LegionPaulL

My review on the Micheal Moore doc. movie is not the worst, but not the best. It was a open range against good President Bush. Alot of funny, but a lot of bull crap against President Bush. I URGE TO TELL AMERICANS THAT IT WAS ONLY ONE SIDE OF THE STORY! Just because a fat guy (no offense to fat people) with money says something doesn't mean it's true. I dont mean to say it was all false, because some of it was sad and true, but it really had President Bush by the balls in some parts. It was made by Democrats, so what do you expect.

__________________
If it is stupid but works, then it is not stupid.
-Murphy

USN_Squid

Actually Moore claims he is an independant, even though he is registered in two states to vote as a democrat and espouses socialistic propaganda. You figure it out.

__________________

Tempus

Yeah, I stopped reading there.

DudeMan

well then i deffinatly do not advise you go to see or pay to see this.

because if someone putting an opinion across while displaying intruths about other peoples works, well from the limited footage i have seen this guy relentlessly uses the whole film to display a political motive rather than an unbiased account of the truth.

_Ender_

What was so untrue about it? Dont just say he was lieing, prove it. Guess us facts about what he lied about.


and yes E! saying bush is good is an oxymoron.

GhostintheShell

Lets get this straight right now;

Bush = good (unless its too hot outside, then stay on your side of the bed)

Pres. Bush = bad

__________________
Certainly there is no hunting like the hunting of man and those who have hunted armed men long enough and liked it, never really care for anything else thereafter.
Ernest Hemingway, "On the Blue Water," Esquire, April 1936

Rampage

Well I like Pres. Bush, and I'm not ashamed of it. I don't like Moore, never have, and don't deny that. I also don't plan to see the film, but I don't protest it being shown. The man has every right to say what he wants, and I have the right to criticize it or ignore it as I see fit.

What a country!

Eclipse

The only good thing I can about bush is that he gave the military a payraise right after I joined up...whats about it

Wolfie

Isn't Moore more known for giving half the facts and leading people to draw untrue conclusions based on the lack of information he gave? Facts do not equal the truth.

Tempest

I enjoyed Farenheight as I have his previous films. None of the information given in his film was new, just repackaged. I would recommend this movie to anyone 'cept strong bush supporters (whom it will just make angry).

=DdogG=

watched it..... erased it...... washed my eyes out with acid..... prayed that GOd woudl kill him very slowly and painfully.

__________________
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. -Albert Einstein
The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity. -Harlan Ellison

If all else fails: "rm -rf /"

CingularDuality

I don't think it is extreme at all... Bowling for Columbine proved proved Wolf's statement.

I haven't seen his latest, and after seeing Bowling, I really have no desire to...

I have a certain respect for the guy. He's certainly a talented filmmaker. I just hope he doesn't get another award from the Acadamy unless they make a new category.

__________________

Become a supporting member!

Buy a Tactical Duck!
Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

Zebra

Limbaugh does that three hours a day five days a week. So do Hannity, Savage, Reagan, O'Reilly, and a dozen other guys. Why does a two hour movie every other year from Moore upset some people's love of the whole truth so much more than the combined hundreds of hours of daily lying from these guys?

IceCold

I wouldn't lump O'Reilly in there with the others... He's a pretty fair guy.

USN_Squid

At the start of ‘Fahrenheit 9/11,’ filmmaker Michael Moore shows a clip of CNN analyst Jeffrey Toobin saying that if ballots had been recounted in Florida after the 2000 presidential vote, ‘under every scenario Gore won the election.’


What Moore doesn't show is that a six-month study in 2001 by news organizations including The New York Times, the Washington Post and CNN found just the opposite. Even if the Supreme Court had not stopped a statewide recount, or if a more limited recount of four heavily Democratic counties had taken place, Bush still would have won Florida and the election.

Moore suggests Bush's conflict of interest was manifest shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks when the White House ‘approved planes to pick up the bin Ladens and numerous other Saudis’ who, fearing reprisals, were flown out of the United States (and it was Richard Clarke who claims responsibility for the idea). Embellishing the well-known scenario, Moore interviews a retired FBI agent who says authorities should have first questioned the bin Ladens.


But the bin Ladens were questioned. The commission investigating the attacks reported in April that the FBI interviewed 30 passengers: ‘Nobody was allowed to depart on these six flights who the FBI wanted to interview in connection with the 9/11 attacks or who the FBI later concluded had any involvement in those attacks.’

link

Before you slam me for the source of this link keep in mind this is quoting an independant study done by news organizations and the 9/11 commission. It has nothing to do with the authors opinion or bias.

__________________