What are your opinions on Michael Moore?

Personally I wonder why he was with the green party in 2000? Didn't he see that it would be a tight race? Couldn't he tell that Bush would be the worst president in History? He seems to think so now.

Alex

I enjoy his work emensly .

Bush lost the election , he was not elected .
He was appointed by the USSC with 5 votes .

own celbrities (ie Michael Moore). I wonder what * would think of that!

He's absolutely fearless, and a helluva researcher. His movies are better than his writing, IMHO, but the message is in both.

I wouldn't want him on my ass, that's for sure.

I think Michael Moore is a genius. He sure pisses off the cons.:party:

I don't always agree with him, but you'll have that.

I do like his work for the most part, though.

He stands for a good cause but I don't think he is 100 per cent truthful in his documentaries.

anything specific, or were you simply told by someone else that he has used false information?

We are not. I've been in huge arguments about this before on DU. BUt I still say he did. As well, I've notice holes in his docs before.

I havent seen BFC, but he praises Canada for having relaxed gun laws yet very little gun violence :shrug:

Part where he runs around Canada opening unlocked doors. Trying to say we never lock our doors. If it's true that in the States "Lock your doors" means when you are at home in the daytime. Fine I'll give him that.

But then he shows "A Canadian Ghetto" Bullshit it may have been a low income area but it sure as hell wasn't East Van or Regent Park or the French Quarter.

Plus, he asks kids in a Parking lot at taco bell questions on Canada's social structure...teenagers in a parking lot..give me a fucking break.

But, I was curious about his portrayal of the Canadian 'ghetto'. I drove to Canada not long ago and saw far worse places then he exhibited.

Michael Moore is a great film maker. But, I don't fully 'trust' him to be fair.

He's the faux news of the left KWIM?

In addition, I don't always agree with his politics.

Do share the stories about the Canadian Ghetto. I'd like to hear them as we consider moving there depending on the 2004 elections ;)

Peace

East Vancouver....huge mess. Largest open drug market, poorest postal code between Canada and the US. I've seen disgusting things down there. If you really want to know more PM me and I'll PM you some more info.

Ok, so he portrays Canadians as being more trusting.. what a bad light to be put in!

Asking normal kids in a normal everyday place on their opinions is a horrible thing? Should he have gone and asked the richest person in Canada their opinions instead?

I really am puzzled why people get all up in arms about his documentaries.. they make you think, BFC certainly posed a good question and a simple, valid one at that. "Why does the US have more gun violence than any other country?"

a lie is a lie is a lie. I don't like my country being falsely presented.

He could have asked maybe a socialogist who has better insight than, "Well, we're more mellow here."

I usually shy away from experts myself..but three kids at a taco bell? Come on

My ex felt the same way about the film, and she lives in East Van. She thought he exaggerated the stuff about the unlocked doors and misrepresented the reality of living in the seedy parts of urban Canada.

That being said, I love Micahel Moore, and I think he has done as much as any DU member to steer potential voters towards the Democratic party.

a couple of days ago where you were vigorously defending BFC. You haven't even seen it?

If you have, how can you honestly say the movie attacks guns? That Moore hates gun owners. That Moore wants to *SHRIEK* take away your guns! :eyes:

Or that Moore hates gun owners, or that he wants to "*SHRIEK*" take away my guns. I didn't say that, altho it's true that Moore agitates for gun control and would, shriek, take away my ability to buy certain firearms if he had his druthers. I did say that it's factually inaccurate. You said that all the criticisms had been answered, and then provided me with a link explaining that the movie didn't have to be factually accurate because it was a film.

Now, pardon my confusion. By "not at all" do you mean you haven't seen the movie, "at all"? If not, why do you defend it so vehemently? How can you "honestly say" one thing or another about it, not having seen the thing?

the only people who have a problem with the film are the gun-lovers

I believe it won an Academy Award...or is ALL the Academy suspect gun-snatchers?!?!

Kmart shoppers and poor people living in Flynt.

It was a good movie over all but selling Moore as
anything but anti-gun is a losing case to make.

He thinks that gun ownership should end where his
childhood memories end.

Moore makes you folks uncomfortable because you know the gun culture in this country is out of control.

Remember the underground people from Escape from Planet of the Apes?

"Worship the gun. The gun is all. The gun is life" :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

I'm still waiting for an answer on how you feel qualified to pontificate at length on a movie you've never seen.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I don't trust others to form opinions for me. Sounds kinda like a dittohead move. But to each his own...

While you may impune the critics of the film all you wish, you still haven't provided any refutation of the criticisms I listed to you before, unless you wish to stand on the "BFC is art" argument.

I'm off to bed in any case. g'night.

I like him. I agree that we have a sick culture.

I think that self defense is a basic freedom
that I would like to preserve. Why trust your
life to the whims of the state and the people
who use it to further their control over the
world and everyone in it. Many of these people
shout hate out over the airways day after day.
Did you ever hear about the radio brodcasts
in Rawanda?

I don't think america is a safe place.

Do you?

dupe

however, his support for Clark means he isnt as liberal or intelligent as I thought.

Seeing as it turns out Clark is for the war, praised Bush, and voted for Regan.

Alex

Amy Goodman asked the same question and he basically said "Well, I'm not going to say 'Anybody But Bush', but hey, we've GOT to get rid of Bush". He said he is not endorsing Clark, but that he had heard Clark speak and that Clark was talking about many of the things that need to be spoken about, and also that he was pro-environment and pro-choice and so forth. Here's the link to the Moore interview: http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/10/15/1543216. (On edit: But the part about Clark is towards the end of the interview.)

He also talked about the Dems & the Reps being 2 sides of the same coin because they are "funded by the same people".

Most interesting was his story about Harper Collins threatening to shred 50,000 copies of Stupid White Men if he didn't change 50% of the book and take out a lot of stuff that was critical of Bush. And how the librarians protested against Harper Collins.

Let's hope his foray into that territory is temporary. :)

When did he say he supported Mr. TrojanHorse?! :scared: (I'd say "Mr. Trojan", but then people would think of condoms and not the Greek legend...)

He might have stated his support of Nader in 2000 just to "come out" to the world. I have no clue. But if he's supporting Clark now?! As Clark will likely be nominated and may win, I sincerely hope he's not a Trojan Horse. That would mean the end of the Democrats for good, when we can't even discern our own from the phonies - especially when the phonies' records have been so obvious in the past.

Reminds me of the series finale to "Blake's 7". Blake couldn't tell who was resistance or who was Federation any longer, and it cost him big-time...

He also talks about Dean and DK.

dont know that he endorsed him as such

In his open letter, Moore makes this quite clear. He thinks Clark could add to the quality of discourse, and be a potential bushbeater. But go to michaelmoore.com and read what he actually says:

"But now the hard part begins. In my open letter to General Clark, while strongly encouraging him to run, I told him that I was not yet endorsing him -- I have no plans to endorse anyone at this point -- yet I thought his voice should be heard in this campaign. Why? Because I heard him say things that I think the American public needs to hear."

If wanting Clark's voice to be heard means he isn't as liberal or intelligent as you thought, then maybe you aren't as liberal or intelligent as you think.

He said this morning on Democracy Now that he was closest to Kucinich in politics.

I'd vote for him for President. Maybe that's his strategy. To run in 2008 as a "Neo-Dem", with Kucinich as Veep. </wetdream>

Moore tends to put his values and his ideals over lesser evils and such (shouldn't we all?) But I wouldn't begin to conjecture as to why he supported the Greens in 2000. Right principles. Wrong time. When corporate america has usurped total control is the time the Green party will have its day. By then the American public would have woken up, too - I hope.

:)

:toast:

I applaud him for that alone. He's been banging at the gate for years, and I trust his agenda.

If he had shut his mouth Gore would be president. Period.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

If you want to form an opinion on Michael Moore, may I suggest reviewing his work before and after the 2000 presidential campaign? That was one set of events, but it doesn't exist in isolation as the only thing he's ever done.

He has created documentary films that challenge the unchallengable. His books dare to write the unwriteable. In public speaking, he says the unspeakable. He's direct, insightful, and a clever pundit who can find novel ways to illustrate difficult concepts.

And right now, he's one of the few media champions going to bat for the left.

Complaining because you disagreed with his position during the 2000 elections is understandable, but ultimately useless. It's been 3 years since Bush stole the election. If Mr. Moore can admit a miscalculation, and dedicate his entire tax refund to defeating shrub in the upcoming elction, perhaps it's time for his Gore-minded critics to re-evaluate their grudge.

Dems couldn't either, so what does that say?

and in your faces repukes!

Really, I thought Bowling pretty much sucked. Roger & Me was pure genius of course, and his TV Nation show was incredible. Canadian Bacon was one of the funniest movies I've ever seen (I think he produced it but didn't direct it, not sure).

Before the 2000 election I admired him. After he sold out to Nader and attacked Gore for months I lost whatever respect I ever had for him.

Some of his more devoted fans can't dare to hear anything negative about him, though.

nt

Moore was right in 2000. Nader was the best candidate.

Some of his more devoted detractors can't bear to read anything positive about him.

so I can respond. Save the one word communications for the AOL chat rooms. You are ignored.

Can any of you name anyone else who takes the fight to Bush, better than MOORE? His book is an all out assault on Bush, and his up coming movie will take the truth about the Bush/oil cartel to the masses.

office. He's using the talent and power he has right now to work for the people.

His hatred of we that desire self-defense is un excusable.

His beef is with the NEO- NRA faction.

And my beef is with their lies and hatred of snowmobilers. In Vermont we don't take kindly to snowmobiler bashers and faux anti-reports against them.

:nuke:

Anybody wanting to pick a fight with Michael has to go through me first! I love this guy.

and he's generally right on things and he is a great voice... but at the same time, his support for Nader in '00 was frustrating and idiotic. And his link of the Kosovo air strikes and Columbine were well, over the top and made no sense. I was also annoyed in that movie how he sought Marylin Manson's opinion on the issues. Who cares what that GOP piece of shit has to say? There was way too much Clinton bashing in that movie.

and we need them. I think his work serves as good, populist introductions to issues which might not otherwise receive as broad a hearing.

He was right that Gore was crippled by his dependence on the "powers that be" (if Gore had been stronger in presnting hiimslfas a fighter his victory might have been larger and less susceptible to a 5/4 reversal) and also had the courage to urge Green voters in contested states to vote for Gore as a tactical move.

He does with film, TV, and books what Woodie Guthrie and Phil Ochs did with song and guitar.

Moore's "Seven Questions for Bush" ought to be answered.

The questions themselves aren't that great, but the way that he follows it up is pretty damning. He's got all of that stuff sourced right there at the bottom of the page and I can only help thinking, if only the public knew a quarter of that stuff, Bush would be done for. I haven't noticed any sourcing from the Washington Times or Faux News though :P

Way too many people are afraid of being called unamerican or unpatriotic for publicly telling the truth about chimpy. Michael tells it all and will continue telling it all.

of Rush. He appeals to emotion rather than reason in the same manner and doesn't have any qualms with stretching the truth. He's a showman, a propagandist. I wish we didn't need people like Moore in the national spotlight, but I guess you've got to fight fire with fire.

We on the left like nuance and are 'tolerant of ambiguity'. I'm not sure if Moore naturally looks at stuff in such a simple way, or if he's just so smart that he knows that's what it takes to appeal to the masses. Maybe he recognizes that the majority are on a kindergarten level in politics.
God knows we NEED people who can appeal to the masses. For whatever the reason, I'm really glad he's out there.

He appeals to people that already agree with him, and is hated by people that disagree with him. I don't think he does much to stir the swing voters because he's obviously an ideologue and has a reputation as such, just like Rush.

I don't know, I really liked the guy after Roger & Me. But since 2000, and some of the stuff he's said I thought was asinine, and BFC...he's wearing thin.

"He's a gun-hater!!! WAHHHH WAHHHH WAHHHHH!!!!" :eyes:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA that's a good one :-) :hi:

I admire him for speaking out at the awards at
the height of the war hysteria.

I admire him for standing up to the book burners.

He should have seen Bush coming in 2000 and not
sold the Gore equals Bush lie.

I like Bowling ok but felt that some of it was
complete crap. Not the part about fear racism
and the history of violent intervention which
I agree with. But the stupid story blaming the
kid being killed on the mother who was bused to
work two jobs at the mall. That was stupid.
The woman said she liked the jobs and Moore
selling it as an indictment of Dick Clark,
work programs, and guns in general was crap.

Getting Kmart to stop selling bullets was also
stupid. Pimping the victims to earn gun contol
points was pretty abject. I thought his thread
about the morally bankrupt culture of the town
was closer to the truth of that nilistic meltdown
than going after Kmart.

In general he is good by me because he is able
to market a solid liberal message to the masses.
I like what he does even if I disagree about
gun control, Nader and Clark.

is that he doesn't give a shit as to what we think of him........

There had ought to be many more like him.