Turn on thread page Beta

Only stupid white men would believe Michael Moore!! watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Brilliant opinion piece in the telegraph today. This is definetly for those who think Michael Moore is a money grabbing spin artist, but who does he really work for? lol

    Only stupid white men would believe Michael Moore
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by http://www.opinion.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2004/01/01/do0101.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2004/01/01/ixopinion.html)
    Indeed, the more vigorously Moore attacks the President, the better Bush's approval ratings. Funny, that. And Moore's lifestyle has been awfully lavish of late. One doesn't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but it makes you think, doesn't it?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    That article sheer brilliance. Michael Moore is nothing more than some angry left winger who wants to blame someone else because his life for a short period was crap. His only following is the same angry losers who want to blame their *****y life on someone else, the obvious scapegoats; The Government, Successful people; and students who don't know anything about History
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MurphysMoment.)
    That article sheer brilliance. Michael Moore is nothing more than some angry left winger who wants to blame someone else because his life for a short period was crap. His only following is the same angry losers who want to blame their *****y life on someone else, the obvious scapegoats; The Government, Successful people; and students who don't know anything about History
    He makes more sense then Ann sodding Coulter.
    Michael Moore is an entertaining polemicist, like Julie Burchill or the aforemantioned Coulter. You dont read them because you expect sense, you read them because they're interesting.
    By the way, I am broadly in sympathy with quite a bit of what Moore says and I can assure you, as a history student, that much of it does not deserve the historically and politically inaccurate brush that the whole of Moore's work is often tarred with by right wingers who are scared of his following.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lala)
    He makes more sense then Ann sodding Coulter.
    Michael Moore is an entertaining polemicist, like Julie Burchill or the aforemantioned Coulter. You dont read them because you expect sense, you read them because they're interesting.
    By the way, I am broadly in sympathy with quite a bit of what Moore says and I can assure you, as a history student, that much of it does not disturb the historically and politically inaccurate brush that the whole of Moore's work is often tarred with by right wingers who arw scared of his following.
    Well said lala. Michael Moore is popular because of his writing style, and his cutting use of satire. Not because of his political accuracy. You'd have to be a real idiot to "believe Michael Moore". But I too, am similarly in sympathy with Moore, although he tends to go a bit overboard.

    But The Awful Truth and Bowling for Columbine are examples of excellent movies, and his statement at the Oscars shows balls - I doubt that he's involved in any conspiracy because of the way he spoke out at such a tense moment.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lala)
    He makes more sense then Ann sodding Coulter.
    Hear, hear!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NeuroticSurgeon)
    Well said lala. Michael Moore is popular because of his writing style, and his cutting use of satire. Not because of his political accuracy. You'd have to be a real idiot to "believe Michael Moore". But I too, am similarly in sympathy with Moore, although he tends to go a bit overboard.

    But The Awful Truth and Bowling for Columbine are examples of excellent movies, and his statement at the Oscars shows balls - I doubt that he's involved in any conspiracy because of the way he spoke out at such a tense moment.
    I actually dislike quite a lot of his style. He is often quite inpolite in his interviews and Sometiems its so obvious he's bending the truth you just wish you had the remote at hand...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jonatan)
    I actually dislike quite a lot of his style. He is often quite inpolite in his interviews and Sometiems its so obvious he's bending the truth you just wish you had the remote at hand...

    It can't be that bad if you're not sufficiently annoyed to get out of your chair.


    To see an example of his inaccuracy, check out what he says in SWM about Catholics in Northern Ireland. May have been true 30 or 40 years ago, but not now.

    I think any conspiracy claims are nonsense. Whether you think he makes any sense or not, it seems clear that he is really passionate about this.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lala)
    He makes more sense then Ann sodding Coulter.
    Michael Moore is an entertaining polemicist, like Julie Burchill or the aforemantioned Coulter. You dont read them because you expect sense, you read them because they're interesting.
    By the way, I am broadly in sympathy with quite a bit of what Moore says and I can assure you, as a history student, that much of it does not disturb the historically and politically inaccurate brush that the whole of Moore's work is often tarred with by right wingers who arw scared of his following.
    There you go guys, la la knows best...(s)he is right. I, two, agree with Michael Moore on a number of issues. What I like about the guy is that he, sometimes, touches on certain issues in certain ways that one would have in the back of ones mind.
    But as Jonatan said he can be quite impolite and disrespectful just to make his point- but that makes good tv doesnt it!?!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by icarusgideon)
    But as Jonatan said he can be quite impolite and disrespectful just to make his point- but that makes good tv doesnt it!?!
    Maybe that quote will be in his next book!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jonatan)
    Maybe that quote will be in his next book!
    u never know what the guy will do next........do u reckon I will make any money out of this, cuz if he quotes me -copyrights and stuff come in.............I really could use a couple of million pounds!
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    How much money has he earned? More than a couple of millions...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by icarusgideon)
    u never know what the guy will do next........do u reckon I will make any money out of this, cuz if he quotes me -copyrights and stuff come in.............I really could use a couple of million pounds!
    I think the probability that he quotes you is inversely proportional to the amount of money you would earn if he did.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i wouldn't say it was 'good' tv and he definetly isn't a good journalist. The thing is he is thought of as a good journalist by those who want to believe him. His views are based on very little truth. Although I understand that he uses his artistic license and people could say he is being comical etc many others say he is unveiling the truth.

    The other problem I have with him is just the irrelevant comments he makes, like how he tries to make out GWBush and some idiot who got into Yale(?) and then became president. I think some of the smartest people I have met would have trouble getting through Yale's History and MBA programmes, Bush is hardly thick. I wouldn't even mind the badly thought out comments, if it weren't for the people who read MMoore and start to say the same rubbish over and over and over until they actually become stupid enough to believe it.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hattori)
    i wouldn't say it was 'good' tv and he definetly isn't a good journalist. The thing is he is thought of as a good journalist by those who want to believe him. His views are based on very little truth. Although I understand that he uses his artistic license and people could say he is being comical etc many others say he is unveiling the truth.

    The other problem I have with him is just the irrelevant comments he makes, like how he tries to make out GWBush and some idiot who got into Yale(?) and then became president. I think some of the smartest people I have met would have trouble getting through Yale's History and MBA programmes, Bush is hardly thick. I wouldn't even mind the badly thought out comments, if it weren't for the people who read MMoore and start to say the same rubbish over and over and over until they actually become stupid enough to believe it.
    Can add in the fact that he contradicts himself several times within a single movie, that he clip interviews to make them support his case, that he quotes sources incorrectly etc etc...

    As an example, he qoutoes George Orwell's 1984, critisizing the republican party. The only problem is that the quote he used is taken out of context and was in fact taken from a part of the book were Orwell tried to immitate sovjet communism propaganda. Those who have actually read 1984 know that Orwell was greatly sceptical towards socialism and communism, hardly the book you want to quote when critisizing capitalism...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    For someone coming from the Bush dynasty, getting into Yale (or any other IVY league uni) is hardly an astonishing achievement. I dare not think, of anyone who would not agree that having such enormous wealth of oil will get you much further than your friend dare think of, irrespective of intelligence.
    And in my opinion Bush is hardly the best politician (or the most knowledgeable US president) america has seen for he did not even know what the capital city of India was and who the Pakistan was, during the elections.

    And before any of you guys say anything, I did not get that from Michael Moore's little books, but from a much reliable source (the BBC!)
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by icarusgideon)
    For someone coming from the Bush dynasty, getting into Yale (or any other IVY league uni) is hardly an astonishing achievement. I dare not think, of anyone who would not agree that having such enormous wealth of oil will get you much further than your friend dare think of, irrespective of intelligence.
    And in my opinion Bush is hardly the best politician (or the most knowledgeable US president) america has seen for he did not even know what the capital city of India was and who the Pakistan was, during the elections.

    And before any of you guys say anything, I did not get that from Michael Moore's little books, but from a much reliable source (the BBC!)
    I agree that Bush aint exactly the brightest person I know about (understatement of the year), but I would rather have bush for president than Moore...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jonatan)
    I agree that Bush aint exactly the brightest person I know about (understatement of the year), but I would rather have bush for president than Moore...
    well I am not so sure, cuz what exactly DOES Bush do being a president relies much more on the working of the administration rather than the actual intelligence of Bush.......dont you agree?
    Its the big players of the game i.e. Condeleeza Rice, Rushfield and Colin Powell who are the thinking machine behind this.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by icarusgideon)
    For someone coming from the Bush dynasty, getting into Yale (or any other IVY league uni) is hardly an astonishing achievement. I dare not think, of anyone who would not agree that having such enormous wealth of oil will get you much further than your friend dare think of, irrespective of intelligence.
    And in my opinion Bush is hardly the best politician (or the most knowledgeable US president) america has seen for he did not even know what the capital city of India was and who the Pakistan was, during the elections.

    And before any of you guys say anything, I did not get that from Michael Moore's little books, but from a much reliable source (the BBC!)
    The thing is getting INTO Yale would be easy, his family supports it and is in the alumni, but getting through Yale is slightly harder, an idiot would not be able to do it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hattori)
    The thing is getting INTO Yale would be easy, his family supports it and is in the alumni, but getting through Yale is slightly harder, an idiot would not be able to do it.
    Ok guys I dont wanna start off conspiracies here, but I have heard of people buying there grades and then later the whole Degree! Wouldnt be to surprised if Bush did something along those lines!!

    THIS is not the point now anyway............
 
 
 
Poll
Is the Big Bang theory correct?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.