatives. I believe it is in their best interest to keep the status quo and the myth that there is no differece between the parties alive. the fewer people that vote—and the less informed they are—the better for them
the choice may be apples and oranges... yet, a choice and quite different
best solution i've heard would be to have Election Day be a national holiday. even that voting should be implied as mandatory in some way... folks who don't vote should at least be treated by the rest of us in society with the same scorn as illegal aliens, drunk drivers, drug addicts and petty criminals.
I ask, who would 90-100% voter turnout hurt most?
_Originally posted by JERKSTORE _ **Yeah, but one is the leader of the free world and the other is a fatty from Flint.
Their lies don't really cancel each other out... **
Lying is lying. No moral relativism, please.
_Originally posted by bons _ **Personally, I don't even see what the difference is between the Democrats and Republicans anymore. It's like arguing over Coke and Pepsi. Who gives a fuck? They're both bad for you.
[...]
But nothing offends me more than Moore and his followers. They're like a bizarre mutation of Rush Limbaugh (who was at the top of my disgust list until Moore came around).**
:thumbsup:
_Originally posted by Walt _ I say it [voter appathy and low voter turnout] benefits the conservatives. I believe it is in their best interest to keep the status quo and the myth that there is no differece between the parties alive. the fewer people that vote—and the less informed they are—the better for them
Interesting assertion, Walt. Why do you believe this to be the case?
_Originally posted by Walt _ you've made an obvious choice here, and [even if it is an unconscious endorsement] you promote the status quo... and the continued Bush presidency.I belive the status quo will continue regardless. I see no difference between the censorship fed to us by the current administation and the censorship fed to us by Al Gore when he was a senator.
I see no difference between the lies of Bush, his supporters, his detractors, Kerry, his supporters, and his detractors. They're all lies as far as I'm concerned.
I still honestly feel that as much as I'm displeased with Bush, I'm extremely happy that Al Gore wasn't there to make things worse. Given the chance to vote again, I'd still vote to keep Gore out of office.> I would submit that there is a clear difference between the two choices available to us in this election and every electionAnd to me it is the difference between Coke and Pepsi.> my opinion is that most dems or liberals would say that the last election was simply very, very close... too close.My opinion is that anyone who needs to start a lawsuit in order to be President isn't someone I want in the Oval Office.> I ask, who does this statistic benefit most? The Democrats and the Republicans.> I ask, who would 90-100% voter turnout hurt most?Both parties, as those people who are sincerely sick of both of their antics may finally decide to vote independant just to prove the point.
_Originally posted by jizzer _ *I'm no Micheal Moore fan at all. I like gun ownership and such. I haven't even seen his movie. I just don't see how Bush is vindacted by his lies. *
because, like it or not, Moore represents democrats. and such a propagandized movie is a tactic even republicans haven't stooped to yet. this level of demonizing is just poor taste and the democrats have made little attempted to distance themselves from it - in effect making the "my lies are better lies" Moore motto their own.
_Originally posted by little girl _ *because, like it or not, Moore represents democrats. and such a propagandized movie is a tactic even republicans haven't stooped to yet. this level of demonizing is just poor taste and the democrats have made little attempted to distance themselves from it - in effect making the "my lies are better lies" Moore motto their own. *
True. Point taken.
_Originally posted by little girl _ *...and such a propagandized movie is a tactic even republicans haven't stooped to yet. *
cough
swift boat captains
cough
_Originally posted by papaya nirvana _ **cough
swift boat captains
cough **
what are you talking about? i've seen no ads for this on tv. when is it playing? where are the viewing party signups? the mindless republicans cheering "BEST MOVIE EVAR?"
face it, republcans haven't stooped to the level of Moore yet in their demonizing.
the liberal lemming like attraction to Moore makes Rush's mind-numbed robots look brilliant.
At the end of the day both sides are sending out as much propaganda as they can muster.
If the republicans had a Michael Moore of their own right now they'd be flogging it to tears. Rush is a bit past his prime, but in his heyday it's hard to argue that he wasn't way, way more influential than MM. Neither side is innocent nor could they afford to be if they have any real designs on gaining power, that's just how the game works.
Anybody who's career is based on public opinion has to be cynical enough to manipulate it to their own ends. Amoral, but who the hell cares? I think the shrewdest move anyone can make is to sell propaganda t-shirts to both political parties.
_Originally posted by StinkFist _ **At the end of the day both sides are sending out as much propaganda as they can muster.
If the republicans had a Michael Moore of their own right now they'd be flogging it to tears. Rush is a bit past his prime, but in his heyday it's hard to argue that he wasn't way, way more influential than MM. Neither side is innocent nor could they afford to be if they have any real designs on gaining power, that's just how the game works.
Anybody who's career is based on public opinion has to be cynical enough to manipulate it to their own ends. Amoral, but who the hell cares? I think the shrewdest move anyone can make is to sell propaganda t-shirts to both political parties. **
i wish i could come up with a good W shirt.
_Originally posted by little girl _ because, like it or not, Moore represents democrats as much as you would like to believe it [or label it so]
moore, does not claim to be a democrat... nor does he represent democrats as you say
he clearly has a distaste for bush... to put it mildly... maybve even hates bush with a vengence... which surely plays into the hand of the dems
but one does not need to be a democrat to have a dislike for bush
_Originally posted by little girl _ *i wish i could come up with a good W shirt. *
c'mon now... there's a great bush shirt there LG your just holding out on us
_Originally posted by Walt _ **as much as you would like to believe it [or label it so]
moore, does not claim to be a democrat... nor does he represent democrats as you say
he clearly has a distaste for bush... to put it mildly... maybve even hates bush with a vengence... which surely plays into the hand of the dems
but one does not need to be a democrat to have a dislike for bush **
oh, come on Walt. you KNOW the movie and Moore are associated with the democratic party, whether Moore is a card carrying member or not. he was sitting next to Jimmy Carter at the opener, Walt. that's what i would call playing right into his hands. so as much as you would like to believe it or not, the dems have embraced Moore.