Michael Moore: Bush Knows Osama's Location, Won't Go After Him

[Terri]

Michael Moore: Bush Knows Osama's Location,
Won't Go After Him

Media Research Center
May 12, 2003

To the astonishment of Bob Costas, Friday night on HBO far-left crank/movie producer Michael Moore claimed, during an interview on Costas' show, that the Bush administration “absolutely” knows where Osama bin Laden is located and doesn't go after him “because he's funded by their friends in Saudi Arabia!” Moore speculated: “Do you think that Osama bin Laden planned 9-11 from a cave in Afghanistan? I can't get a cell signal from here to Queens.”

Setting up the May 9 interview on HBO's On the Record with Bob Costas, which airs at 11:30pm EDT/PDT, Costas played a clip of Moore at the Academy Awards after winning for his “documentary,” Bowling for Columbine: “We live in a time where we have a man sending us to war for fictitious reasons [edit jump] We are against this war Mr. Bush. Same on you Mr. Bush! Shame on you!”

Full Article (http://www.mediaresearch.or g/cyberalerts/2003/cyb20030512.asp#4)

[rkeyo]

Amazing how this food-intake challenged leftist of dubious sexual orientation, who suffers from a diarrhea of words and a constipation of thought, apparently is privy to information that is denied to all of Congress, and is confided in by Mr. Bush in person. Perhaps Mr. Bush should appoint him head of the CIA... http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/flag19.gif

[azwhitewolf]

http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rotflo.gif

Agreed - but wouldn't that be "food OUTGO challenged"?

What kills me is that the same leftist groups who enjoy bashing and tearing down any sort of organized religion, seem to love this guy and his unorganized "fiction", and scramble to hear more!

Shame on you, Moore. For not even writing a decent documentary. For unfairly smearing Charton Heston, a REAL American hero. SHAME ON YOU, MOORE. SHAME ON YOUR FAT @$$!

[pRIMrose]

I've never known of a celeb with the initials MM that had a dab of sense. Marilyn Monroe, Marilyn Manson or Michael Moore. And of course there's that sterling entertainer known as "M & M" (Eminem) http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tqrolleyes.gif Collectively, if their brains were water you could pour them out on a dime and a red bug could wade through with his pants legs rolled down. http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif Which proves you don't have to have a lot of brains to be rich and famous. Just a lot of sheep to follow you.

[angelus]

Quote[/b] ]diarrhea of words and a constipation of thought,

That is quite possibly the funniest line I've seen in a long time! *http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rotflo.gif *http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rotflo.gif *http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rotflo.gif

Quote[/b] ]What kills me is that the same leftist groups who enjoy bashing and tearing down any sort of organized religion, seem to love this guy and his unorganized "fiction", and scramble to hear more! *

That's because religion scares them, because they do not understand it. *Fiction is all they understand, so it does not scare them.

[Right & right]

The entertainment industry is full of buffoons who think that their opinions are not only worthy of our support (read: Right)
but also to be blindly agreed with, since they're celebrities. Moore, you & Penn, Sarandon, Clooney, & the rest insult my intelligence with those assumptions. *You are displaying your LACK of intelligence by continuing to open your mouth!

[Terri]

Right & right! Welcome to the forum!

[makidwell]

Let me assure you Mr. Moore - if President Bush knew where Osama was - he wouldn't be there for long. Maybe he is funding you instead Mr. Moore and you are trying to put the monkey on someone else? It is apparent that you have not one shred of intelligence in your body. You not only disgust me, you make me sick to my stomach. I pray that our country never falls prey to the likes of you and others like you. God help us if that ever happens. Thank God for President Bush and our men and women of the military. http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif

[Jerry44]

http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif Why does anyone print the ravings of this Lunatic anyway?http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif?

[Terri]

Well Jerry, since Disney is willing to finance his ravings to be presented to legions of the unaware, I think that conservatives organizations like GOPUSA and NewsMax have to let it be known.

[Jaksavin]

It is amazing that this guy is allowed out on the street! There obviously is no limitation to the level of moronic behaviour that can and will be tolerated. The more amazing thing is that in light of yesteday's bombing and tragic loss of life in Saudi Arabia will do nothing to disabuse this miscreant from further ravings of his demented loggoria.
I am STILL waiting for Jeananne Garafaloony to get on her knees on the broken glass! I am sure that somewhere Sarandan and her significant other are finding a way to blame this bombing on the US!

[pRIMrose]

Hi Jaksavin http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wavey.gif ~ welcome to http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/gopusa.gif

The left loonies are really just cowards ~ as we observed when they beat a hasty retreat from the "human shield" mode in Iraq. http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif They don't mind running their mouth as long as they are sure they aren't really in harms way. A bunch of anti-American losers. http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tqrolleyes.gif I still say, quit buying all the trash and drivel they produce and they'll soon dry up.

[Corgie Girl]

Is it just me, or doesn't Mr. Moore start looking and acting "moore & moore" like Jabba the Hut? He has the the same intelligence and eating habits, and is just as appealing. Perhaps Mr. Moore is the victim of a new disease "brain hemorrhoids" caused by their migration from the lardier nether regions where they are being squeezed out to large areas of vacuum, and thus needs our compassion. Believe me if President Bush new where Osama was, he would give him Mr. Moore's address as one of the key purveyors of "American Corruption"!

[Covenant]

Wow, what a singularly opinionated board.... Is there really a lfty socialist agenda to take over the world? Does anyone else deserve to have their own opinions?


Can an attack on a celebrity or political group be construed as hate speech? Is this a really family friendly site? I

3. The Forum or its Private Messaging system may not be used to communicate hate speech, flame, or attack another member in any way. This behavior will not be tolerated and may result in immediate loss of membership access to the GOPUSA Forum. The Forum or its Private Messaging system may not be used to transmit Spam (the posting of the same message in multiple forums or to multiple members). GOPUSA strives for a friendly family atmosphere in its Forum, and expletives and excessive vulgar language are not permitted.

I do not mean to mean to raise alarms but is seems like some of the people on this board (and some of the most graphic...) are really out for blood. I am just concerned. Thank you.

[pRIMrose]

Quote[/b] ]The Forum or its Private Messaging system may not be used to communicate hate speech, flame, or attack another member in any way.

Hi Covenant http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wavey.gif

If you will notice, the rules explicitly refer to attacking another member in the forum. It doesn't say anything about celebrities. You are free to defend the indefensible http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin2.gif and await the replies from those who do not agree. http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[Covenant]

alas... you are right. I bow to your bunghole... I shoulda known you were a lawyer prim ;) hey as a message board admin, it seems you've become quite a celebrity around here yourself. What do we make of that?

[Jaksavin]

Dear Covenant:
All are entitled to free speah. It IS a free country afterall. As far as your sensitivity to the vitriol accorrded the 'celebs', I dare posit that this is all in reponse to their oft-misguided rage against all that is good and proper. These folks hate America and all for which our great country stands. They are quick to spend a buck but loathe to acknowledge that this is the ONLY country in the world where they could get away with it. Anywhere else they would have been incarcerated (China, Iran, etc), or elected (france, Germany) and not have had the opportunity for a free populace to support these miscreants. As GWB said: "you are either with us or against us". 'Nuff said!
God Speed
John

[Covenant]

John- Thank you for the 1st amendment confirmation. It seems that right is getting harder and harder to come by now a days. Is all this 'they hate america' stuff really true? I've lived in various parts of the country all of my life and never left it. Is it really so bad 'out' there? i don't really go for all the hate speech. Especially when poeple spend alot of time saying that other poeple 'hate' this and that but never really get down and try to explain why. usually the best answer to that is some moral story. If the 'celebs' were not 'created' by the 'american media' they would not be 'celebs'. there is no 'american media' in China Iran etc. Where was Ronald Reagan elected president?

[Jaksavin]

Dear Covenant:
The "media" has "created" all the "problems" "caused" by these "celebs". Could it all be part of some grand plot? I do not know. I, too, have lived in many parts of our great land and the feeling is pretty universal to one degree or another. Where the Right has a stronghold, they excoriate the left and vice-versa. But my feeling is and has been that the "hate speech" from the Right is simply in response to that which has been proulgated by the Left. I am not claiming conservatives perfect (far from it) but at least we know that we are not. In contradistinction, our "friends" on the Left have a tendancy to spew anti-good (insert any other word after hyhpen) in the addled hope that they will appear priescent and intellegent. Remember, in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. So it is with the Moores, Penns, Clintons, Sarandons, Daschles and so on. In their greatly inflated sense of ego, their wee bit of intellegence looms lofty among the less-informened. To which I posit, the true giants of intellect are those who can discuss and discourse without insulting the topic or the participants. The Joe Franklin panel noted above only serves to underscore that.
(Please do not infer that I have less intellegence than others because I do not spell-check! LOL)

"When you are running down my country, you are walking on the fighting side of me!"

God Speed
John

[Corgie Girl]

Covenant:
The vitriol towards 'celebs' (and I use the word loosely here) like Mr. Moore is that most of these people are relatively uneducated, live in a rarified (and paranoid, I might add) universe. They are not well read and have very little knowledge of world history, etc. But in spite of this, they use their position in society to spew, not reasoned, logical objections to what is happening, but bitter and mean EMOTIONAL statements meant to demean and degrade. Most of it stems back to the point that the left thinks that their candidate was robbed due to Bush's election by the Electoral College and they can't let it go. This all is fine and they DO have the right to free speech, but then so do we. We have a much smaller pulpit, but, I would say, are much more educated on events and history and I feel that our insight is much more rationally based. Don't forget, when the world seems to have gone mad, humor does rise to the top!

[pRIMrose]

Covenant ~ I haven't a clue as to what you think you mean. http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tqrolleyes.gif But to set the record straight ~ I am not an administrator on this board. Just a lowly moderator. Neither am I a lawyer. However, be advised, had I been, the above post would have been your last. http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wavey.gif

[Terri]

Quote[/b] ]However, be advised, had I been, the above post would have been your last.

All things can be arranged.

Covenant, you are suspended. If you wish to be reinstated you may contact me privately for a discussion of the rules and purpose of this forum.

[cheeze]

Quote[/b] (Terri @ May 13, 2003 -- 7:01 pm)]Quote[/b] ]However, be advised, had I been, the above post would have been your last.

All things can be arranged.

Covenant, you are suspended. If you wish to be reinstated you may contact me privately for a discussion of the rules and purpose of this forum.
Terri - THANK YOU! Good job well done! http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif

[StarspangledSweetie]

http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/star2.gif
It is so easy to attack Michael Moore. I'd like to see some other incriminating evidence against him, though. Other than, of course, that he is fat and that he lies. It scares me that there is more proof that Bush is a liar than proof that Moore lies. It is the weak who cut into someone's outer qualities rather than taking the time to research inner qualities. http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[Charie]

Okay, Triple S. You made an unsubstantiated charge that the Prez lies. Give us some concrete examples, please.

[StarspangledSweetie]

http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/star2.gif
Sadly, if you look at what Bush's platforms are in terms of "leaving no child behind," and then look at what he has done for education, it's complete hypocrisy. I explained how he lies in my post above, if you failed to catch it. Bush claims to be a compassionate conservative but then uncompassionately hurts the children in terms of education, welfare, and healthcare. so sad http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

[GodBlessEveryone]

Allow me...."Leave no child behind" and what happens? MASSIVE cuts to education which are diverted to the military. there are plenty more, but I won't steal triple S's thunder...(PS. did you have anything to do with Vin Diesel's masterpiece 'Triple X'?) http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[pRIMrose]

The last time I checked, Congress appropriates the money. The President either signs or vetoes. The Democratic Senate's primary function for the past two years has been to obstruct and water down everything that the President wants. If programs suffer you can thank a Democrat.

I'm really growing weary of tired old liberal axioms. This President has shown exemplary performance and expertise during his short tenure. Even while trying to get cooperation from the backstabbers in Congress.

It is amazing that liberals simply are unable to connect the dots. Bush inherited a sagging economy in 2000 and before he could turn around he was forced to bulk up an emaciated military and implement Homeland Security in answer to 9/11. An attack that should have been prevented by the previous administration, since they were well aware of the danger and chose to ignore it. Guess Michael Moore didn't catch those pesky little facts. http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tqrolleyes.gif

[Saber]

Quote[/b] ]MASSIVE cuts to education which are diverted to the military.

Better to remain silent that open your mouth and welll........if you don't know the rest......you should.

Massive cuts, eh? *LOL *Don't come here parroting the DNC talking points and expect to get away with it.

In fact, the education budget was increased alarmingly and it is presently on my list of http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/angry.gif VERY upsetting things President Bush has done. *He should shut that haven for lost hard earned tax dollars down (aka the Education Department) immediately. *It's downright repulsive the amount of money they get (and now the MASSIVE additional amounts) that they "lose" and squander. *What do we get in return. *Cesspools of rot spewing out of our indoctrination centers every June who can't even manage to out-test France on many standardized tests. *I will say this for them though; they know a heck of alot more about bananas and condoms than their elder counterparts who had to learn reading, writing and arithmetics. *Disgusting.

Check out the Education budget for yourself and get back to me. *P.S. *When a higher number comes after a lower number, that number has INCREASED; gotten LARGER, GREATER THAN. *http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/doh.gif

[Constitutional American]

Quote[/b] ]You made an unsubstantiated charge that the Prez lies. *Give us some *concrete examples, please
I'm not trying to step on StarspangledSweetie' s toes but here's some examples:

Bush reverses position on emissions reductions (http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/03/13/power.plant.emission s/index.html)

Promise to help seniors with drugs falls flat (http://www.sptimes.com/2002/01/07/Columns/Promise_to_help_seni o.shtml)

Bush’s Broken Promise (http://www.nationalreview.c om/lowry/lowry022102.shtml) (Campaign finance reform)

PRESIDENT BUSH PLACES U.S. TROOPS UNDER UNITED NATIONS COMMAND; BREAKS CAMPAIGN PROMISE (http://www.usasurvival.org/ck102602.shtml)

Political News Summary: Promises Made... (http://www.apria.com/resources/0,2725,494-15257,00.html) (Health Care)

Bush decision on stem cell study draws mixed response (http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/2001/08/13/stories/0313000a.htm) (destruction of live human embryos)

[Terri]

This topic is about Michael Moore.

A common tactic of internet trolls is to come into a discussion and take it off track.

Let's not fall for that.

Start a new topic if you want to discuss something other than the original topic.

[angelus]

Quote[/b] ]This topic is about Michael Moore.

A common tactic of internet trolls is to come into a discussion and take it off track.

Let's not fall for that.

Start a new topic if you want to discuss something other than the original topic.

Thank you Terri! As far as Michael Moore goes . . . Well, Moore is less. That's really all I have to say right now about him. (I still love that "a diarrhea of words and a constipation of thought" bit. That was hilarious!)

[Constitutional American]

Sorry Terri...

As far as Michael Moore goes, being a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment, I didn't think I could stomach his Columbine mockumentary so I never saw it.

As far as Moore's claim that we know where Bin Laden is & are doing nothing about it, that sounds ridiculous to me.
Personally, I think he's dead (or dying) like Saddam.
I just don't see how the fanatics that have thumbed their noses at America all these years would be able to remain silent. If Bin Laden were alive he'd be shouting it from the rooftops to rub our faces in it. IMO

[Stormhawk]

http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif Just how long does Moore think that cheesy wig and fake beard are going to fool Captain Ahab?

[Stormhawk]

As to Mr. Moore's view of reality, well enough said, but as to anyone knowing the whereabouts, dead or alive, of Bin Laden; there's a $20 million dollar bounty on that guy's head along with amnesty and new ID/relocation. The only reason no one's collected it before now is because they haven't been able to dig down deep enough in the rumble to find the body yet.
If, by the way, you're upset by Moore, then contact Disney and tell them if they go ahead with their deal for his "picture", you'll not only not go to see it, you won't buy any Disney products or see any Disney movies (film or rental) for a month.
Call your local theaters and tell them the same. Be sure to include a time frame for the loss of your custom, as they will be inclined to take it more seriously. Hit the bugger where it hurts, in his pride and pocket. http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/flag17.gif

[Jaksavin]

Bravo, Stormhawk!
Moore and his ilk need to realize that the only reason that they have a forum (other than the 1st Ammendment) is because the poor, dawdling masses WILL pay to see and hear his tripe, and that of the other unhappy littnay of loser-leftists. While his thoughts are ill-conceived, at best, and treasonous at worst (I refer all to Article 3, Section 3 or the Constitution) he is getting his word out.
Boycott can and does work. And you are correct in letting the bilge-pipes procurers thatyou are boycotting, etc, because of specific reasons.
The truly sad thing is less the fact that this addled-brined, adipose, assinine encephlapod is spilling his nonsense, but he is getting a forum here for his insane remarks and to know these words will appear in his latest incarnation of bile. I am reasonably sure (not paranoid) that this type of unindicted felon is searching the web for his detractors. He has certainly come to the right place.

"When you're running down my country, you're walking on the fighting side of me!" Merle Haggard


Pray for our President
Pray for our Troops
Pray for our Country!

God Speed
John

[Corgie Girl]

Triple S
As a former teacher, I share your passion for education, but to say that "Bush lies" is being a little short-sighted. *Bush has shown his committment to education by what he did in Texas. *You seem to forget that on 9/11 everything changed. *The only thing in the list that you mentioned mandated by the Constitution for the President and Congress to spend in our name is "to provide for the common defense". *All the other expenses are by interpretation or habit. *He was obligated to put the safety of the US ahead of any ideas or programs. *As you have seen, as soon as the war in Iraq died down, Bush is back out in public trying to get the economy back on track and thus bring in the revenues to put all of these other programs in place. *Don't lose sight that the government's money is OUR MONEY and last year I paid 35% of my income to Uncle Sam and got very little back for it. *I live in one of those "donor states" that gets back less than 50% of every tax dollar sent to the Feds and then in turn live in a county that gets back less than 33% of the money sent to the state Capitol. *We can't give everything to everybody. *We need to become much more self-sufficient in local programs and be smarter on how the money is spent on a LOCAL basis.

[makidwell]

I have said this once and I'll say it again - the real reason Moore, Sheen, Dixie Chicks, Penn or any of the other celebrities are spouting off is to either revive a dying career, promote a new movie or CD or to make sure Republicans look bad for the next election. Nothing would make these type of people happier than to see Democrats take office again and they will stop at nothing to make it happen. Think about it, they are loving all the talk we are doing! If one person mentions it to another person and so on and so on, think of all the people that will now know who Moore is! In their small minds they think this is the way to popularity and a way to makes lots of $$$ (might I also add that lots of $$$ is what they believe morals to be made of). I have just about washed my hands of all of them and find that I have very little to watch on tv and very few movies to go see. Not only will that give me more time to spend with family and friends, but I will also save $$$..... Hey, maybe this is a good thing! http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif

[republicrat]

Quote[/b] (Jaksavin @ May 14, 2003 -- 11:29 am)]Bravo, Stormhawk!
Moore and his ilk need to realize that the only reason that they have a forum (other than the 1st Ammendment) is because the poor, dawdling masses WILL pay to see and hear his tripe, and that of the other unhappy littnay of loser-leftists. While his thoughts are ill-conceived, at best, and treasonous at worst (I refer all to Article 3, Section 3 or the Constitution) he is getting his word out.
Whether you agree or disagree with some of the questions that Moore raises in Bowling for Columbine, I would like to ask how is airing a movie that questions the nature of violence in America, and which critiques weapons manufacturers, treason?

That kind of intolerance for views that oppose your own is not good for the party, and it is not good for the country.

When did many Republicans quit saying "I may not agree with what you say, but will defend unto death your right to say it" and start saying "If you disagree with me or the President, you are unpatriotic, and we will boycott, sue, or do whatever else is necessry to shut you the hell up". That's not being Patriotitic, it's borderline fascist, and it's antithetical to what it means to be a good citizen in a society grounded in Democratic principles.

God Bless the Bill of Rights.

[angelus]

Quote[/b] ]"If you disagree with me or the President, you are unpatriotic, and we will boycott, sue, or do whatever else is necessry to shut you the hell up". *

Well, we may view their words as unpatriotic, but that is only us expressing our view. *Boycotting is part of free speech. *Yes, everyone in this country has the right to say what they want, but we have the right to be offended by it and show our displeasure just as much. *If that shuts them up, it's only because they're putting money ahead of their views.



Quote[/b] ]Whether you agree or disagree with some of the questions that Moore raises in Bowling for Columbine, I would like to ask how is airing a movie that questions the nature of violence in America, and which critiques weapons manufacturers, treason? *

From what I have heard, this "documentary" was largely a fabrication. *I have not seen it, so I do not know for sure. *However, Scarborough and his guests one night were talking about how Moore made things up, doctored speeches, and other things like that to make the situation appear worse than it really is.

I don't think anyone here is suggesting Moore is truly committing treason. *He is, however, being incredibly stupid by putting out drivel that makes the right seem like bloodthirsty warmongers who want only to kill people and eat their babies. *OK, so that was an exaggeration. *But at least I admit I exaggerated.

[jonalvy44]

Excellent News!!

The Mouse has come to it's senses!! I just spoke with Disney CEO Michael Eisner's secretary, she was very familiar with the Moore controversy and she told me that Mr. Eisner has decided that while they and Miramax WERE considering a movie project, they have decided that it is NOT something they would want to be associated with!!

So not only has Mel Gibson and IKON Productions shunned the vile Mr. Moore, now Disney/Miramax has as well! This is a major victory and great news for proud Americans everywhere!

We will not forget the victims of 9-11. Nor will we allow their memories to be tarnished by Michael Moore.

Contact Info For Disney Studios: (818) 560-1000 studiooperations@dis neyonline.com

[GodBlessEveryone]

This is a sad day for free speech. Moore is not attacking the victims, only questioning what has a right to be questioned. This is a travesty.

[makidwell]

That brings to mind a wise old saying "Give someone enough rope and they will hang themselves." I can't think of a better way to put it for Mr. Moore! http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[Terri]

Quote[/b] ]This is a sad day for free speech. *Moore is not attacking the victims, only questioning what has a right to be questioned. *This is a travesty.

And questioning dishonestly. *This is not a travesty. This is free enterprise. This is free speech. This is a free market. Are you denying Disney the right to make a wise business decision?


Quote[/b] ]When did many Republicans quit saying "I may not agree with what you say, but will defend unto death your right to say it" and start saying "If you disagree with me or the President, you are unpatriotic, and we will boycott, sue, or do whatever else is necessry to shut you the hell up". *That's not being Patriotitic, it's borderline fascist, and it's antithetical to what it means to be a good citizen in a society grounded in Democratic principles. *


Please show me one effort by government to restrict free speech. That would be fascist.

I could just as easily say that your attempt to discourage the free speech and actions of conservatives is fascist but it isn't.

Words have meanings and are not to be tossed around lightly.

So often, liberals think rights and freedoms are only for them. Not so.

Quote[/b] ]That kind of intolerance for views that oppose your own is not good for the party, and it is not good for the country.

Which party are you concerned about?

[noPEACEwithoutJUSTICE]

Nothing like "Michael Moore" for a topic to bring out the trolls. (http://gopusa.com/cgi-bin/ib3/ikonboard.pl?act=ST; f=8;t=3221;st=50)

Does anybody smell something? *Either Michael Moore just ripped through a pair of his half-mast dungarees, or the trolls have left a couple of "gifts" on our bridge... *http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/dead.gif

"starsprinkledswasti ka" and covenant have cordoned themselves off under the bridge to toss dingus. *Isn't playing with feces pretty much an indication that "Sara Bellum has left the building"? *http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/doh.gif

Quote[/b] ]I do not mean to mean to raise alarms *but is seems like some of the people on this board (and some of the most graphic...) are really out for blood. I am just concerned. *Thank you. *

And Covenant showed all this "concern" just before bowing to pRIMrose's "bunghole". *Covenant did not "mean to mean to" though. *Awe.....can you smell it? *Just in from France: Eau d'Troll. *Be careful not to put any near your eyes or mouth...

Then, something right out of a MM docu-mockery:
Quote[/b] ]It is the weak who cut into someone's outer qualities rather than taking the time to research inner qualities.

Thanks SSS, for that touching show of support for Mr. Moore. *However, researching MM's "inner qualities" would take an electron microscope and a grant from GM. *(Now that would be ironic, GM giving a grant to MM... *http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif )

I'm sure, SSS, you've taken time to research Mr. Bush's "inner qualities" before you called him a liar? *

Oh, and thanks to my favorite fence jumper, Constitutional American, I've got to go through 6 sites of documented Bush "lies" to post an "educated" response.

Here goes:

1. Global warming is a myth. *Bush made the decision NOT to pursue the same wacko emissions controls that has California in rolling blackouts. *Bravo for changing his mind on that one. *Changing one's mind in light of correct information is not a lie.

2. His plan for senior's prescription drugs was struck down by a Federal judge. *I'll give you credit that the plan was ill-conceived, but again hardly a lie. *

3. Now you're talking. *Campaign finance--bad idea. *Bush said he'd veto it. *He signed it into bad law. *No arguments here, bona fide lie numero uno.

4. Have to double-check sources on this one. *Questionable resource(?) *I'd probably trust Cliff Kincaid more than the NYTimes, but still unconfirmed by more reliable sources....

5. Same issue as number 2 on drugs for seniors, come on!!...In this article, they even point out that Bush's primary responsibility was dealing with terrorism. *Jim Nussle's comments about being "two years late" was his own campaigning with seniors and both he Olympia Snowe are RINO's. *No lie.

6. Any decision where everbody is unhappy has to be good one, don't you think? * http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif * Halfsies on this one. *He's not exactly lying, but he didn't stick with the original plan. *Thank God for a President that adapts to the situation at hand. *No lie.

Overall, CA, departing from a "campaign promise" is not a lie. *It's not good to break a promise, and it's up to us to hold our elected officials accountable. *Don't think he did his job? *Elect someone else. *http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif

But a broken promise is different than lying by:

deliberately obfuscating the truth (a la Clinton), http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mr_yuk.gif

just not having the mental capacity, the education or the wherewithal to look hard enough to find it (a la Sean Penn), http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/anon.gif

or having an agenda that requires the sifting of every event through commie-colored glasses (a la Moore & Stone'd). http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/fire.gif

Bush would candidly admit he hasn't addressed every campaign issue. *That's a whole lot different than quibbling about what the definition of "is" is, isn't it? *

One confirmed lie in your list, signing campaign finance reform into law. *http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/noway.gif *I don't see "SenoritaScimitarSap " or Covenant complaining about THAT one.

Checking on his putting US forces under UN authority...

Other than that, give me a break.

Oh, to get back on topic, Michael Moore's lies are documented better than anyone else's--they're directed and put on film by the liar himself. *

...And he's a big, fat, doodie-head.

[AngelsRWorldChamps]

Look Moore Kilton knew that location of the evil one at one time and did not allow the CIA and NSA to tkae him out. I personally know thet Bush knew nothing, if he knew something i could not work for the man nor would I support him at all.

[Terri]

Folks, please take your discussion about President Bush over to political buzz.

This topic is just for Michael Moore.

[republicrat]

Quote[/b] ]Well, we may view their words as unpatriotic, but that is only us expressing our view. *Boycotting is part of free speech. *Yes, everyone in this country has the right to say what they want, but we have the right to be offended by it and show our displeasure just as much. *If that shuts them up, it's only because they're putting money ahead of their views.

Fair enough. *But I still do not support those types of actions to silence speech

Quote[/b] ]From what I have heard, this "documentary" was largely a fabrication. *I have not seen it, so I do not know for sure. *However, Scarborough and his guests one night were talking about how Moore made things up, doctored speeches, and other things like that to make the situation appear worse than it really is.

Well, it would probably be better on the whole to reserve judgement about something political until you've actually seen what was said. *Commentators about the film are often no less political than Mr. Moore. *

I saw the film. *It was definitely slanted, but there was nothing in it that I can recall as fabrication.

Quote[/b] ]I don't think anyone here is suggesting Moore is truly committing treason. *He is, however, being incredibly stupid by putting out drivel that makes the right seem like bloodthirsty warmongers who want only to kill people and eat their babies. *

I'm not sure that "the right" was his target so much as the military industrial complex. *Moore didn't really draw many conclusions though he did raise many questions which oftentimes reflected his personal bias. *It really isn't valid to conflate the military industrial complex with all conservatives since many conservatives and moderates don't really support the militarization of the American economy. *The demilitarization of the economy was part of the Cold War dividend that Reagan promised us.

As for Moore, he had plenty of criticism for Clinton's policies as well as for conservatives in Bowling for Columbine.

[AngelsRWorldChamps]

I think he is commiting Treason and I will be the lawyer to try his a ** get a conviction in the name of Paula and the rest of the September 11th angels

[angelus]

Mark, you might want to tone it down just a bit. I understand you're going through a really difficult time right now, but promising to pull the trigger yourself may wind up getting you in trouble.

[AngelsRWorldChamps]

20 20 Hind sight I think the edited post works better

[stormy]

Angelus, I'm curious--you said you heard Scarborough talking with a guest about MM one night--would that have been our Jon Alvy?

I think it's really neat that we have someone on our forum who is powerful enough in his writings and his convictions that he gets invited to an interview on a national program!!

Thank you, Jon, for your diligence and your hard work! I have a feeling you're going places!

Stormy

[angelus]

I don't remember who it was. I got in on it late and his name wasn't mentioned as I watched.

[cheeze]

The interview with Michael Moore has raised a question in my thoughts. *IF MICHAEL MOORE CLAIMS PRESIDENT BUSH KNOWS THE WHEREABOUTS OF USAMA BIN LADEN, AND IF MICHAEL MOORE HAS ALL THE "INSIDE SCOOP" ON ALL THIS, THEN SHOULDN'T MICHAEL MOORE KNOW THE WHEREABOUT OF BIN LADEN HIMSELF? *Moore seems to force his way with his camera and seems to get inside information that NO ONE else on earth is able to get. *He appears to be such a great source of "secret" information - why doesn't he produce Bin Laden? *He MUST know where he is!*I believe he should tell Bush - don't you? *http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rotate_on_head.gif http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/ne_nau.gif
http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

Oh - before I forget - One thing I have difficulty with when I see Michael Moore in one of his documentaries is discerning between his head and the camera. *http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif This all leaves me wondering why the media and television programming cannot come up with more believable stories.

Hey - If you can't make jokes, why watch Jay Leno?

God bless http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/gopusa.gif *http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/flag17.gif *http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/flag17.gif *http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/flag17.gif http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[republicrat]

Quote[/b] (noPEACEwithoutJUSTI CE @ May 14, 2003 -- 4:04 pm)]
Quote[/b] ]1. Global warming is a myth. Bush made the decision NOT to pursue the same wacko emissions controls that has California in rolling blackouts.

I was in California at the time. My impression was that the rolling blackouts to businesses was caused by artificial shortages that were caused when Enron took advantage of de-regulation to create artificial shortages so that they could sell California's power back to itself at highly inflated prices.

As for the global warming myth... I'm prepared to believe that it's a short-term hiccup in the global weather pattern, or that in 40 years, we'll be out of oil, and that will put an end to the majority of damage caused by the emissions of fossil fuels, but could you please explain why the Adriatic Sea has raised to the point where much of Venice is slowly going under water? How do you explain the fact that sea levels are rising?

Is it a myth, or does it have to be a myth because we are not yet at a point where we can give up our dependence on oil and other greenhouse gas producing fossil fuels?

I don't know the answer to that, but it is a question that is worth asking.

[Constitutional American]

Terri asked us to take the Bush discussion elsewhere so here it is,
Bush Lies??? continued (http://gopusa.com/cgi-bin/ib3/ikonboard.pl?act=ST; f=8;t=3462)

[Jaksavin]

Dear Republicrat:

While I applaud your thought's, to put it in perspective, that SINCE we are a democracy (well, not really, but you know) we have the right to spend our money as we see fit. *Please do not misunderstand what I am saying, however. *All have the right (within reason, ie: can't yell fire in a crowded building, etc) to their opinions and moreso, the right, if not the duty, to express them. *My arguement is that these folks are spouting theur views without offering any alternatives. * *In business I have made it a credo of mine that anyone could come to me at any time with any problem. *The one caveat was that they had to have at least one solution. *Not that I am lazy, not that they are right, but it fostered upon then the incumbancy to think and react before looking for someone else to do the heavy lifting. *While I am non in favor for changing the Constitution, I do belive that with noteriety comes power and with power comes responsibility. *The more power, the more responsibility. *While Mr. Moore has the heft of the former, he has not shown any maturity for the latter.

"When you're running doen my country, you're walking on the fighting side of me"

God Speed
John

[noPEACEwithoutJUSTICE]

Quote[/b] ]Is it a myth, or does it have to be a myth because we are not yet at a point where we can give up our dependence on oil and other greenhouse gas producing fossil fuels?

This has been a personal criticism of mine on those in Washington-- not just the President. *

We have a renewable fuel resource and a proven process to make it--expensively now, but cheaper as demand and processing increases. *It is clean. *Not just cleaner--it has no adverse effects on the environment.

Contrary to the myth that it is "harder on your engine" it actually prolongs seal and pump life as well as cleaner burn.

Ethanol and soy diesel aren't getting the funding they need or deserve because they adversely effect the oil economy. *I suppose too much of the overall economy is tied to oil--production, processing, sale, pumping, resale, etc. *To introduce the alternative fuel option is the right thing to do, but it might not be wise in light of the economic effects it would have overall.

This is my assumption--why else wouldn't they jump on this? *It's renewable, it gets us out from under ME oil...

I hardly think it's about the president's personal profit or even those of his friends/contributors, etc. like the Dem-Dem's like to point out. *("Blame the rich!") *I think the issue is the underlying economy and the effect of introducing even a 10% mandate for ethanol...it would destroy the price control the oil companies have...

Will this be said by any politician anywhere (even if it's true)? *I may be way off base and I'd be the first to say I have been in the past, but it just doesn't make any sense to say this is about money alone or the stifling of an "oil" competitive idea...

Problem is lots of good people have gone into poverty this way because the right idea came to them too quickly...Tucker comes to mind....and it conflicted with profit, economy, and future stability.

[jonalvy44]

Thanks Stormy!

Maybe you could speak to my wife...She's always bossing me around, makes me take the trash out... :)

[Charie]

Tsk, tsk, Jon, You should do that without nagging. * http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif *and congratulations.

nPwJ: *Funny you should mention ethanol and soy diesel. *The resolution to name bio-fuels was added at *our district caucus *instead of corn as it had been written previously. *Republicans are cognizant of grains being used for fuels in farming states.

Also, Tucker never managed to make his car actually work the way it was supposed to, if memory serves. * My first husband used to talk about it (he was quite a bit older than me).

My question here is, if this is so important to the Dems., why in he\\ didn't they do something about fuel sources *when they had 8 years in which to do it? *I think Bill Clinton was so busy campaigning, *raising funds, making peace between Israel and the PLO, *and making nice that he had no time for really important items on the agenda. *

I do have a question, though, for whoever can answer it. *I've been told that one gets worse gas mileage with biofuels and *it may actually exude more pollutants than fossil fuels because one uses more of it. *Help?

Sorry, I got sidetracked again. *Has anyone here reposted the site that tracks the Michael Moore dialogue with what was actually said by Charlston Heston. *And the actual time line with what Moore reported? There is such a thing as literary license but it's not to be thought of when you're doing a documentary. *Michael Moore is a liar!!

Ok, so this is the thread that is about Prez Bush. Well,d@m^ kids, I think this thread has gotten so far off track that it's been just about derailed. http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rofl.gif http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rofl.gif http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rotflo.gif http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rofl.gif http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rotflo.gif http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mdr11.gif http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[noPEACEwithoutJUSTICE]

Here, now, I will pull this back around to topic...like 7 degrees of Kevin Bacon...here goes.

Michael Moore is a lying grocery sack of wet poo.

Michael says Bush knows where Osama is. *Osama is wet poo.

Osama is afraid of our little white-meated friend, the pig.

Pork, 'round here, is corn-fed.

Corn is grown next to, after, and in conjunction with soybeans. *

Both are bio-fuels. *(On your question, Charie, ethanol raises the octane level. *Higher octane, BETTER performance. *It's alcohol, basically, no adverse effects on environment. *Buses that use soy diesel don't emit those noxious diesel fumes--they smell like someone just cooked French Fries, oh, excuse me, Freedom fries...)

Bio-fuels will reduce our dependance on oil.

Oil is what our fat filmmaker friend cooks all his food in. *(Or is that dietarily challenged?)

Mikey, same said fat filmmaker, said Bush knows where Osama is.

There. *Back on track. *Everyone feel better now?

[noPEACEwithoutJUSTICE]

Quote[/b] ]This is a sad day for free speech. *Moore is not attacking the victims, only questioning what has a right to be questioned. *This is a travesty.

I'm sorry, I just couldn't let this one go.

GBE, do you listen to EVERYTHING anyone says and support it?

According to your definition of "free speech" that's what we'd all be required to do to make sure the right to free speech was protected.

That is naive and ridiculous.

The fact is, several potential financiers of Michael Moore's lies finally saw him for what he is, or better for what he is not. *He is NOT a documentary filmmaker. *He's, at best, a satirist. *At worst a communist propagandist. I fancy he's somewhere in-between. *But the fact that his satire has almost no humor to most Americans--that it's only funny to him--is enough reason to not want to fund him.

Popular, compelling, interesting, convicting, artful, honest? *No, no, no, no, no, and no. *

To you, GBE, he must be our generation's "Orson Welles" for you to respond like a "great voice" has been silenced.

Freedom of Speech gives you the right to say whatever you want, BUT it gives the rest of us the right to ignore you. *Freedom of Speech is not a mandate for everyone else to listen.

With the Freedom of Speech also comes the consequences of what you say.

The Freedom of Speech doesn't protect you FROM saying something stupid. *And it doesn't protect you from everyone else's freedom to point out that you said something stupid. *Michael Moore is free to make any film he wants to. *The country is free not to go and see it, comment on it at will, find and point out the lies and half-truths and point out his obvious departure from the guidelines of what is a documentary. *

If he wanted to avoid criticism, he should have made a better film. *If he wanted to increase the number of people seeing his film, maybe he should have told the truth. *If he was trying to woo investors in his next project, maybe he shouldn't have offended the audience that would potentially pay to see it.

That fact that so few people understand the concept of free speech literally scares me to death.

[Jaksavin]

Quote[/b] ]The Freedom of Speech doesn't protect you FROM saying something stupid. And it doesn't protect you from everyone else's freedom to point out that you said something stupid. Michael Moore is free to make any film he wants to. The country is free not to go and see it, comment on it at will, find and point out the lies and half-truths and point out his obvious departure from the guidelines of what is a documentary.


Well said, that is what this is all about!
As soon as teh leftist realize that that can not wrap themselves in selected parts of the Constitution, perhaps their blather will recede.
Harken to the recent scenario when Mrs. Clinton was castigating those who claim that if "they oppose this presidency" they will be opunished. Concurrent with this "support" of 1st Ammendment rights, her "staff" was "escorting" out and away those who disagree with her!
Her and others like her must have their hypocrisy exposed for what it is! (I do not wany to go on a Hillary rant, but she and Bernie Nusbaum were among the first to call for the impeachment of Nixon yet these same two excoriated those who called for her husbands impeachment. Double standard?)

God Speed
John

[republicrat]

Quote[/b] ]And questioning dishonestly. This is not a travesty. This is free enterprise. This is free speech. This is a free market. Are you denying Disney the right to make a wise business decision?

The motion picture industry is not a free market. The production and distribution of films in this country is controlled by a handful of companies whose oligopoly effectively precludes competion. There is a market for Moore's film. If film making and distribution was a true free market economy, he would have no problems producing a movie as all of his movies make money.

Quote[/b] ]Please show me one effort by government to restrict free speech. That would be fascist.

I wasn't actually referring to efforts by the government to restrict free speech, but since you asked, two good examples are the Patriot Act and the manner by which the Justice Department is using the 1984 Witness Protection Act in its prosecution of suspected terrorists.

The Patriot Act allows FBI agents to seize records of book borrowing and purchases from libraries and bookstores without obtaining a warrant to show probable cause. When this happens, library staff cannot consult with anyone, including an attorney. The less obvious free speech impact is that some people cannot read books related to certain topics without fear of coming under government scrutiny.

The DoJ is using the Witness Protection act to hold U.S. citizens for months without charging them, without telling anyone that these people are being held, and they do not have the right to an attorney, and when attorney's are involved, the traditional attorney client privilige is suspended. This has been used against hundreds of U.S. citizens in the past few years.

A third example is movement within State and federal governments to prohibit the expression of dissent. This has happened in Oregon, where a legislator introduced legislation that would have punished acts of civil disobedience such as blocking a freeway or access to a government building punished more severely than rape or second degree murder.

Quote[/b] ]So often, liberals think rights and freedoms are only for them. Not so.

Not everyone who criticizes the administration is a liberal. I am a strong advocate of the Bill of Rights, and am equally critical of efforts by people on the left to silence free speech and alternative views.

Part of the problem with our two party system is that it causes people to think that there are only two sides to complex issues on which a variety of positions may be adopted. I tend to think that the "liberal/conservative","right /left", "democrat/republican" labels lend very little to debate since it makes it easier to "shoot the messenger" than to think critically about the message.

Quote[/b] ]Which party are you concerned about?

I am concerned about the entire political process in this country. I believe that the Bill of Rights is being threatened, and that this threat is not a partisan issue. There are good people in both parties who are working to roll back some of the worst aspects of the new legislation ( Dick Armey, for example ), even as there are other people who are working to curtail the freedoms of America's citizens ( unfortunately, from what I've seen, Attorney General John Ashcroft is in that camp ).

[Jaksavin]

Quote[/b] ]I am concerned about the entire political process in this country. I believe that the Bill of Rights is being threatened, and that this threat is not a partisan issue.

While your research is laudable, it appears to be the half full/half empty kind of analogy which you proffer. Laws are made for the good of the majority (excluding pork in bills) for the most part. In certain times things are done on an ad hoc basis. Some are good (tax relief) some are bad (internment during WWII). We need to look at this from a more universal viewpoint in contradistinction to picking out a few "bad" examples or people and rushing to justice or suggesting that our freedoms are about to be compromised. Elsewise, one ought to simply suscribe to the fact that the Trilateral Commission, The Council for Foreign Affairs, The Rothschilds or for that matter, the Boy Scouts have a grand and master plan for Novus Ordo Seclorum.

Alas, I fear we have strayed from the point. Again.





"When you're running down my country, you're walking on the fighting side of me" Merle Haggard

God Speed
John

[noPEACEwithoutJUSTICE]

Quote[/b] ]The motion picture industry is not a free market. The production and distribution of films in this country is controlled by a handful of companies whose oligopoly effectively precludes competion. There is a market for Moore's film. If film making and distribution was a true free market economy, he would have no problems producing a movie as all of his movies make money.



If my memory serves me correctly, Moore made Roger & Me independently. I'm uncertain of the funding of Bowling for Columbine. Moore tries to coin himself as a rabid independent filmmaker. The reason for Mel Gibson or Disney or anyone else to invest in Moore's project would be to do so because they thought it profitable. For some it might also be politically beneficial to do so. Moore is not really an "I.F." any more. That would be too much work and he wouldn't have as much time to spout his political ideologies.

Those larger MP companies understand it's important to lose money on flicks, too. (note the correct spelling of "lose", for those paying attention on other threads as well as the rest of the www...)

I watched Roger & Me in a theatre that wouldn't have shown it unless it was being distributed VERY well back in 198?... You're telling me he can't get it done now because the industry is against him? I hardly think so. Or is it because he thinks his Oscar gives him the right to be funded by whoever he chooses, regardless of what doody he puts on film?

No, oligopoly or not, Moore is offending more than he's entertaining, and that is a big no-no in the movie industry. You can call it a Blacklist or whatever you want, but when it's self-imposed by your own stupidity, then it's deserved.

Do movie makers or actors have more rights to say stupid things and not suffer the consequences than other prefessionals?

If the local Chevy dealer came out and said people who drive SUV's are baby killers because of what they're doing to the environment, do you think he'd sell many Suburbans, or any cars for that matter? The dealer has the right to call them 'baby killers' if he thinks it, but the Chevrolet Company also has the right to review his dealership license when he's no longer selling any cars.

Same with Sean Penn or Michael Moore. If they wish to say things to make their images less palatable to the paying public, they do so at their own peril, and those considering investing in their "draw" when the movies are released are stupid if they don't take these factors into account.

There are independent FM's that defy the MP Industry every year with a film that becomes profitable in spite of distribution and theatre ownership. It's even easier now with Multi-plexes and independent film houses having a greater ability and need to show Independent films.

Moore' and Penn's problems, if they really have any, are self-inflicted.

[USNfromME]

The Constitution places limits on the government - not the people. The government cannot limit free speech. If there are instances of abuse, it would be appropriate to look at the interpretive courts for explanation. So far they've defined free speech as everything from "Christ in Urine" to campaign finance.

The 1st Amendment gives the people the right to speak out and criticize the government without fear of reprisal. Strictly speaking, there is no such animal as freedom of expression. That is a convention adopted by a reactive, rather than an interpretive judiciary.

Thus, Moore, Saranden, et al, are free to say anything they desire, free from government censure. However, the people have the right to call them to task if they spout lies, deceit and propaganda.

It is one thing to be against the war in Iraq. Many people were and they had good reasons: religion, conscience, mistrust of government, unpersuaded as to necessity of the war. They had every right to march and protest and make their sentiments known. They did not have the right to engage in anarchy and felonious behavior.

The celeb war protesters had no convictions. They spouted the party lines. Bush is lying. Bush wants the oil. 5000 kids a day are dying because of Bush. Bush is fighting the war to detract from the economy. These are opinions and not convictions. These people use their celebrity to gain access to media, which they then use to gain exposure and enhance themselves. They don't care about the war, the economy or the price of camel dung in Baghdad. The bottom line is self-promotion. Then they get indignant and throw hissy-fits when people rebut them. They claim that anyone who speaks out against them is denying them their civil rights. Bull hockey!!

When these craven, egomaniacs are spreading lies, inciting the people against their government and exhorting foreign leaders to challenge us, they are aiding and abetting the enemy and are guilty of treason. It may not be strictly within the legal definition of treason, but it is treason.

Michael Moore follows the same path. His "documentaries" are twisted, sarcastic misrepresentations of actual events that he uses to promote himself and make money. He has no discernible talent, he proposes nothing constructive. He has to use bombast and outrageous behavior to draw attention to his pathetic, unimportant self. He is the darling of the left because he is a celebrity like them - all appearance and no substance.

[conn.servative]

USNfromME:

I was with you all the way up until this statement.

Quote[/b] ]He is the darling of the left because he is a celebrity like them - all appearance and no substance

I never thought I'd hear anyone refer to MM as "darling". And appearance but no substance? I don't know what MM you're talking about but his appearance is pretty darn substantial!

http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

I was going to chime in with something serious, but you and NPWJ beat me to the punch, you're so darn smart!

[republicrat]

Quote[/b] ] *
It is one thing to be against the war in Iraq. Many people were and they had good reasons: religion, conscience, mistrust of government, unpersuaded as to necessity of the war. They had every right to march and protest and make their sentiments known. They did not have the right to engage in anarchy and felonious behavior.

I generally agree with the points you have made in the above paragraph. *

One caveat relates to "engaging in anarchy and felonious behaviour". *While I agree that the government has a right to punish those types of offenses, I would also suggest that civil disobedience is a valid form of protest, and has been throughout America's history. *What was the Boston Tea Party if not an act of civil disobedience? *How much time did Thoreau spend in jail for his refusal to pay taxes to support a standing army?

Though I would not expect our government to tolerate or support that type of activity, I would point out that the seminal document of American political philosophy, the Declaration of Independence, is at its core, a defense of the right to engage in civil disobedience based on natural rights.

I would also tend to disagree with your sentiment that many of the celebrity protesters lacked any real conviction. *That is no more fair than saying that people on this list who toe the party line lack any real convictions of their own, and I do not think it's true. *Reasonable people could quite legitimately come to different conclusions about the need for war with Iraq, or for the justifications for the war. *

My own belief is that nothing happens in the Middle East that does not relate to oil. *Human rights have never been a focal point of American policy in the Middle East, and to this day I am not convinced that Iraq posed any sort of threat to the United States. *The core of Islamic fundamentalism was never coming out of Iraq. *If anything, Hussein's presence prevented it from emerging there. *Friendly regime or no, Saudi Arabia, and other American allies in the region pose a greater risk to our security.

Having said that, I think that it is clear that the administration took advantage of the public sentiment created by 9/11 to engage in one of the core goals of many of the people in the Defense Department, namely regime change of a hostile regime which controlled a resource-rich nation, and which can be used as a basis for establishing and promoting American interests more directly throughout the middle east.

As for the rest of your comments...you raise some very good points about the nature of consistutional free speech protections.

[republicrat]

Quote[/b] (Jaksavin @ May 16, 2003 -- 12:14 pm)]Quote[/b] ]I am concerned about the entire political process in this country. *I believe that the Bill of Rights is being threatened, and that this threat is not a partisan issue. *

While your research is laudable, it appears to be the half full/half empty kind of analogy which you proffer. *Laws are made for the good of the majority (excluding pork in bills) for the most part. *In certain times things are done on an ad hoc basis. *Some are good (tax relief) some are bad (internment during WWII). *We need to look at this from a more universal viewpoint in contradistinction to picking out a few "bad" examples or people and rushing to justice or suggesting that our freedoms are about to be compromised. *Elsewise, one ought to simply suscribe to the fact that the Trilateral Commission, The Council for Foreign Affairs, The Rothschilds or for that matter, the Boy Scouts have a grand and master plan for Novus Ordo Seclorum.

Alas, I fear we have strayed from the point. *Again.





"When you're running down my country, you're walking on the fighting side of me" * Merle Haggard

God Speed
John
Quote[/b] ] *We need to look at this from a more universal viewpoint in contradistinction to picking out a few "bad" examples or people and rushing to justice or suggesting that our freedoms are about to be compromised.

While I generally agree with your premise that a few examples do not necessarily constitute a trend or a broader agenda, I think that it's healthy to view any growth in government authority over the rights and lives of citizens with a healthy dose of skepticism.

I would point out that the examples that I selected ( Patriot Act, use of Witness Protection Act ) are not small ones. *More to the point, there are those who would see the powers granted in those acts expanded which could create an even greater threat to our liberty ( e.g., elimination of the sunset clause for the Patriot act, draft of Domestic Security Enhancement Act 2003, etc ). *

Quote[/b] ] * Elsewise, one ought to simply suscribe to the fact that the Trilateral Commission, The Council for Foreign Affairs, The Rothschilds or for that matter, the Boy Scouts have a grand and master plan for Novus Ordo Seclorum.

Well, I'm not a conspiracy theorist. *However, I will say that elites who share a common interest tend to work pretty well together, and will point out that you cannot always dismiss the notion that powerful people have grandiose plans (for better or worse). *

A good example of that is the Project for the New American Century. *The signatories of that group, formed in 1997, include Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bill Bennett, Elliott Abrams, Jeb Bush, and other key administration personas. *

If you look at the group's mission statement, it becomes very clear what agenda the administration was pushing in Iraq.

newamericancentury.o rg/statementofprinciple s.htm

[Jaksavin]

Quote[/b] ]While I generally agree with your premise that a few examples do not necessarily constitute a trend or a broader agenda, I think that it's healthy to view any growth in government authority over the rights and lives of citizens with a healthy dose of skepticism

I appreciate all that you say and your general perspicacity! We could tautologixe this to death and againwe have strayed from the topic. Please let me opine, however, that it seems to me that the current "regime" (quotes mine) and similar thinking legislators seem to be much more Jeffersonian in their ideas of a central governement that their most recent predecessor. The fact that we have soooooo much information available to us in this day and age can really do nothing but allow us to be a bit more cynical and untrusting. It is a fair cop, but, we need to temper that with a belief that not all politicians are evil.
With respect to the other bits of legislature ledgardemain, it needs ot be further understood, without raising more paranoia, that the Constitution does allow the President certain powers in certain times. Who knows what they are and what needs to occur to trigger them! I hope it is not one more outburst from Michale Moore! (Wow, back on track!)
Have a great day!

"When you're running down my country. you're walking on the fighting side of me" Merle Haggard


God Speed
John

[republicrat]

Quote[/b] ]I appreciate all that you say and your general perspicacity! *We could tautologixe this to death and again we have strayed from the topic. *Please let me opine, however, that it seems to me that the current "regime" (quotes mine) and similar thinking legislators seem to be much more Jeffersonian in their ideas of a central governement that their most recent predecessor. *

Clinton was the President who started us down the path to increased government power with regard to surveillance. *The backdoor in the clipper chip, for example ( enables law enforcement to decrypt and monitor cellphone conversations ). What was added under Bush (after 9/11) has been the elimination of Judicial oversight for much of the surveillance that occurs, and of the Justice department using some very creative interpretations, and in my view taking some undesirable liberties, with regard to how it prosecutes crime in this country. *Due process and habeas corpus are really the most significant protections that the accused have, and they are two things which should not be eroded in order to prosecute terrorism.

As to the President's increased power during certain times, I grant that it's an important power. *My concern is that from what our leaders are saying, this is a war without end, we could be fighting this war for 20 years, 40 years, even longer. *I'm not sure what criteria the leadership is using to determine when it's okay to roll back some of our constitutional protections. *But I'm not so sure that it isn't in our interest to start pressuring them to do it sooner rather than later, and to not simply assume that these protections will be returned without pressure from the people. *

Quote[/b] ]It is a fair cop, but, we need to temper that with a belief that not all politicians are evil.

I don't believe that most politicians are evil. *I've worked with enough of them to know that it isn't true. *But as William Blake said, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions". *

FWIW, though we have strayed off-topic in this thread, I tend to think that it's an important discussion, and I thank the moderator for letting us play it out.

[Jaksavin]

Quote[/b] ]FWIW, though we have strayed off-topic in this thread, I tend to think that it's an important discussion, and I thank the moderator for letting us play it out.

I second that! Perhaps we will have the opportunity far additional persiflage in another topic soon. Your rationale is well thought out and you support your contentions. Only if more folks did their homework there would be less problems in the world!

Roger and out.

God Speed
John

[USNfromME]

Quote[/b] ]I would also suggest that civil disobedience is a valid form of protest, and has been throughout America's history. *What was the Boston Tea Party if not an act of civil disobedience? *How much time did Thoreau spend in jail for his refusal to pay taxes to support a standing army?


I think we are much closer to one another than apart. Civil disobedience is a valid form of protest - emphasis on civil. The Boston Tea Party is accepted as civil disobedience, but that is through the prism of historical perspective. It was actually a case of vandalism against the Crown in protest.

I have much more empathy with Thoreau. He was a man of intense convictions who was willing to suffer the consequences of his actions.

I was brought up with the understanding that my rights ended where others began. If I carry a sign, do a sit-in, take part in a protest march, it is my right to do so. If I interfere with the function of government in a non-violent manner, that is my right, if I am willing to risk arrest and/or a fine. *If I set out with the aim of interfering with private industry, ambulances or emergency equipment, I have crossed the line from civil disobedience to putting people's lives in danger. My right to protest stops when it interferes with someone's right to life.

When protesters block major roads or try to shut down a utility, they have overstepped their bounds and entered the area of criminality. The same is true when they engage in aggressive or destructive activities.

Perhaps one feels justified in rash acts when the object of a protest is a war. But how about a splinter fringe protest in support of the Snail Darter? The Snail Darter proponents may feel just as strongly about their cause but are they justified in placing lives in danger?

[Shrillary]

Is Michael Moore related to Demi Moore.

(Aren't all demicrats related? *Or are they all just moore-ons?)


Just kidding ... I have family members who are democrats. *Oops, I guess the crat is out of the bag. *Sorry, mum.

Well, diversity is a good thing, I guess. *One size doesn't fit all. *(What's that expression, "you can't shove two pounds of crat into a one-pound bag"?)

http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[AngelsRWorldChamps]

I have friends so are dummicrates,The ones that are true friends we have mad a pack, we just dont talk politics we talk about other issues. You can have friends that are not Repulicans,just as long as they know you are always right and they are always wrong. lol http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/flag17.gif http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/flag19.gif http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/star2.gif http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/flag4.gif http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif