He's a nice bloke innit? Grats him

observer.guardian.co.uk/i...39,00.html (http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1222939,00.html)

*puts on his best Akipt voice*

IT'S ALL BULLSHIT! MICHAEL MOORE IS A TOOL! THIS DOCUMENTARY IS CRAP!

LIES!

BUSH WILL PREVAIL! WESTERN CHRISTIANITY PRINCIPLES WILL RULE THE WORLD!! WIPE OUT THE INFIDELS!

On a serious note, I can't wait to watch this. Sounds pretty awsome. And, just for fun, they should add footage of Heston walking out of an interview again, even if it has nothing to do with the theme.

Haha! Nice impression!

Michael Moore is known for stretching the truth, and suggesting stupid shit just to get publicity for his movie. People like him benefit from controversy and negativity.

Thing about Mr Moorer

His Bowling for Columbine was proven to be made up facts/hoaxes and outright lies.

And still he's called a documentary maker??

I wonder how folks would rate him if he had to compete in the category he's actually skilled at?

Drama/fantasy

Fandros

I can't wait till they boo him at the Oscars again.

And its a comedy Halo, not a documentary... get your shits and giggles from it, but try not to learn anything ok? I know that'll be hard for you, but try for us.

IT'S ALL BULLSHIT! MICHAEL MOORE IS A TOOL! THIS DOCUMENTARY IS CRAP!

LIES!

BUSH WILL PREVAIL! WESTERN CHRISTIANITY PRINCIPLES WILL RULE THE WORLD!! WIPE OUT THE INFIDELS!

Woo Halo...about time ya figured it out!

intr4w3b > Dazzler

Besides.
Micheal Moore is only Bizarro Limbaugh/Hannity/O'Reilly

For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Well hehe he didn't hide the fact it was complete propaganda anti bush considering his goal is to get bush not reelected. I m not sure if bush need more help for that at this point.

Anyway, even if only 30% of his documentary is true its already beyond sad :p

Gotta be new that bowling for columbine is full of hoaxes and lies, you got any link that prove that? Really curious to see them. I assume you're not saying the 2 guys that shot down students with M16/uzi were fake tho but that the interviews were.

How's that Air America doing anyway?

www.hardylaw.net/Truth_Ab...wling.html (http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html)

There you go Kinu, since, I guess, they dont have Google in France...

Master Damoiel Mindbend
Retired Enchanter of the 60th Season

www.rushlimbaughonline.com/index.htm (http://www.rushlimbaughonline.com/index.htm)

The difference of course is that Rush doesn't run around making/staging propaganda films and labeling them documentaries or pretend to be anything other than a biased talk show host.

"There is only one way to get rid of nuclear weapons... use them"

lol, I laughed enough for a whole week. I had never heard of that guy, but I reckon they should syndicate his show over here, just for a laugh.


"Fox News, we instruct you obey"

Good job Mr Tarantino! :hat :D

/clap

The difference of course is that Rush doesn't run around making/staging propaganda films and labeling them documentaries or pretend to be anything other than a biased talk show host.
A lie is a lie is a lie.

Rush doesn't lie so much as put his opinion on things, however exaggerated his opinion may be.

There's a difference between saying Charlton Heston is an incensitive bastard because he loves guns and saying Heston trampled on the grave of a young girl shot by a gun.

CALLER: It was like a college fraternity prank that stacked up naked men --

LIMBAUGH: Exactly. Exactly my point! This is no different than what happens at the Skull and Bones initiation and we're going to ruin people's lives over it and we're going to hamper our military effort, and then we are going to really hammer them because they had a good time. You know, these people are being fired at every day. I'm talking about people having a good time, these people, you ever heard of emotional release? You of heard of need to blow some steam off?


Good Times!
http://www.antiwar.com/photos/perm/dead-iraqi2.jpg
http://www.antiwar.com/news/?articleid=2444

wtf frat did Rush belong to? actually explains alot

Wanna misquote him a few more times? Maybe, y'know, instead of going to sites named "antiwar.com" or "Limbaughisafilthyfuckingliar.com" you might just want to, y'know...download the transcripts of the show and read them for yourself?

He condemns the MP's several times, calls whoever took the pictures an idiot (remember, this show aired the first day that the pictures were released, before anybody had all the facts) etc...etc...

The point he was getting to was that these people are not only going to be punished because of what they did, but to make the American public feel better, they're going to punish them 'more' because from the photo's it looks like the MP's are having a good time breaking the law.

Basically, if somebody is under alot of stress and snaps and does some horrible shit, we feel compassionate for them, we sympathize. Just watch John Q or whatever that movie is about the guy who holds up a Hospital because he can't afford the Heart transplant for his kid. We're supposed to feel sympathy for the man.

Yet as soon as that person that breaks, as soon as that person who loses control is in the military, then we have no compassion. We scream bloody murder for their heads and the heads of their superiors, and then right on up the ladder to screaming for the head of Bush.

He goes on to state that if this had happened under the Clinton administration, the liberals would be claiming that the terrorists voluntarily arranged themselves into those pyramids knowing full well that the video tapes and photo's would get out into the public. Remember again, this show aried on May 4th, basically at the same time as the photo's were released.

Do I agree with him? No. However, as much as a dick as he is, he's still simply stating his fucking opinion. He's not spreading lies and misinformation. He's just being an asshole. It's the liberals in this case who are spreading misinformation. It's a sad state of affairs when you have to lie about Rush to prove he's an asshole. He does a good enough job of it on his own.

Mr. Moore on the other hand, is an asshole -and- spreads lies and misinformation.

I have come the the conclusion Moore is a complete idiot. He lies and streches facts to support his logic.

Linlaweniel you are the stupidest mother fucker I have ever seen, the site L2 put up was a joke; its not a offical Rush Limbaugh site, but rather people that hate Limbaugh putting it together poke fun at him.

Boo hoo Iraqi prisoniers were humiliated, I would rather be humiliated every day than have my head cut off with a blunt blade.

From later in the show.

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>CHRISTIE: OK, I’ll make it real quick. I’m a Conservative Christian living here in Fort
Lauderdale, but I wanted to ask you – I normally agree with everything you say,
but this time, I just feel like the way you pass this off as possibly a college prank, I
don’t know. It just sounded like is there any time when you can – where we’re
wrong? I mean, are we never wrong?


RUSH: I know, that’s why I said – this is – I never said that this wasn’t wrong. I said it
is. I’m – I’m – I’m railing against taking – this is taking a quarter and making it a
million dollars. This is – this is blowing something so out of proportion it just
doesn't deserve what’s happening to it. This isn’t even torture. This is not torture.
It’s abuse, but it’s not torture. And yet it’s already been equated to rape and pillage
and murder and everything else.
So no, no. I – I don’t – our standards haven’t been lowered. This was – stop
thinking about this personally. It’s not about us. It’s not about you, Christie. You
didn’t do this. Stop letting it say something to you about you. “But it’s my country,
Rush. It’s –” your country didn’t do this. Some renegades did it and we’re going
to find – if we ever get – I don’t even know if we can get a genuine investigation
out of this, now. You know, what if the truth is so far removed from this that
nobody will believe it, based on all this cockamamie PR buzz, there’s no
circulating about this.

I want you to think about something.
Remember Tailhook versus the Waco Invasion. What do you remember? What
was – what had people more outraged for the longer period of time? Waco
Invasion of Janet Reno or Tailhook? Same thing here. Think about how little
outrage there was about what happened at Waco compared to what’s going on to
this or Tailhook and you will get my point.
<hr></blockquote>

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Rush: Now, I’m not – don’t misunderstand, here. I’m not suggesting that the torture is OK because I don’t think it is. I’m not suggesting it’s not a big deal. I’m not suggesting anything of the sort. What I’m trying to say, we are in a war and there are bad guys, from our perspective, and they are it. And there are good guys from our perspective and we are the good guys. And amongst both groups you’ve got some factions that don’t qualify. Probably some good people in the bad guys and there’re probably some rotten apples in the good-guy group. And these people that did this so-called torture may, in fact, be the rotten apples of the good-guy group. And it’s like I said – it doesn’t taint the whole military effort – it doesn’t taint us – but the world is joining, now, trying to get us tainted as a nation, and as a people, and as a culture, by virtue of these pictures on the basis that we have humiliated these people.

I mean, where was the outrage when the burned, charred bodies of Americans were
dragged through the streets? Where was the world outrage at the Islamofascists
who did that? There wasn’t any. Where is the world outrage at the atrocities
committed against us and our troops over – there isn’t any. Now, you got the
French that are showing – that the cable channel over there, showing footage of a
US helicopter firing on supposed innocent Iraqis. You know, this is – we have to
realize exactly what’s at stake. And we cannot respond and say, oh, gosh. OK,
French. We’re sorry for this. We won’t do it again. That’s not how this game is
played. If we start trying to appease everybody here, we’re going to end up losing
this.<hr></blockquote>

Normally I just think of Rush as a pompous windbag ,b ut he makes some good points there.

Oh wow.. a Flip Flop!

"Let's all admit something."

"There's nothing good about drug use," he was saying. "We know it. It destroys individuals. It destroys families. Drug use destroys societies. Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. And the laws are good because we know what happens to people in societies and neighborhoods which become consumed by them. And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up."

"What this says to me," he told his listeners that day, "is that too many whites are getting away with drug use. Too many whites are getting away with drug sales. Too many whites are getting away with trafficking in this stuff. The answer to this disparity is not to start letting people out of jail because we're not putting others in jail who are breaking the law. The answer is to go out and find the ones who are getting away with it, convict them and send them up the river, too."
In his own words.
Hypocrisy.
And yes outright lying.
www.fair.org/press-releas...ality.html (http://www.fair.org/press-releases/limbaugh-debates-reality.html)

He espouses things that he knows to be false, altering and changing the meaning by leaving out and ignoring crucial pieces of it.
Intentionally Minimizing problems to acheive a desired effect IS lying. Call it disembling if it makes you feel better.
make the problems of your opposition artifically larger and the problems of your side artificially larger. Present Opinions as facts.
Lies lies lies.
www.fair.org/press-releas...uttal.html (http://www.fair.org/press-releases/fair-limbaugh-rebuttal.html)

I'm not saying he doesn't lie. Calling someone a liar is accusing them of being human. You might as well accuse him of being opinionated too. I'm saying the example you gave was a poor one at best because it was a perfect chance for the liberal media to take something he said out of context and make him more of monster then he really is, and he is one.

He may be off his rocker quite often, pull shit out of nowhere...but last I checked Rush never won an award for best documentary or newshow with the most integrity or whatever the radio equivolent is. He doesn't try to pawn his radio show off as something it isn't. It's his ego projected onto the world, and I find it hilarious.

See, although there may be similarities between the two - Moore and Limbaugh, both being dumbass, pompous windbags - at least Limbaugh doesn't go out and make propaganda films filled with so many skewed facts and figures it would have made Goebbels (sp?) weep with joy.

THAT'S the difference. There's a LARGE dissimilarity between a radio host's obviously biased statements on the air during an op-ed show and a filmmaker who presents his "facts" as truthful by cloaking them in a careful web of editing and purposefully misleading and false "information".

See also the aforementioned "Truth About Bowling for Columbine" link upthread.

--Cen

It's political commentary. Politics, as a general rule, are full of bullshit, lies, and warped facts. They're not documentaries at all, unless they're simply documenting overblown editorials. Whatever, I hate politics.

Moore is a total publicity whore of the highest caliber. He's no Courtney Love, but he's up there.

Makes interesting movies though, as long as ya don't take em too seriously.

Oh wow.. a Flip Flop!

Nah, not really.I still think he is a pompous windbag, but he did have a valid point in there. I don't really have a political side that I lean towards. I know as much about left wing and right wing as I do about conservative and liberal...wich is nada.
The problem with government is that its full of politicians. Take the politics outand do whats best for the people not the party. Rush is just a politician without an office.

Calling someone a liar is accusing them of being human.
:rollin
We need a "palm" for funny quotes as well.

Selwen you said that perfectly. :)

So as you all call Michael Moore a liar, what are the lies he said in this film that won the Palme D'Or?

Both the Oscar and the Palme have a large group of judges, and even larger group of submissions. If the films were as out of wack as some people suggest, they'd never have made it as far as they did. There's plenty of legal support for defending yourself against a lie in film, especially since he categorized the film as a documentary. I can't recall the word but its just like the print term libel. Of course what seems like a truth to someone, say that George Bush is screwing up the world, may seem like a lie to others ... but thats the nature of oppinions and politics.

If I was not mistaken, yes ... kids did kill kids after bowling class in Columbine. Yes, missiles are driven through Columbine once a month. Yes, the NRA did hold a rally in the same town a little girl was shot in, and the NRA did hold a rally in Columbine. These weren't lies, they were facts and a springboard for the viewer to make their own decision about the events -- its clear which decision Michael Moore made, its clear which some of you made, but that doesn't mean he lied to you.

Now someone above said "Michael Moore is known for stretching the truth, and suggesting stupid @#%$ just to get publicity for his movie. People like him benefit from controversy and negativity." ... I dare you to find one media firm that doesn't. Hell, its another point Michael touched on in his film, that the media preys off negativity. Singling him out as one to do it, when everyone does it, is just nieve.

Knowing Michael in real life may have my oppinions slightly skewed towards believing him as well. Prove me wrong, what are some of the lies he made in Bowling for Columbine or this new film? I've read the site www.moorexposed.com, and its just as slanted and Moore bashing as his film against the government or the NRA. Why should I not believe one but believe the other?

http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html

http://www.hardylaw.net/omitted.html

http://www.moorelies.com/

The only true part about Bowling for Columbine was when he said "hi, im michael moore."

Yeah, you totally quoted the exact same site I mentioned three times, all of which were obviously slighted and propaganda ... and as I read through it, lacking factual backing for the attacks it made.

It was simply that fellows oppinion that the facts were slighted. The events did happen, the speaches were said, and the cutsie cartoon by the Southpark guys was simply that, a cartoony editorial.

Some of those sites are playing the same game Moore is playing btw.

The telling thing is how much effort goes into trying to discredit him and attack him.

As Shakespeare once wrote, "Me thinks the lady doth protest too much"

SO where's the proof that this 'propaganda' is propaganda? I posted links to the actual article so you could see that although Rush is a pompous windbag, he is nothing more then he declares himself to be.

Mr. Moore on the other hand, seems to think he's some kind of compassionate human being.

Thats just not accurate Zehn.
You cant listen to Rush for more than 2 minutes without hearing some insane gibberish declaring himself "the truth detector"
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/limbaughletter/index_r3_c1.jpg
or how he is the ONLY person telling the unspun truth, when in fact, HE IS ALL SPIN.
Now, for normal people, like you and I, we can tell the notice the subtle nuances of bluster, but there are people out there, like Crist0, who are very susceptible to this overt demogougery (that CANT be spelt right).
He never admits what he is. He doesnt say "Hey, just got my "talking points from Rove, so we got lots of stuff to talk about"
From Salon:

A Bush administration employee known only as "Eric" may now be a former employee for leaving sensitive materials at a Washington D.C. Starbucks. The Center for American Progress got their hands on the papers when a resident of Dupont Circle found them at his local coffee shop and handed them over to the left-leaning think tank. CAP has posted the documents, with an important redaction and some snarky embellishments, on its Web site.

Eric's lost Pentagon's Papers, as CAP is calling them, were basically talking points for preparing administration officials including Rumsfeld for their round of Sunday morning talk shows. Also found among the documents was a map to Donald Rumsfeld's house, kindly redacted by the CAP folks "in the interests of national security."

Here's a translation of Eric's sloppy hand-written talking points:

"Took threat v seriously and then segue to wh we have been doing. Rise above Clarke. Emphasize importance of 9/11 commission and come back to what we have been doing. Gorelick pitting Condi v. Armitage. Our plan had military plans to attack Al Q -- called on def to draw up targets in Afg -- develop mil options."

Found at the Starbucks was also a list of possible questions Rumsfeld and other officials might encounter in their talk show appearances, including this query: "Commission member Ben-Veniste said a long string of reports on the use of airplanes as missiles was available. Did you ever see them?"

Eric didn't provide an appropriate sample answer, but CAP does, echoing the White House attack on former counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke: "Ben-Veniste is disgruntled. He's angry that he was demoted from Watergate prosecutor to 9/11 commissioner. He's writing a book … and just wants to make a lot of money. Ann Coulter and Robert Novak told me he can't deal with an African-American woman."

There was also this quotation among Eric's notes, initialed DR (Rumsfeld): "Stay inside the line -- we dont need 2 puff this at all. we need 2b careful as hell about it." Then another piece of advice: "This thing will go away soon and what will keep it alive will be one of us going over the line."

Memo to Eric: You're not helping.
(quote just to prove that "talking point" memos arent fiction, they are actual things that go out to conservative and liberal "journalists", read: shill)

He regurgitates the party line as dictated to him. Now, he does it in a pretty entertaining and charismatic style, but thats why hes on the air and making millions. They provide the script, he provides the talent.

Eric's lost Pentagon's Papers, as CAP is calling them, were basically talking points for preparing administration officials including Rumsfeld for their round of Sunday morning talk shows.

.. the paper's were for Rumsfeld's appaearance before the 9-11 commission.

What the hell is all this about "sunday morning rounds" I don't know, and neither does "Salon" because he's pulling it from his ass all the same.

Eric didn't provide an appropriate sample answer, but CAP does, echoing the White House attack on former counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke:

You even read what the garbage you just posted? Gah.

Who wrote this? Michael Moore? He has more journalistic truth than this does...

So what are you disputing?
That the politcal strategists for the Republicans generate and distribute these talking agendas, or that an actual one was uncovered in this case.

So what are you disputing?

It's no wonder your head is so far up your ass reading @#%$ like this.

Eveything to do with your snip from Salon is wrong and out of context, because the author is a liar. The notes were taken the morning of Rumsfeld's appearance before the 9/11 Commission (...not the Sunday morning talk shows), and Eric was a Defense Dept aid, not an administration political Rove hireling. The reddaction was the directions to Rumsfeld's house, because Eric didn't know where he lived. Eric picked him up, and they preped at the Star Bucks.

That the politcal strategists for the Republicans generate and distribute these talking agendas, or that an actual one was uncovered in this case.

Everyone does, but this isn't one of them.

Everyone does, but this isn't one of them.

Thank you, thats all I wanted to know.

As far as Rumsfeld not being involved in politics.. umm, he is a political appointee. He is a political animal. He is not a pentagon lifer, he leaves when a new administration comes in. If hes not political, then why does he speak at $1000 a plate RNC fundraisers?

I dont think you understand the level of involvement political hacks like Rove have in day to day operation.
For this administration especially, staying "on Message" is of the highest priority. Who do you think organizes the message on a daily basis? Rove. And for the DNC, whoever his counterpart would be.
The reason for this is simple. When speaking to the public, the continuity of the message must be preserved, all branches of the administration and the party have to appear to be speaking with one voice. And that one voice has an agenda. A political one.. of course.

Now, for normal people, like you and I, we can tell the notice the subtle nuances of bluster, but there are people out there, like Crist0, who are very susceptible to this overt demogougery (that CANT be spelt right).


Demagoguery, genius.

Someone like you who is utterly incapable of coming up with anything that didn't come out of a democrat's ass(usually pictures since you've shown time and again that you can't comprehend a message if there are only words) accusing someone else of being easily influenced by rhetoric would be laughable if it weren't so sad.

lol crist0
I thought that would wake ya up
/hugs

At least I can see the humor in both directions..

A good Kerry one
forums.fark.com/cgi/fark/...ink=977045 (http://forums.fark.com/cgi/fark/comments.pl?IDLink=977045)

God Fark is so horrible. Really L2, you have no taste. =p