well said...
what about a lawyer who makes his living on 2nd amendment issues and is an advocate of gun ownership.
okay i support a liar, are you happy?
can i ask you this?
do you support the bush admin?
end of discussion.
well said...
what about a lawyer who makes his living on 2nd amendment issues and is an advocate of gun ownership.
okay i support a liar, are you happy?
can i ask you this?
do you support the bush admin?
end of discussion.
JetBlack69
Diamond Member
- Sep 16, 2001
- 4,580
- 1
- 0
Amused
Elite Member
- Apr 14, 2001
- 57,482
- 20,006
- 146
Well, I haven't read the book, nor have I read the counter points. However, more than one study has proven that CC permits do not raise crime rates, and a few including Lot's have show crime rates dropped after they were passed. Correlation does not prove causation, I agree. However, it appears, while skimming through must of that log, that this person is nitpicking rather than pointing out real substitive errors. I'd have read deeper to make a final decision on it though.
now i'm forced to watch the movie.
i did watch the oscars and i also dislike him.
but i need some basis for it.
i'd sound pretty stupid debating about him because of a 10sec stunt on the oscars.
You sir, are an idiot and a troll. WTF does the Bush Administration have to do with Michael Moore's lies, misquotes, and fraudulent claims?
I would also like to point out that the Hardylaw site itself has had problems with the truth. But, it being a website, he has the luxury of purging the bad info when it is pointed out to him.
I always took Michael Moore for being an irreverent, tongue-in-cheek commentator. So he?s as irreverent to the documentary as an art form as he is to the subject matter he?s dealing with.
It?s deconstructive satire. The editing of speeches and other factual alterations were never meant to be propaganda used for deliberate manipulation of the uninformed masses. Moore is not proclaiming truth, just repackaging the facts for further examination.
Splicing Heston?s NRA speeches to make them appear as though directly related to Columbine isn?t supposed to be taken at face value. It?s a humorous, satirical effort to get the viewer thinking. Does this mean it should not be classified as documentary? No. Moore has given us a marginalized documentary film in which the medium itself is subjected to his acerbic examinations.
It?s deconstructive satire. The editing of speeches and other factual alterations were never meant to be propaganda used for deliberate manipulation of the uninformed masses. Moore is not proclaiming truth, just repackaging the facts for further examination.
Splicing Heston?s NRA speeches to make them appear as though directly related to Columbine isn?t supposed to be taken at face value. It?s a humorous, satirical effort to get the viewer thinking. Does this mean it should not be classified as documentary? No. Moore has given us a marginalized documentary film in which the medium itself is subjected to his acerbic examinations.
Lol, you missed the boat... read it again.
He said he supports a Liar, if you support Bush you also support a liar (according to him).. just his way of bring things even or something
DT4K
Diamond Member
- Jan 21, 2002
- 6,944
- 3
- 81
Moores work is NOT satire. It is not just repackaging the facts, it is changing the facts. And that is a big difference.
How does it "get the viewer thinking" to present something in an altered form that completely changes the context and message of what someone is saying?
If I edited various audio clips of Moore, I could easily put them together in a way to make it appear that he is saying anything I want. If I make it obvious, like some SNL skits or something, then you can call that satire. If I put these edited and reordered clips in a movie that is publicized as a documentary, that is NOT satire. It is dishonest and deceiptful propaganda.
Maybe you don't understand what a documentary is.
Documentary:
Presenting facts objectively without editorializing or inserting fictional matter, as in a book or film.
n. pl. doc·u·men·ta·ries
A work, such as a film or television program, presenting political, social, or historical subject matter in a factual and informative manner and often consisting of actual news films or interviews accompanied by narration.
Amused, I find it hard not to question your moral values if you don't have a problem with Charles Heston.
Amused
Elite Member
- Apr 14, 2001
- 57,482
- 20,006
- 146
Why should I have a problem with him?
The man marched with Martin Luther King in the 60s. He had the first interracial love scene in the movies. He's been a social liberal his entire life.
How has supporting the Second Amenemdment suddenly turned him into an evil man?
Oh, okay. I guess I got lost in his convoluted argument. Still doesn't make any sense to me though. It is possible to be opposed to Michael Moore AND GWB, isn't it?
Such a clever post! That made me laugh.
Unfortunately, I'm having one of those days where I lack the spit to argue and regret having stepped into the debate. So I think I'll concede that your argument stands above mine and let it rest until a day when I feel like shedding light on my previous statements.
Cheers.
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,337
- 136
I think that is what upset me more than anything else about "Bowling." It was Heston who almost singlehandedly broke the barrier for blacks to get into Hollywood -- not just in acting roles but for jobs behind the scenes as well. And he played an important public role for the Civil Rights movement during the 60s.
And then Moore comes along 30+ years later and labels Heston a racist, and the idiot public not only falls for the lie, but Hollywood honors Moore for it. :|
Heston has also been a labor supporter and organizer for not just the upper echelon of Hollywood's highest paid, but all the way down to the lowest paid laborers. You're right, Heston has been a bona fide social liberal all his life, with numerous liberal causes to which he has dedicated much.
An entire life of accomplishments and advocacy, apparently, can be 'undone' by a simple misconstrued statement from a man clearly suffering from the early affects of Alzheimer's in the interview. Funny how an ignorant populace favors the prepared propagandist. Well, no, its not very funny. Its downright tragic, really.
The one thing about the left, they have absolutely no qualms about eating their own for purposes of political expediency - none.
An entire life of accomplishments and advocacy, apparently, can be 'undone' by a simple misconstrued statement from a man clearly suffering from the early affects of Alzheimer's in the interview. Funny how an ignorant populace favors the prepared propagandist. Well, no, its not very funny. Its downright tragic, really.
The one thing about the left, they have absolutely no qualms about eating their own for purposes of political expediency - none.
oh yes, the right are free of political sin.
come on, you're point is good...but dont start making sweeping generalizations to punctuate it.
The list of life-long liberal stalwarts who have been castigated, impugned, and ruined for daring to part with the left on even a single issue is actually quite stunning. The right has nothing like it.
For instance, Colin Powell's endorsement of affirmative action at the RNC. Had that been a liberal or Democrat criticizing affirmative action at the DNC, he or she would have been destroyed.
My statement was not an implicit defense of the right as 'free of political sin'. Try to read what I wrote, not what you think I might have meant.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter