# Michael Moore Is Being Sued



## GT3 (Mar 29, 2006)

This was of no surprise to me:


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

A frivolous publicity stunt which won't get far.

I'm sorry the guy has lost his arms (I wonder how much he got from the army for that?) but sueing for $85M because a piece of film creates an "implication" about this guy is ridiculous.

I like Moore and I'm looking forward to his next film.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

*I had read this...*

I had read the article but just had not come up with just that perfect remark, that javelin of sarcasm to pierce the heart of lefties yet. For a guy that walks around with "he lied to us" as his mantra to be caught, in effect, lying, is just too perfect.

Michael Moore is all that is wrong about the left.

A guy that says flat out, "I do not own a single share of stocks", lambasts "corporate greed" and then clearly has profited himself from those same companies, makes millions of his "blue collar" schtick but lives in a mansion on a private lake, has a level of hypocrisy that most people can only aspire to.

Warmest regards


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

*Wow, there's a surprise!*



gmac said:


> I like Moore and I'm looking forward to his next film.


I am in total shock!


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> I had read the article but just had not come up with just that perfect remark, that javelin of sarcasm to pierce the heart of lefties yet. For a guy that walks around with "he lied to us" as his mantra to be caught, in effect, lying, is just too perfect.
> 
> Michael Moore is all that is wrong about the left.
> 
> ...


Hilarious. The extreme right wing, represented by the likes of wayfarer, have never been able to lay a glove on Moore as he has made them look like fools over the years - oh, except that he lives in a nice house and makes too much money, a wierd complaint from our laissez faire friends.

But now some Bush supporter has filed a bogus claim because his feelings got hurt and all of a sudden they think their Moore "lied" claims are all proven (the dude doesn't even claim Moore lied, just ordered certain segments of film- is that it???)

Hilarious - it's like you _want_ to be made fools of!


----------



## hopkins_student (Jun 25, 2004)

gmac said:


> Hilarious. The extreme right wing, represented by the likes of wayfarer, have never been able to lay a glove on Moore as he has made them look like fools over the years - oh, except that he lives in a nice house and makes too much money, a wierd complaint from our laissez faire friends.


You're certainly not so dense as to miss the hypocrisy of Michael Moore's behavior, are you? I'm glad he's successful and has made a lot of money, he's living the American dream. But to tell people the American dream doesn't exist and to deny his lifestyle because it doesn't fit in with the middle class image he sells, that's nothing short of lying.


----------



## Sweetness (Aug 25, 2005)

gmac said:


> Hilarious. The extreme right wing, represented by the likes of wayfarer, have never been able to lay a glove on Moore as he has made them look like fools over the years - oh, except that he lives in a nice house and makes too much money, a wierd complaint from our laissez faire friends.
> 
> But now some Bush supporter has filed a bogus claim because his feelings got hurt and all of a sudden they think their Moore "lied" claims are all proven (the dude doesn't even claim Moore lied, just ordered certain segments of film- is that it???)
> 
> Hilarious - it's like you _want_ to be made fools of!


Are you serious or is this supposed to be a joke? We "have never been able to lay a glove on Moore," with the exception of pretty much debunking everything the man says and writes in his movies and novels. What wayfarer is saying is that its ironic for a man who hates capitalism so much goes back to a multi-million dollar mansion at nights, and wakes up the next day complaining about how the leaders have too much money. It reminds me of Sedaris, who said about his Communists friends, that they always believe after the revolution, they will be the ones at party headquarters while other people will be forced to do the dirty work.


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

hopkins_student said:


> But to tell people the American dream doesn't exist and to deny his lifestyle because it doesn't fit in with the middle class image he sells, that's nothing short of lying.


It would be - but since he does nothing of the sort the point is rather moot.

In fact, Moore is trying to defend that American dream from those who would take it away (and those who are so desperate to give it away).


----------



## hopkins_student (Jun 25, 2004)

gmac said:


> It would be - but since he does nothing of the sort the point is rather moot.
> 
> In fact, Moore is trying to defend that American dream from those who would take it away (and those who are so desperate to give it away).


Was that from the Michael Moore website? If so you should probably put it within quotation marks.


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

Sweetness said:


> Are you serious or is this supposed to be a joke? We "have never been able to lay a glove on Moore," with the exception of pretty much debunking everything the man says and writes in his movies and novels.


The ravings of right wing nutcases on their blogs and spoiler movies seen by, oh, dozens of people, do not count as laying a glove on a man who is making the most popular documentaries in history and winning Oscars.

Or have there been hundreds of succesful lawsuits against Moore that I missed? Surely this dupe can't be the first?

Oh......


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

hopkins_student said:


> Was that from the Michael Moore website? If so you should probably put it within quotation marks.


Nope, came up with it all by myself. Not bad, eh?


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

So, this seems to have brought all the right wing extremists out. Have you guys actually seen the movies that Moore puts out?

Pretty good aren't they?

Or is this just knee jerk reaction agaisnt someone whose views you disagree with?

How about $85M? Sound about right to you fellows?


----------



## hopkins_student (Jun 25, 2004)

gmac said:


> Nope, came up with it all by myself. Not bad, eh?


Is that you Michael?


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

Wow, you sure give up quick.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Ironically members of the military or their family cannot file suit for injuries incured in service. I wonder if that exploding tire was made by Firestone? personally, I weary of both Michael Moore and Rush Limbaugh. The affairs of the nation should not be a dog and pony show regardless of political bent.


----------



## pendennis (Oct 6, 2005)

gmac said:


> A frivolous publicity stunt which won't get far.
> 
> I'm sorry the guy has lost his arms (I wonder how much he got from the army for that?) but sueing for $85M because a piece of film creates an "implication" about this guy is ridiculous.
> 
> I like Moore and I'm looking forward to his next film.


Obviously, you have little understanding of privacy laws in the United States, and that is what is driving this man's lawsuit. He is also suing Miramax Films, and several other film companies. Moore used the film without the permission of the man. Whether he has a case because of the "implication" is another matter. Failure to get permission, and then using a person's image for commercial purposes is a huge no-no in the United States. Lawsuits like this don't always get to trial, because Moore's lawyers will probably want to settle this out of court.

Personally, I hope that gas bag, Moore, loses his shirt. Like most liberals, he can't take his arguments to logical conclusions, and couldn't think in a straight line if his life depended on it.


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

pendennis said:


> Failure to get permission, and then using a person's image for commercial purposes is a huge no-no in the United States.


Is that so? Then how come nobody else who has appeared in Moore's movies has sued. Or did they all give permission for their image to be used? Bush for instance?


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Because a reply is often likened " Getting into a pissing match with a skunk." Something like replying to certain posters.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

*Shooting fish in a....*



gmac said:


> Hilarious. The extreme right wing, represented by the likes of wayfarer


Too, too funny. Let us examine some of the things I have endorsed in this forum. I have defended public education. I have stated I am pro-abortion. I have stated I am at best, an agnostic. I have stated I am 100% behind civil unions. Legalizing pot. Against the war in Iraq. Yes, ever so "extreme right wing" gmac.

Oh wait.....I find Moore specious and hypocritical. Ah yes, my transgression noted, I am indeed "extreme right wing" because I think Moore is an hypocritical boor and do not march in lock-step with the lunatic left.



gmac said:


> Hilarious - it's like you _want_ to be made fools of!


Odd, that is exactly what I was thinking when I was reading your childish retort.

Warmest regards


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

gmac said:


> Wow, you sure give up quick.


No, somehow I found having a nice dinner out with my wife a little more important than having a battle of the wits with an unarmed man such as yourself.

Warmest regards

P.S. The foi gras was excellent with brandied appricots as a garnish.


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> No, somehow I found having a nice dinner out with my wife a little more important than having a battle of the wits with an unarmed man such as yourself.
> 
> Warmest regards
> 
> P.S. The foi gras was excellent with brandied appricots as a garnish.


I'm glad your dinner was nice. I was actually referring to the Hopkins chap who withdrew very rapidly.

How does it feel being constantly bested by an "umarmed man" in a battle of wits. You're an expert by now.


----------



## hopkins_student (Jun 25, 2004)

gmac said:


> I'm glad your diner was nice. I was actually referring to the Hopkins chap who withdrew very rapidly.
> 
> Howe does it feel being constantly bested by an "umarmed man" in a battle of wits. You're an expert by now.


I left to go to Subway. And I can't spend all my time here tonight...year long cumulative test at 9 AM tomorrow.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

*Reality bites*



gmac said:


> Howe does it feel being constantly bested by an "umarmed man" in a battle of wits. You're an expert by now.


Only in the alternate reality you seem to inhabit. So when is your socialist self going to vacation in France? Seriously, it is just too easy.


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> Too, too funny. Let us examine some of the things I have endorsed in this forum. I have defended public education. I have stated I am pro-abortion. I have stated I am at best, an agnostic. I have stated I am 100% behind civil unions. Legalizing pot. Against the war in Iraq. Yes, ever so "extreme right wing" gmac.


Its your lunatic economic views that have earned you that title. Plus your obvious self-loathing as a Canadian. Extreme right winger? Yep, sounds about right to me.



Wayfarer said:


> Odd, that is exactly what I was thinking when I was reading your childish retort.
> 
> Warmest regards


I'm glad we agree! You _do_ like to look like a fool. You certainly take every opportunity!


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

gmac said:


> Its your lunatic economic views that have earned you that title.


Yes, free market economics would be quite lunatic to you. God, you make it so easy.

Off to the wine bar, please leave me some entertaining posts to read while I do my email at the office in the morning 

Warmest regards


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> Y
> Off to the wine bar, please leave me some entertaining posts to read while I do my email at the office in the morning
> 
> Warmest regards


Wine bar? Where do you live? 1987?

Seems like you had quite enough liquor already this evening, judging by your ramblings.....

_Zing! Another one! It is just too easy!!! God! Phew! Hah!_

You are such a goof, its pretty amusing to make fun of you.


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> So when is your socialist self going to vacation in France? Seriously, it is just too easy.


What, vacationing in France is too easy. Sure, it's nice but just recently you were complaining about my high end lifestyle or some such nonsense.

Which is it to be?

_God_! It is just so goddamn _easy_! Why are you so _dumb_? I am the greatest! Etc, etc, etc. Yawn.


----------



## arbitrage (Jan 13, 2006)

Gentlemen,

Do not feed the troll.


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

arbitrage said:


> Gentlemen,
> 
> Do not feed the troll.


OK, you're right, I won't respond to Wayfarer any more.


----------



## Trenditional (Feb 15, 2006)

At least "we" aren't deciding this law suit in here, I don't think a decision would ever be made.

Bottom line there a law suit has been brought against Moore. Maybe it will, maybe it won't make into a court room and in front of a jury. It really doesn't matter to any of us! The soldier will go on living without arms and Moore will go on living "very comfortably" making movies about how "bad" America is. Fortunately Moore lives in a country where freedom of speech and opinion is a protected right and he has gotten quite wealthy from it. No I have never seen any of his movies, nor do I want to. Is it because I'm afraid of what he has to say? No, its because I am judgemental and to me he is a dork and therefore I won't give him any of my money. Moore would earn my respect if he took all of the profits from his movies and put it to use helping those he claims are being taken advantage of. 

So, lets just wait and see what the outcome of this law suit is and then we can debate the positives or negatives of the outcome.


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

Trenditional said:


> No I have never seen any of his movies, nor do I want to. Is it because I'm afraid of what he has to say?


So where do you get your opinions on the content of Moore's movies? Because he has never said anything about how "bad" America is. He has criticised certain aspects of American life, sure, rightly in my opinion.


----------



## GT3 (Mar 29, 2006)

I was just trying to inform our well educated audience of this suit, not another gmac against the world thread. Frankly, this is getting childish. 

My point is that we live in a litigous world that does no one any good.


----------



## Trenditional (Feb 15, 2006)

gmac said:


> So where do you get your opinions on the content of Moore's movies? Because he has never said anything about how "bad" America is. He has criticised certain aspects of American life, sure, rightly in my opinion.


He has done interviews, there have been reviews of his movies and their have been commentaries. The impression I've gotten from these sources of information is that his movies are geared to point out those things that are bad or wrong with the government of this country.

I'm sure he believes the points he makes in his movies are correct and important and I'm sure some of the information he disiminates through his movies is accepted by a large number of people. That said, he is a movie maker who has the ability to edit a movie to emphasize the point he is trying to make. I don't like Moore, but do I want him to lose 85 million? Only if a jury finds he used this soldiers statements illegally. In general I feel the U.S. has become too letigious.


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

Trenditional said:


> He has done interviews, there have been reviews of his movies and their have been commentaries. The impression I've gotten from these sources of information is that his movies are geared to point out those things that are bad or wrong with the government of this country.


Absolutely correct.

And in my opinion that makes him a true American patriot, willing to take on the establishment on behalf of the little guy and shine a light on things our leaders would rather we didn't see. More power to him!


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

GT3 said:


> I was just trying to inform our well educated audience of this suit, not another gmac against the world thread. Frankly, this is getting childish.
> 
> My point is that we live in a litigous world that does no one any good.


C'mon GT3! You didn't think you could even mention Michael Moore's name, never mind dedicate a thread to him, without it instantly descending into, well, whatever it is we call this.

At least, it did after I had made my thoughtful and considered remarks.....


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Gents,

I have no opinion on this matter. Only to say that I did like Roger and Me, Moore's first film. His television show TV Nation was pretty funny in the mid 90's, especially the segment where he had the Croatian consul in DC try and explain the Balkans mess by using a pizza pie and then singing a Barney song as an ode to peace. Also I once saw him on at the airport in Detroit and if anyone could use Ask Andy its Michael Moore. Moore gave new meaning to the term Fat Slob - unshaven, ill fitting clothing and generally unkept. Unforgivable sins for a millionaire.

In short I think he is a talented partisan propagandist. Nothing wrong in that, even if he is usually and predictably wrong.

Karl


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Heres my 'thoughtfull and considered remarks' for the evening before I retire. Ever hear " the medium is the message?" As a more or less self described liberal on many issues, I theoretically should support most of the man's PROPOGANDA. But in point of fact, he's an uncouth slob reminiscent of the class clown, generic PITA jerk we all knew in high school. Moore is hardly the tricolor bearing singer at the barricades in Les Miserables. I am fed up with having to carry forward my political views with the assorted putrefying albatrosses of public figures on my back and slipping on their drivel. There are thoughtfull, articulate and reconciliatory people in most of our political and issue specific organisations. Those are the people I seek out.


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

Kav said:


> There are thoughtfull, articulate and reconciliatory people in most of our political and issue specific organisations. Those are the people I seek out.


Does beg the question of why do waste your time on the interchange then?


----------



## pendennis (Oct 6, 2005)

gmac said:


> Is that so? Then how come nobody else who has appeared in Moore's movies has sued. Or did they all give permission for their image to be used? Bush for instance?


President Bush is a public personna, ergo no expectation of privacy. The veteran is a private citizen, and the courts have generally recognized the right to privacy in using a private citizen's image and words in commercial ventures. It can be likened to copyright protection, and is covered under some of the same U.S. laws.

e.g. In the United States, if one takes a picture of something, the image is instantly protected by copyright at the moment of exposure.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

*The difference between us....*

Gmac:

Here is the essential difference between my posts to you, vs. your posts to me: mine revolve around issues and factual items, yours aroud insults.

Example: you assert I am a member of "the extreme right wing". I post numerous examples showing that is preposterous. Not to be foiled, you insult me then do an _ad hoc rescue_ attempting to totally ignore my sound refutation of your assertion and say it is my "lunatic economics" that make me "extreme right wing". I again resort to that meaningless tactic to you, the facts; I point out I am merely a believer in free market capitalism, something 99% of people in the West would certainly not refer to as "lunatic". Not to be foiled, you insult me for going to a wine bar, again, totally ignoring those bothersome items we call "facts".

Gmac, I had asked for some entertaining posts to read over my morning emails. You sadly disappoint me.

Warmest regards


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> Gmac:
> 
> Here is the essential difference between my posts to you, vs. your posts to me: mine revolve around issues and factual items, yours aroud insults.


Do you ever actually read your posts? Or are you simply delusional? Throwing insults around is more or less all you do.



Wayfarer said:


> Gmac, I had asked for some entertaining posts to read over my morning emails. You sadly disappoint me.


Really? Everything you say is utterly predictable so I am never pleased or disappointed.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

gmac said:


> Really? Everything you say is utterly predictable so I am never pleased or disappointed.


Yet you keep replying. Hell, you even reply more than once to the same post by me sometimes.

Again gmac, and I know this is "predictable", justify your assertion again that I am "extreme right wing" and believe in "lunatic economics".



gmac said:


> Its your lunatic economic views that have earned you that title. Extreme right winger? Yep, sounds about right to me.





Wayfarer said:


> Yes, free market economics would be quite lunatic to you.





gmac said:


> Hilarious. The extreme right wing, represented by the likes of wayfarer





Wayfarer said:


> Too, too funny. Let us examine some of the things I have endorsed in this forum. I have defended public education. I have stated I am pro-abortion. I have stated I am at best, an agnostic. I have stated I am 100% behind civil unions. Legalizing pot. Against the war in Iraq. Yes, ever so "extreme right wing" gmac.


Facts are just so bothersome....do not let them get you down!

Warmest "lunatic economics" regards


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> Yet you keep replying. Hell, you even reply more than once to the same post by me sometimes.


I know! I guess i just like taunting you.....

You're still an _extreme_ right winger though. And your hatred of your homeland and its people must be a bit depressing for you - don't worry, I'm sure those who knew you here reciprocate in full.

I'm now going to spend all day digging out your dumb quotes to back up my assertions - because that's what I like to do.........


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

*This is really getting sad...*



gmac said:


> I guess i just like taunting you.....


Well if you define "taunting" as giving me some good belly laughs....



gmac said:


> You're still an _extreme_ right winger though. And your hatred of your homeland and its people must be a bit depressing for you


While you're digging up quotes, find one where I express hatred for Canada.


gmac said:


> I'm now going to spend all day digging out your dumb quotes to back up my assertions - because that's what I like to do.........


Glad to know your obsession of me is reaching such epic proportions. However, bring it on.

Warmest "lunatic economic" regards


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

You're not so quick on picking up the sarcasm are you?

Not a great surprise I suppose....

I'm going to give you a break now, you seem to have had more than you can handle and are cracking up completely. Karl is much more fun to argue with, you're just a bore.

Byyeeee!


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

gmac said:


> You're not so quick on picking up the sarcasm are you?
> 
> Not a great surprise I suppose....


Predictable yet again. I was so tempted to allude that this would be your _ad hoc rescue_ but was afraid I would let the cat out of the bag.

So son, back to those things you hate so much; the facts. Ready yet to admit your assertion that I am an "extreme right winger" is idiotic? Of course not! Never change.

Warmest "lunatic economic" regards


----------



## oktagon (Mar 9, 2005)

GMAC's views on the issues are tipical of the extreme left commies who are callim themselves liberals. This is exactly why I loath lefties, vote Republican and try to piss the lefties off any time I have an opportunity (like now?).
I have caused significant blood pressure increases among my leftie co-workers as well as so called family friends. 
On the subject, Michael Moore is a fat bag of bovine excriment who opens his rotten oral orifice way too wide, but perhaps whide anough for a someone's boot to enter and finally shut that idiot up. He is a descrace to the documentary movie makers and he is a descrace to US citezenry. It is too bad that his US citezenship can not be stripped from him and he can not be deported somewhere to Iraq to live with his ilk.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Oktagon,

Easy does it big fella!

Karl


----------



## Patrick06790 (Apr 10, 2005)

Wowie-zowie. I'm up early to crank out a piece for this afternoon's deadline and decided to check out AAAC to warm up my brain and fingers. And what do I find? JP Morgan's scorched-earth exit and now this.

Of course everybody knows Michael Moore is really an agent of the Lizard People. While we argue about him the Reptilian Agenda slithers along -quietly, relentlessly...

23 Skidoo


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Patrick,

What is this Lizard People conspiracy you always speak of? Or do I not have top secret reptile clearance?

Karl


----------



## Nantucket Red (Jan 26, 2006)

Karl89 said:


> Patrick,
> 
> What is this Lizard People conspiracy you always speak of? Or do I not have top secret reptile clearance?
> 
> Karl


I believe it's a reference to one of the earlier cantos in Dante's Inferno in which slithering was mentioned, though I can't recall that Dante specifically addressed the fate of those who squander their lives in peurile partisan bickering.

My favorite characterization of Michael Moore is in _Team America_.


----------



## JRR (Feb 11, 2006)

Nantucket Red said:


> I believe it's a reference to one of the earlier cantos in Dante's Inferno in which slithering was mentioned, though I can't recall that Dante specifically addressed the fate of those who squander their lives in peurile partisan bickering.
> 
> My favorite characterization of Michael Moore is in _Team America_.


Also...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reptilian_humanoid


----------



## jcusey (Apr 19, 2003)

oktagon said:


> GMAC's views on the issues are tipical of the extreme left commies who are callim themselves liberals. This is exactly why I loath lefties, vote Republican and try to piss the lefties off any time I have an opportunity (like now?).
> I have caused significant blood pressure increases among my leftie co-workers as well as so called family friends.
> On the subject, Michael Moore is a fat bag of bovine excriment who opens his rotten oral orifice way too wide, but perhaps whide anough for a someone's boot to enter and finally shut that idiot up. He is a descrace to the documentary movie makers and he is a descrace to US citezenry. It is too bad that his US citezenship can not be stripped from him and he can not be deported somewhere to Iraq to live with his ilk.


Watch it, oktagon. This isn't an appropriate post. Address the argument, not the man.


----------



## Tom Bell-Drier (Mar 1, 2006)

oktagon said:


> GMAC's views on the issues are tipical of the extreme left commies who are callim themselves liberals. This is exactly why I loath lefties, vote Republican and try to piss the lefties off any time I have an opportunity (like now?).
> I have caused significant blood pressure increases among my leftie co-workers as well as so called family friends.
> On the subject, Michael Moore is a fat bag of bovine excriment who opens his rotten oral orifice way too wide, but perhaps whide anough for a someone's boot to enter and finally shut that idiot up. He is a descrace to the documentary movie makers and he is a descrace to US citezenry. It is too bad that his US citezenship can not be stripped from him and he can not be deported somewhere to Iraq to live with his ilk.


come on now Oktagon there`s little point in sitting on the fence and being diplomatic at this point in the argument . tell us what you really feel


----------



## Patrick06790 (Apr 10, 2005)

Karl89 said:


> Patrick,
> 
> What is this Lizard People conspiracy you always speak of? Or do I not have top secret reptile clearance?
> 
> Karl


Google "David Icke" and you'll get all you ever wanted to know. Selah.


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

Patrick06790 said:


> Google "David Icke" and you'll get all you ever wanted to know. Selah.


"he wrote that the secret world government consists of a race of reptilian humanoids known as the Babylonian Brotherhood, and that many prominent figures are, in fact, reptilian, including George W. Bush, Queen Elizabeth II, and Kris Kristofferson."

Hmmmm. He may have something there.


----------



## BertieW (Jan 17, 2006)

Speaking of reptilian, I see that Ann Coulter's going to be on Leno tonight. Oh, so is some chap named George Carlin.

Should be fun, but nothing to put the sponsors off.

Do any of us get tired of this political clap-trap? Maybe I've missed my B-12 shot today, but the same-old same-old is making me terminally fatigued.

How about some billiards instead!



crs said:


> "he wrote that the secret world government consists of a race of reptilian humanoids known as the Babylonian Brotherhood, and that many prominent figures are, in fact, reptilian, including George W. Bush, Queen Elizabeth II, and Kris Kristofferson."
> 
> Hmmmm. He may have something there.


----------



## Patrick06790 (Apr 10, 2005)

BertieW said:


> Do any of us get tired of this political clap-trap? Maybe I've missed my B-12 shot today, but the same-old same-old is making me terminally fatigued.


The beauty of the Lizard People conspiracy theory is this: I trot it out when friends or colleagues are starting to boil over. The effect is magical. The combatants either withdraw muttering or ignore me entirely, and there's always at least one other person who's interested in talking about something -_anything_ - else.

Also, the L.P. conspiracy theory is completely unanswerable. If they call me crazy, I smile a subtle smile. If they get mad, I just shrug and ask them to pass the flies. Rbbb-it. Hiss. And if they're silly enough to try and argue the merits, I just tell them they've been successfully duped.

I'm waiting for the occasion I run into some loon who actually does believe it. _That _should be fun.


----------



## BertieW (Jan 17, 2006)

In going back to read some of the exchanges above, it's amazing just how vitriolic some of them are. And these are people who likely have not, nor will they ever, meet one another. Anonymity breeds venom, not to mention very ungentlemanly behaviour.

So it goes.

So would Ickes hang out at the same parties as Robert Anton Wilson?

More sensible discourse to be had there, I suspect, than in some of these Interchange harangues.



Patrick06790 said:


> The beauty of the Lizard People conspiracy theory is this: I trot it out when friends or colleagues are starting to boil over. The effect is magical. The combatants either withdraw muttering or ignore me entirely, and there's always at least one other person who's interested in talking about something -_anything_ - else.
> 
> Also, the L.P. conspiracy theory is completely unanswerable. If they call me crazy, I smile a subtle smile. If they get mad, I just shrug and ask them to pass the flies. Rbbb-it. Hiss. And if they're silly enough to try and argue the merits, I just tell them they've been successfully duped.
> 
> I'm waiting for the occasion I run into some loon who actually does believe it. _That _should be fun.


----------



## Jill (Sep 11, 2003)

Editing one's statements in such a way that materially changes the meaning of the statement is nothing more than a lie. To use this young man's own words, CREATIVELY edited, is fallacious propaganda for which MM *should* be held accountable.

If you know the context in which some of the movie's quotes were originally made, and the way in which they were edited, then perhaps you would understand the utter disdain that most of his detractors have for him. *To present facts to support your point of view, in a persuasive way is fair game.* To use the editing room in order to CHANGE the meaning of a quote is unethical to the greatest extreme.

For instance, I recently heard Jane Fonda, in her own voice, saying "Most of my best friends are Communists". While not surprised, I was a bit appalled. Turns out, a talk show host was having a little fun with an interview of hers in which she was quoting Ted Turner on their first date when HE made that statement. Did she really say those words? Yes. Did the editing materially change the meaning of the statement? Definitely.

If this talk show had been seriously presenting that quote as a deliberate misquote, then I would be saying the same thing about them.


----------



## Patrick06790 (Apr 10, 2005)

Oh, sure, return to the actual subject of the thread.

Moore is a talented propagandist - nothing more. 

I've been trying to work out a ditty - to the tune of "London Bridge is Falling Down" - for this thread. "Michael Moore is being sued, being sued, being sued..."

Could be catchy.


----------



## Nantucket Red (Jan 26, 2006)

Thanks, Jill, for the cogent explanation.

Michael Moore is an embarrassment to any intelligent liberal the way Ann Coulter is an embarrassment to any intelligent conservative.

Moore and Coulter should get together and have a baby.


----------



## Jill (Sep 11, 2003)

Nan Red,

I think there's some truth to that assessment. They are very different creatures, though.

MM's MO is to present propaganda in a warmly sincere and convincing way. AC's MO is to present facts/opinions in a very "in your face", lambastic way. I DO think she's _much_ more intelligent that he, but ultimately he is more effective. He actually has a chance at winning over the uninformed masses. Her presentation - while entertaining to the likes of me - is not conducive to persuasion!


----------



## BertieW (Jan 17, 2006)

I see her more as a mean-spirited self-aggrandising opportunist who may or may not believe her own spew. I'm no fan of extremists, left or right, but Coulter, every time I have the misfortune to hear her speak, seems brimming with ill will.

I mean, how about this, one of many examples:

"I think the government should be spying on all Arabs, engaging in torture as a televised spectator sport, dropping daisy cutters wantonly throughout the Middle East and sending liberals to Guantanamo." - Her column December 21, 2005

This is nonsense. No serious person should give either Coulter or Moore the time of day. If such venom makes someone feel good, they might contemplate the reasons why.



Jill said:


> Nan Red,
> 
> I think there's some truth to that assessment. They are very different creatures, though.
> 
> MM's MO is to present propaganda in a warmly sincere and convincing way. AC's MO is to present facts/opinions in a very "in your face", lambastic way. I DO think she's _much_ more intelligent that he, but ultimately he is more effective. He actually has a chance at winning over the uninformed masses. Her presentation - while entertaining to the likes of me - is not conducive to persuasion!


----------



## Jill (Sep 11, 2003)

Yeah, I'd say that's a little over the top!


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

Jill said:


> Nan Red,
> 
> I think there's some truth to that assessment. They are very different creatures, though.
> 
> MM's MO is to present propaganda in a warmly sincere and convincing way. AC's MO is to present facts/opinions in a very "in your face", lambastic way. I DO think she's _much_ more intelligent that he, but ultimately he is more effective. He actually has a chance at winning over the uninformed masses. Her presentation - while entertaining to the likes of me - is not conducive to persuasion!


 Now gmac and crs - don't take this the wrong way. I have not fallen off the deep end (any more than usual).

IMO, Coulter is one of the worst things to happen to the conservative movement in America. She is abrasive. She is shrill. And she revels in the dog-eat-dog fight. No civil discourse for Coulter. Much of what she writes may be on target, but she finds the compelling necessity to interject wild and outrageous, practically indefensible statements designed solely to stir controversy and - let's face it - get herself onto the media and sell books. If only she had the defense of bi-polarity it wouldn't be so bad, but her over-the-top allegations are on and with purpose. Simply through guilt-by-association, she brings abuse on all the other conservative writers and pundits.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

In my university debating class we had to be both protagonist and antagonist on given, impromptu issues. 5 minutes would be spent vigourously attacking, ie abortion rights and then another 5 minutes defending same. I personally learned quickly that not only are many issues not black and white, or even grey, but oftentimes pink as a fine dress shirt with tab collar and monogramme. Which leaves me to beg the question, Who are these people self appointed to lead me out of the wilderness? What enabling genius, circumstance or financial backing gave Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum so much media access? They may have " agreed to have a fight" at some rediculous honorarium, but not on my nickle. They remind me of this black man who stands in this rediculous white uniform outside the local Main Post Office. He greets every patron both entering and leaving with some vague speil about selling overpriced candybars for some children's organization. People respond like Pavlov's dog with a mixture of excuse, apologies or some triggered guilt to buy a lousy stale Milky Way for a $ so nothing Bad will happen. I have a different approach. I am there for stamps, not chocolate. I utterly ignore the boor.The american public needs to do same. We need public speakers of wit, charm, a grasp of issues from many views and personal credibility- Will Rogers meets Gore Vidal. Not embittered soccer mom meets local slob who brings down property values.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Kav,

I agree with what you write but Gore Vidal is hardly a model of intelligent debate. He may be the master of le bon mot but he IS too clever by half. We need more Buckleys and Moynihans. Although I don't consider myself conservatibe I vote Republican and am appalled by the paucity of intelligent spokesmen in the GOP ranks. Yes we have McCain and Lugar but the rest of the bench is weak. The Democrats are even worse and with exception of Lee Hamilton (who has been out of office since 1993) and Lieberman (who is persona non grata) I can't off hand think of many Democrats who make effective spokesmen. I almost hope McCain runs as an independent so the GOP can take a long hard look at itself. I fear there is little hope for the Democrats and that their long suicide as a national party that began in 1968 will continue. 

And the Mavs got thrashed, boy am I gloomy.

Karl


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

Karl89 said:


> And the Mavs got thrashed, boy am I gloomy.


If they fail to count Pat Riley among the Lizard People, I am going to lose faith in the entire concept.


----------



## Chuck Franke (Aug 8, 2003)

Karl,

Watch game 5 with us - If we lose I have good bourbon - it helps.


----------



## Jupiter (Mar 15, 2006)

*Deconstructing Michael Moore*

back to the topic at hand:

www.weirdrepublic.com/episode73.htm


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

Karl89 said:


> Kav,
> 
> I agree with what you write but Gore Vidal is hardly a model of intelligent debate. He may be the master of le bon mot but he IS too clever by half. We need more Buckleys and Moynihans. Although I don't consider myself conservatibe I vote Republican and am appalled by the paucity of intelligent spokesmen in the GOP ranks. Yes we have McCain and Lugar but the rest of the bench is weak. The Democrats are even worse and with exception of Lee Hamilton (who has been out of office since 1993) and Lieberman (who is persona non grata) I can't off hand think of many Democrats who make effective spokesmen. I almost hope McCain runs as an independent so the GOP can take a long hard look at itself. I fear there is little hope for the Democrats and that their long suicide as a national party that began in 1968 will continue.
> 
> ...


You omit a couple of superb, engaging speakers who can really work a crowd:

Zell Miller
Mario Cuomo

Thankfully, the Dem leadership doesn't read this and won't be incorporating my suggestions anytime soon. And then, of course, there is Bill.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

AK,

Yes Cuomo is a great speaker - his speech at the 1984 convention is a classic but ever since his defeat in 1994 he has sort of disappeared from the national stage. And Zell Miller is probably the only person less welcome in Democratic ranks than Joe Lieberman! Bubba is charming but he is so polarizing that he essentially is a wash when it comes to persuading an audience.

And Chuck where are you watching the game on Sunday - any chance you are going to see it at the AAC? We have got to win on Sunday otherwise I may buy one of your elegant ties to hang myself with - in style!

Karl


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

Karl89 said:


> AK,
> 
> Yes Cuomo is a great speaker - his speech at the 1984 convention is a classic but ever since his defeat in 1994 he has sort of disappeared from the national stage. And Zell Miller is probably the only person less welcome in Democratic ranks than Joe Lieberman! Bubba is charming but he is so polarizing that he essentially is a wash when it comes to persuading an audience.
> 
> ...


 Not to worry, Karl. I hear he's having a 40% off sale. Death will be cheaper.

Remember to send in your absentee ballot for Condi-Rudi before you go.


----------



## Chuck Franke (Aug 8, 2003)

Actually going to watch the game from home probably. Might sell Jill's Jag and buy some floor seats for game 6 though.


----------

