farenheit 9/11

2331-june25-2004

this post has been edited on june 26, 2004 11:55

so this was thad, checking in (which i appreciate):

saw fahrenheit 9/11 today. quite a movie. it was very well done, and while it is certainly flagrant propaganda, it was also incredibly factually well-put together. i would encourage anyone to check it out.

i'll show him i appreciate him reading the site by getting mad at him for saying this. hehe

well, i don't have too much to say, except i hate michael moore and he doesn't present "facts" as much as "lies" or "sorta facts that fit his worldview". what am i babbling about? well read about the problems with farenheit 9/11 here. the author is part of the "american left", so don't think that it's just some conservative getting upset at the anti-bush message. also, for a more thorough and possibly partisan attack on michael moore, check out this website. the essay on "bowling for columbine" was especially fleshed-out, i thought.

i've had arguments with jen and zack in the last two days about the dangers of michael moore. the impression i get from reading around is that there _is_ a fair amount of leftish people that dislike him. of course, pretty much every conservative dislikes him too. nitin often calls him the ann coulter of the left, and i can't really disagree. (if that reference didn't make sense, let me know.)

ok, anyways, thad, i promise, i am glad you responded and checked out the site. now if you'd only email or go online as often as you check your fantasy baseball team...

UPDATE: another article by someone smarter than me about michael moore.

comments

re: Michael Moore is fat

from: Nick (2004-06-25 23:52:22)

while the title of my response is a true fact, it has nothing to do with the fact that I dislike Michael Moore. And I hate Bush too, so my opinion is unbiased dislike for that bastard. I am a very liberal guy myself, but I can't stand the way he tries to get his message across. It forces his opinions on the public in a way that is not true to the facts and he simply makes a scene to get his opinions heard. In conclusion, Michael Moore is fat.

re: Craigslist

from: Nick (2004-06-26 12:45:42)

This has nothing to do with anything that was previously said or my previous response... but I just thought everyone should know that if you are looking at the popular site "craigslist" to buy or sell shit or look for an apartment... make sure you type in CRAIGSLIST with an "S" because if you type in CRAIGLIST, I found that it's a porn site. You can imagine my confusion this morning when I was trying to find an apartment in DC and instead got a big picture of boobs. Yea... carry on.

re: irregardless

from: thad (2004-06-26 20:38:09)

i think moore is a douche and i've never seen one of his movies or read anything he has written before.

i tried to watch the movie with as open a mind as possible, because i know it is highly opinionated (he readily admits this), but i also tried to pay attention to the actual facts that he presented.

as far as the problems with the movie, yeah, fine. i don't know enough about politics to dispute anything said in the article. However, it seems to me that he criticizes moore for only presenting things that "fit his worldview", which is interesting because i think that that's exactly how the author operates in his critique of the movie, focusing on the shadier parts of the movie and not really saying much when moore does make a good point, which i believe he does at times.

anyway, seriously, see the movie. there are some really funny and clever parts, and it's obviously sparking debate, which can't be a bad thing. and moore has about 4 chins.

re: hehe

from: niv (2004-06-26 22:55:19)

4 chins! that's pretty accurate. and funny. more importantly, we need an over/under on how long until phil looks like michael moore...

re: more liberals against moore

from: nitin (2004-06-27 11:13:39)

Here is another liberal who has a strong distaste for Moore's propaganda.

re: argument?

from: Zack (2004-06-28 07:52:59)

I wouldn't have called it an argument...maybe just a friendly disagreement. And it wasn't even much of one, since I agreed that he's a propagandist. The disagreement came in whether or not his propaganda serves a purpose, which I feel it does.

Obviously, the political legitimacy of his movies and writings are up for debate, just as is the political legitimacy of the very people who call themselves our 'leaders.' But just because he's a narcisistic blowhard doesn't mean he doesn't know how to make a meaningful and emotional point.

I feel that as long as you approach anything he's created knowing that its propaganda, but open to what he has to say, you'll be able to see that it actually is really well done; as long as you're smart enough to see through the conveniently worded 'facts' that he presents.

The question, which niv and I struggle with on almost a daily basis is: Are the vast majority of American people smart enough??

re: right

from: niv (2004-06-28 08:29:07)

and the answer is no. to the smart enough thing.

and it was an argument, in that we disagreed. no feelings were hurt, so maybe it wasn't up to par with the normal arguments you have...

re: true

from: Zack (2004-06-28 08:47:01)

my perception of an argument includes yelling, and name calling, and grudge holding, whereas a disagreement is an intelligent conversation in which two people represent opposing points of view. there was no name calling, or yelling, so it wasn't an argument.

fucker.

re: you ass

from: niv (2004-06-28 12:43:08)

see title

re: Moder foqerrrr

from: jrdureza (2004-11-29 11:52:26)

The only thing moore does on his movies are express his points of views on a really smart way.
Though they are very subjective, they are really important that every US citizen whatchs it

re: moore is great

from: juan carlos (2004-11-29 11:53:37)

jajaja jrdureza you are right