UnderGround Forums
 

Weapons UnderGround >> Michael Moore's bodyguard arrested


2/24/05 9:24 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Dark Knight
480 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 24-Feb-05
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 3525
From his website "Finally and most importantly, over 55 million Americans voted for the candidate dubbed "The #1 Liberal in the Senate." That's more than the total number of voters who voted for either Reagan, Bush I, Clinton or Gore. Again, more people voted for Kerry than Reagan. If the media are looking for a trend it should be this -- that so many Americans were, for the first time since Kennedy, willing to vote for an out-and-out liberal. The country has always been filled with evangelicals -- that is not news. What IS news is that so many people have shifted toward a Massachusetts liberal. In fact, that's BIG news. Which means, don't expect the mainstream media, the ones who brought you the Iraq War, to ever report the real truth about November 2, 2004. In fact, it's better that they don't. We'll need the element of surprise in 2008." Again........ "We'll need the element of surprise in 2008."
2/26/05 5:52 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Buddhadev
21 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 27-Feb-05 09:56 PM
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 1036
paw, I want to show you something that's a good example of what I was telling you earlier about how people on the left don't really ever make direct, cut-and-dry policy statements. Look at this thread. Read the posts by "finnfighter." You'll notice that he doesn't actually really say anything. He's trying to advance a viewpoint without having to affirmatively argue for it. This is similar to Moore's style.
2/27/05 9:00 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Demitrius Barbito
40 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 27-Feb-05
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 523
The CSPT
Mike Moore is a spinless liberal coward. He is what you would find if you looked under rocks and in closets. He should be ashamed of himself. He is anti freedom and anti American. Interesting that it is the gun that gave him his "freedom of speech".
3/1/05 2:07 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
paw
1562 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 01-Mar-05
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 7303
Well, I guess I can't make you care, but given that you expressed great interest in his Bowling for Columbine movie, it's kind of shocking that his ultimate goal RE: gun policy wouldn't be of interest to you. I don't know, nor do I care = I'm not concerned with Moore's political positions. He's not a guru or my sole source of information. He's just one voice in a cacophony of voices. I do find him to be a very, very good filmmaker, for what that's worth. Do you still find it laughable to describe him as a leftist as you did earlier in this thread? Yes. Lables are almost always simplistic and subjective. To some, Moore is a leftist, but I know a number of people that would passionately argue that he's a moderate...and compared to those people's belief, he is. Labels, for the most part, don't interest me. Someone's belief system and why they feel that way is much more interesting to me. I disagree with you on gun ownership by minors. Kids in this country have owned and used guns for longer than we've even had a country here. It's never been a problem before, and actually still isn't: that is, when you actually look at current rates of youth firearms crimes as opposed to getting swept away by the emotions surrounding events like Columbine and Paduka. Well, then we can agree to disagee. I feel that owning a firearm is a big enough of a responsiblity that there should be some modest restrictions on it, similar to drinking alcohol or operating a motor vehicle. There's nothing wrong with the NRA having an event in CO so close to the time of the shootings. This is true on two levels: (1) I'm sure they've held events in areas that have had more overall levels of gun homicides over similar time periods. There's no reason to feed the media orgy that tried (and failed) to create an aura of singularity and exceptionalism around Columbine. By your logic, it would be "insensitive" for them to have an event in in or near Detroit EVER. I said, in this thread, that I believe Moore felt an "in your face" rally in a community that recently had a tragic incident of gun violence didn't help the community. I never said if I agreed with Moore's viewpoint and I could be very well mistaken about Moore's feelings. You've made some tremendous contortions based on facts not in evidence. (2) If they cancelled the event, they'd be giving moral legitimacy to gun-grabber activists for no reason. Why do that? Gun owners and gun advocates have no reason at all to feel collective guilt over Columbine. I don't buy that for a second. I believe an organization like the NRA can choose to have an event in an area that recently had a horrible incident of gun violence and get great press....they would just need a different approach than the "in your face" retoric that is often quoted. Off the top of my head, pointing out some of the NRA's children's programs (ie Eddie the Eagle) would be a step in that direction.
3/2/05 8:22 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Dark Knight
480 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 02-Mar-05
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 3543
"Yes. Lables are almost always simplistic and subjective. To some, Moore is a leftist, but I know a number of people that would passionately argue that he's a moderate...and compared to those people's belief, he is." Read what I posted, he is a liberal by his own statements
3/2/05 9:08 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
paw
1562 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 02-Mar-05
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 7308
Read what I posted, he is a liberal by his own statements Weren't we discussing if Moore is a leftists not a liberal? Also, unless I misread what you posted, Moore claims Kerry is a liberal. He makes no such claim about himself. Here's my point of view. You can take the positions on certain topics, round them up and call them "fred" for all I care. If you then say, liking vanilla ice cream is "fred"...that doesn't mean shit to me. I'm going to agree or disagree on liking vanilla ice cream based on my experience and personal belief structure. I will of course, be willing to listen as to your reasons as to why I should or shouldn't like vanilla ice cream. But I sure as fuck ain't going to make a decision because someone has attached a label to the position of liking vanilla ice cream.....but that's just me.
3/2/05 10:11 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
johnnypayne
57 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 02-Mar-05
Member Since: 05/22/2002
Posts: 4103
"I do find him to be a very, very good filmmaker, for what that's worth. " This may be the daftest thing anyone has ever written, seriously, I'll allow you your views on gun control or anything else, but that's just dumb.
3/2/05 10:24 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
paw
1562 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 02-Mar-05
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 7320
This may be the daftest thing anyone has ever written, seriously, I'll allow you your views on gun control or anything else, but that's just dumb. Moore is very, very good at what he does. The numerous awards he's won for his films and the box office $$$$ he's earned are pretty good arguments that you're a fucking idiot when it comes to film. If you have another standard for filmmakers other than $$$$ or awards, I'm interested in what that may be.
3/2/05 10:47 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Buddhadev
21 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 02-Mar-05
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 1060
I don't know, nor do I care = I'm not concerned with Moore's political positions. He's not a guru or my sole source of information. He's just one voice in a cacophony of voices.
As I said, I can't make you care, but, to me, when someone launches a polemic on a particular subject, I'm VERY interested in what the person's ultimate goal is. Logically, when a guy opens his mouth on a controversial subject, it's going to be in an effort to further his own agenda. Hell, the reason I started THIS thread is to advance MY own political agenda.
Here's my point of view. You can take the positions on certain topics, round them up and call them "fred" for all I care. If you then say, liking vanilla ice cream is "fred"...that doesn't mean shit to me. I'm going to agree or disagree on liking vanilla ice cream based on my experience and personal belief structure. I will of course, be willing to listen as to your reasons as to why I should or shouldn't like vanilla ice cream. But I sure as fuck ain't going to make a decision because someone has attached a label to the position of liking vanilla ice cream.....but that's just me.
Sure, but this is conflating two things. I'm not expecting you to reject a position just because it has a "bad" label attached to it. Rather, the point is that the label is necessary: not as a way to pass judgement, but as reference point and a way to identify something. This sort of labeling lends clarity to a discussion. Ultimately, all words are labels of some sort. If you reject labels out of hand, then we're left with a post-modernist intellectual mishmash that undermines not just freedom, but civilization itself. Think about Orwell's 1984: "War is Peace" and "Freedom is Slavery" Can labels be over-used/abused? Certainly! So with any label you hear, you absolutely have the right to ask, "What do you mean by [insert label here] ?" But just totally rejecting the concept of labels leads to intellectual oblivion. In any case, this seems to be an intellectual departure for you. Before, you dismissed the idea of Moore being a Leftist because he's attacked people on the Left (implying that the label wasn't illegitimate generally, but just that it didn't apply to HIM). Now it sounds like your objection is just the result of a categorical rejection of labeling as concept. This is pretty confusing. Which way is it?
3/3/05 8:47 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
johnnypayne
57 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 03-Mar-05
Member Since: 05/22/2002
Posts: 4107
"If you have another standard for filmmakers other than $$$$ or awards, I'm interested in what that may be. " Well, lets see, positive critical responses would be a nice start, knowing a single person who who thinks his work is worth a damm would be another. If he could frame a shot properly, edit smoothly (he's getting better at editing I'll grant) and not lie through his fucking teeth in a supposed documentary he might start getting my respect, shit, I used to be a fan before BFC, but that film was so full of half truthes and outright lies it coud've come out of the Goering propoganda machine of the 30's and 40's. As for money, Alien Vs predator made more money than Way of the gun (or Boondock saints, or fight club etc etc etc), which do you think is a better film.
3/3/05 9:22 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
paw
1562 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 03-Mar-05
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 7340
In any case, this seems to be an intellectual departure for you. Before, you dismissed the idea of Moore being a Leftist because he's attacked people on the Left (implying that the label wasn't illegitimate generally, but just that it didn't apply to HIM). Now it sounds like your objection is just the result of a categorical rejection of labeling as concept. This is pretty confusing. Which way is it? Both, depending on context. I feel in this thread that Moore's ideas have been discredited because he's a "leftist" or a "liberal". In my mind that's pathetic. Moore's ideas can be accepted or reject on their merit. I also feel that labeling Moore a "liberal" or a "leftist" is, at best, retoric. Unless I've misread something, Moore has not used either of those labels to describe himself and, as best I recall, he attacks democrats as often as he attacks republicans. So, insofar as labeling Moore is used to demonize him without addressing his ideas on their own merit, I reject the label. Does that make sense? What I'm trying to say is: John is a "liberal" and therefore wrong is bullshit. Supporting universal health care is "liberal" is also bullshit. Saying, universal health care is a bad idea, because (insert reason here) is a legit argument. Having never met Moore, I have no opinion of the man. He could be a saint or a sinner, so to speak. He has some ideas that I feel are complete nonsense and some that I could support, if that helps frame things for you. RE: filmmaking Well, lets see, positive critical responses would be a nice start, knowing a single person who who thinks his work is worth a damm would be another. We obviously read different critics. For F 9/11 Tarantino and Robert Ebert (awarded the film 3 1/2 out of 4 stars) both though highly of movie, and it won several awards. Bowling for Columbine won the Oscar for best documentary as well as other awards. As for money, Alien Vs predator made more money than Way of the gun (or Boondock saints, or fight club etc etc etc), which do you think is a better film. Are you asking my personal preference (subjective opinion) because you are curious or because you are trying to prove a point? If you're trying to prove a point, my point was the only objective measurements of success of a film are critical acclaim (awards) and gross amount earned. I don't know of any other objective measurements. And by those objective measurements Moore is fine filmmaker. If you want to use subjective measurements, then all we would be taking about is our opinions. For what it's worth, here's my opinion. Fight Club is the best film you mentioned. Then I would say Way of the Gun, AvP and then Boondock Saints. To me (my opinion) Fight Club is much better than the other 3, but YMMV.
3/3/05 11:57 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Buddhadev
21 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 03-Mar-05
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 1066
as best I recall, he attacks democrats as often as he attacks republicans.
I already explained this in this thread and even quoted a specific part of his Stupid White Men book. If you missed it the first time, here again is that quote:
"So is there a difference between Democrats and Republicans? Sure. The Democrats say one thing ("Save the planet!") and then do another quietly holding hands behind the scenes with the bastards who make this world a dirtier, meaner place. The Republicans just come right out and give the bastards a corner office in the West Wing. That’s the difference." (p.216)
And here again is the comment I made on it:
See, his quarrel, is with left-wigners who aren't principled enough, who aren't leftist enough: he doesn't have a PHILOSOPHICAL problem with leftism as an IDEA.
I defy anyone to find a quote that proves me wrong on that.
I feel in this thread that Moore's ideas have been discredited because he's a "leftist" or a "liberal".
Well, your feeling is dead wrong. That's the danger of letting your feelings and emotions control your thought process. When you read what I wrote and don't let your feelings get in the way, I said the opposite: that the label is being used as a means of identification--not judgement. Here's what I wrote:
I see the evidence of his leftism in his words and actions. He's been on the record favoring 70% tax rate--you might agree with that policy and consider it a good policy, but good or bad it IS a left-wing policy.
See, I EXACTLY affirm the concept of judging a policy idea INDEPENDENT of its ideological label. So, insofar as labeling Moore is used to demonize him without addressing his ideas on their own merit, I reject the label. Does that make sense? Yes, it makes sense, but I never did that.
What I'm trying to say is: John is a "liberal" and therefore wrong is bullshit.
I agree. I never made any statement similar to that. Are you paying attention? My reason for bringing the label up wasn't to discredit his ideas, but rather to point out a pattern in his behavior typical of Leftists: the fact that he very, very rarely makes direct statements of policy opinion. He only made that statement about tax policy when O'Reilly asked him point-blank about it.

Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.