Election 04

[dANdeLION]

Ok. I am Sorry. But you mentioned about how the election is made clouded to the public by the Media. I just thought I'd comment on it. But newspapers aren't the only section on media that surround us dANdeLION. There are others as well. And they all influence us in one way or another.

Very true, and in fact, I think the newspaper is the least....well, emotional form of information. I can only watch the wheather and sports on television news; everything else leads me to board up my house before murderous thieves or the ATF break in.....maybe my support of the current administration is a reaction to the obvious bias of the media; maybe I just like the underdog. But I do consider the media to be an enemy of mine, and the enemy of my enemy......

[dANdeLION]

Bush's career is marked by unsupassed levels of entitlement, dishonesty, outright lying, religious zealotry and terrible misunderestimations of his own place in the world. For a man who claims he is humble..he is more a Kevin than a Berek.

Wow. I hope you realize that you're blurring the lines between fiction and reality here.

Right now, a vote for John Kerry, Ben Affleck (Gigli non-withstanding) or even my Dog makes more sense than sending Bush back to office.

So you don't think much or Kerry either, then. Lucky me; I get to vote for somebody rather than against somebody.

[Revan]

Ok. I am Sorry. But you mentioned about how the election is made clouded to the public by the Media. I just thought I'd comment on it. But newspapers aren't the only section on media that surround us dANdeLION. There are others as well. And they all influence us in one way or another.

Very true, and in fact, I think the newspaper is the least....well, emotional form of information. I can only watch the wheather and sports on television news; everything else leads me to board up my house before murderous thieves or the ATF break in.....maybe my support of the current administration is a reaction to the obvious bias of the media; maybe I just like the underdog. But I do consider the media to be an enemy of mine, and the enemy of my enemy......

Do mine ears decieve me? Does dAN post something half civil? Agreeing????

[Revan]

Bush's career is marked by unsupassed levels of entitlement, dishonesty, outright lying, religious zealotry and terrible misunderestimations of his own place in the world. For a man who claims he is humble..he is more a Kevin than a Berek.

Wow. I hope you realize that you're blurring the lines between fiction and reality here.

Right now, a vote for John Kerry, Ben Affleck (Gigli non-withstanding) or even my Dog makes more sense than sending Bush back to office.

So you don't think much or Kerry either, then. Lucky me; I get to vote for somebody rather than against somebody.

Ignore dAN Gunslinger, he just makes subtle stabs at people when he can't come up with a good argument.

[Theo]

[

Not me Theo. I am doing everything in my power to see that he is never elected.

Too late. He's already been elected as both the Governor of Texas and the president. Looks like you and your time machine failed again.

I believe Gunslinger meant to write "reelected".

What amazes me is that the mainstream news media monster, which is the most vain, negative, biased, prejudiced, self-serving piece of crap that makes WWE seem real and authentic in comparison, has managed to cloud the thinking of so many otherwise intelligent people. Kerry is so freaking stupid, and the concept of "Big Ketsup" is so scary (we're talking $5.00 a bottle even if he only lasts one term here!) that I cannot help but vote for the guy I'd be supporting anyway because he's honest, intelligent, down to earth, and knows the only path to world peace lies in freeing and educating the repressed people in Iraq and other parts of the middle east.

... I can't tell if you're being serious now. Please help out this non-native English speaker and tell me whether you're joking or not.

[Theo]

Ok. I am Sorry. But you mentioned about how the election is made clouded to the public by the Media. I just thought I'd comment on it. But newspapers aren't the only section on media that surround us dANdeLION. There are others as well. And they all influence us in one way or another.

Yeah. Like the Internet.

[dANdeLION]

I wasn't joking, except for the parts where I was joking.

[Revan]

lols.

[A Gunslinger]

Wow. I hope you realize that you're blurring the lines between fiction and reality here.

I assume you speak of the Kevin/Berek reference, because Bush's bio is quite clear. If, so, indeed I was. Just trying to use a metaphor that we ALL can understand.

[MsMary]

Not voting at all - what a GREAT solution to our country's problems.

[dANdeLION]

I assume you speak of the Kevin/Berek reference, because Bush's bio is quite clear. If, so, indeed I was. Just trying to use a metaphor that we ALL can understand.

The problem is that Kevin does not fit your perception of Bush. Kevin isn't corrupt, Kevin isn't so bad you'd rather elect a Lord you are completely uninterested in as High Lord, just because he's not Kevin. I don't like this metaphor because the lines are clear in the Land; there's nobody trying to obfuscate the candidates, issues, whatever. There's just a group of heartbreakingly honest and open people who tell us about Kevin's shortcomings without spite or judgement. How I wish we could be more like the people of the Land.....until then, I will continue to support Bush, who I believe is trying to do the best thing for America, and the rest of the free world, no matter what Stone Phillips or Ted Coppell or any of those other media Ur-Viles say.

[A Gunslinger]

The problem is that Kevin does not fit your perception of Bush.

My only point was (and it is albeit an exaggerated one my friend) is that he more dangerous because of his intentions and implementation of them, than he is a hero.

[Seppi2112]

Here's how I see it. Regardless of trying to do the best for the American people, Bush has:

1) Rolled back more environmental regulations than I can even count. He wants to open up oil drilling in Wildlife preservations, and somehow thinks that we can improve air quality by being laxer on air quality restrictions for big businesses and car companies.

2) Turned the largest budget surplus in US history into the largest deficit in US history in under 4 years. Understandably, 9/11 and the popping of the tech bubble started a downward trend, but since when does giving a tax break help the economy? I understand the argument that giving money back to people stimulates their spending, but how much money did YOU get back on taxes? $300? $500? Even a thousand? Cheney made over $125,000 in tax refunds alone last year, and is set to make over $400,000 more this year. Seems like cash we could use for schools.

3) Not putting contracts up for bidding for reconstruction in Iraq. Instead of free market, lowest-price-does-the-job work, who is put in charge? Halliburton. More specifically, VP Dick Cheney's former company Halliburton. The one who kicked out execs in an Enron-esque move after charges of mismanagement of funds, etc...


And the list goes on. False pretenses for war are hard to prove, so I'll ignore them and give him the benefit of the doubt. I'm also happy to overlook the fact that the first thing Bush did on 9/11 was ensure that Osama Bin Laden's family staying in the US was found and brought in by the FBI/CIA... and then FLOWN HOME without being questioned. They are after all family friends (Saudi royal family has had business dealings with the Bush clan since the 1980s).

If you want sources they're out there, I just don't have the energy to find them all right now.

I'm a republican. Always have been. I didn't want to believe most of this stuff when I read it at first because it seemed so fictional. But the paper trail is legit. Opinion or otherwise, Bush cares about the upper class, their interests and making them more money.

If you care, try to be open-minded and check out:

www.michaelmoore.com
www.workingforchange.com/column_lst.cfm?AuthrId=43

Or pick up a copy of "Dude Where's My Country." I've never screamed so loudly at a book before in my life, but everything is documented, everything is based on primary sources and newspaper articles. Besides, with the things being claimed, don't you think that people like Michael Moore would have been successfully sued by now if their statements COULDNT be proven true?

</rant>

[The Leper Fairy]

Nicely put Seppi

[Brinn]

For a self proclaimed Republican you have a great deal of Democratic views.

Aside from that, you must be aware of the unintentional comedy in your call for openmindedness followed by links to sites on professional malcontent and purveyor of propaganda, Michael Moore.

Your logic equating a lack of law suits with the veracity of his claims is specious at best. Osama has not been sued for the rhetoric he spouts yet are you willing to believe his claims based upon the lack of law suits brought against him?

If you want to check the actual facts behind some of Moore's more famous claims I would point you here, here or here.

[Seppi2112]

Well Moore is an american that lots of people would like to find a way to shut up, and Osama is a foreigner that lots of people would like to kill. So yeah...

I checked the sites out before I replied.

www.mooreexposed.com/
The first one talks about the Truth of Michael Moore and makes claims about his being incredibly wealthy and thus unfit to say what he does. I would argue that it doesn't matter where he lives or how much money it makes any more than any of us really care how much Michaelangelo got paid to sculpt the David (not that I would ever compare Moore to Michaelangelo). The work is what's important and wouldn't be invalidated if Moore was rich, or poor, or a space alien for that matter.

On that note though, Moore has himself responded to similar websites and articles: www.michaelmoore.com/words/wackoattacko/

But if you can't trust one website, how can you trust another? You can't. I have no way to prove anything about Moore but I don't really care to anyways. I'll take his word because he hasn't given me any reason not to. (More on that later)

As far as Bowling for Columbine goes, I walked out of the film believing maybe half of what Moore said. You simply can't take anything at face value, and yes his movie is filled with his own personal views- but its his movie. That's his job. There are lawsuits that could be brought against Moore for misrepresentation of character if Charleton Heston or anyone else thought that was what Moore did, if in fact "Bowling uses deception as its primary tool of persuasion and effect" as your site suggests. People HATE this guy! You think for one minute they wouldn't try to shut him up if they could? Legally?

------

2nd site goes on about the Gun in Bank part of the movie.

--
www.spinsanity.org/columns/20031016.html writes:
And in a distortion of reality that is comparable to the altered Bush '88 campaign commercial that I noted, Lyons found that the scene in a bank in Michigan that that opens the film was staged. Customers who open long-term CDs at the bank actually have to go to a gun store to pick up the weapon after a background check. Yet the film clearly indicates that the bank itself stores and hands out guns to customers and Moore even jokes as he walks out, "Here's my first question: do you think it's a little dangerous handing out guns at a bank?" (This clip from the film can be viewed here in clip 3.)

--

The response:
The Truth: In the spring of 2001, I saw a real ad in a real newspaper in Michigan announcing a real promotion that this real bank had where they would give you a gun (as your up-front interest) for opening up a Certificate of Deposit account. They promoted this in publications all over the country – "More Bang for Your Buck!"

There was news coverage of this bank giving away guns, long before I even shot the scene there. The Chicago Sun Times wrote about how the bank would "hand you a gun" with the purchase of a CD. Those are the precise words used by a bank employee in the film.

When you see me going in to the bank and walking out with my new gun in "Bowling for Columbine" – that is exactly as it happened. Nothing was done out of the ordinary other than to phone ahead and ask permission to let me bring a camera in to film me opening up my account. I walked into that bank in northern Michigan for the first time ever on that day in June 2001, and, with cameras rolling, gave the bank teller $1,000 – and opened up a 20-year CD account. After you see me filling out the required federal forms ("How do you spell Caucasian?") – which I am filling out here for the first time – the bank manager faxed it to the bank's main office for them to do the background check. The bank is a licensed federal arms dealer and thus can have guns on the premises and do the instant background checks (the ATF's Federal Firearms database—which includes all federally approved gun dealers—lists North Country Bank with Federal Firearms License #4-38-153-01-5C-39922).
------
Links to references:

Here's the link to the initial ad:
www.michaelmoore.com/words/wackoattacko ... ankgun.jpg

Here's an actual story a newspaper did in 2001 about the ad:
www.michaelmoore.com/words/wackoattacko ... 010128.php
------

The difference? Moore has citations. He has evidence. He even has the Firearms license number belonging to the bank. Why else would a bank have a license to sell/distribute firearms?

Look all I am saying is that I hated Moore myself at first. I walked out of B4C thinking that he had some good points but that he was way too liberal- blaming LockheedMartin or the NRA for the Columbine killings for example. But the difference is, when he gives his opinion he says so, and when he is making a statement of fact he backs it up with references and physical proof.

I'm not a Democrat, I'm a scientist (lol) and I have a hard time disreputing someone who says what I don't want to hear when he has facts to back himself up. If you can show me hard evidence that what he says is untrue, and not just "We know a guy who knows Moore and HE says..." then I have no reason to mistrust the man.

I can't remember who said it, but "Experience never lies, it is only our expectations that does." I think it applies here.

[A Gunslinger]

Seppi... yer MACHO.

[Brinn]

Seppi,

Which one is it...

I'll take [Moore's] word because he hasn't given me any reason not to.

Or in your next sentence...

As far as Bowling for Columbine goes, I walked out of the film believing maybe half of what Moore said...

Take a look at these pages here which address the spin, misrepresentations and "creative editing" which Moore uses in BFC. It contains a section on the Bank scene and I'll link it for you here. Moore does cite fact in his response to the criticism however, like his movies, his answer is misleading and not indicative of the entire truth. Here is another link that deals directly with his responses from "Wacko Attacko".

I have no problem with your dislike of Bush or his administration. I may disagree but as I have stated before, you are certainly entitled to your opinion. However, holding up Michael Moore and his work as "proof" of your contentions is an odd choice. It is equivalent to a republican stating that a thorough read of Ann Coulter's "Bias" or a perusal of Limbaugh's websight should be enough to put one on the path to enlightenment. Surely you can provide a better source than Moore.

[A Gunslinger]

I have no problem with your dislike of Bush or his administration. I may disagree but as I have stated before, you are certainly entitled to your opinion. However, holding up Michael Moore and his work as "proof" of your contentions is an odd choice. It is equivalent to a republican stating that a thorough read of Ann Coulter's "Bias" or a perusal of Limbaugh's websight should be enough to put one on the path to enlightenment. Surely you can provide a better source than Moore.

Brinn, you too, are macho. Good points scored by both sides. I think it is abundantly clear how I feel!

[Tranquil Hegemony]

Seppi,

Which one is it...

I'll take [Moore's] word because he hasn't given me any reason not to.

Or in your next sentence...

As far as Bowling for Columbine goes, I walked out of the film believing maybe half of what Moore said...

Why don't you just call him a "flip-flopper" ;) (Sorry, I just couldn't resist!)

Anyway, since nobody asked for my opinion, here it is. I think Moore is full of hot air and I take everything he says with a grain of salt. But at least he doesn't say things like "liberals should be taken out to the streets and shot" (Anne Coulter) and that if there's a terrorist attack before the election, we should just not have one (Sean Hannity). Where these hypocritical wingnuts get the nerve to say liberals hate America is beyond my comprehension.